Planning Commission Meeting Packets

SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR JUNE 19, 2018 PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DAVID HAINLEY, DIRECTOR THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD AT 2:00 P.M. IN THE SUFFOLK CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY HALL BUILDING IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND OR NEED SPECIAL ACCOMODATIONS AT THE MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT (757) 514-4060 PRIOR TO 12:00 NOON ON FRIDAY, JUNE 15, 2018. HOWARD C. BENTON CHAIRMAN  AGENDA SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION June 19, 2018 2:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order A. Invocation B. Roll Call 2. Approval of minutes from previous meeting 3. Family Transfer Subdivision Plat: A. FAMILY TRANSFER SUBDIVISION PLAT FTR2018-005, submitted by Armando S. and Kandi F. Rowe, applicant(s) and property owner(s), requesting a family transfer subdivision pursuant to Section 31-514 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected property is identified as Zoning Map 45, Parcel 27A, Cypress Voting Borough, zoned A, Agricultural Zoning District. The City’s 2035 Comprehensive Plan identifies this property as being located within the Rural Agricultural Use District. 4. Preliminary Subdivision Plat: A. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT REQUEST, PSB2018-001, Riverfront Parcel 8B, Rivergate at the Riverfront: submitted by Tuck Bowie, RF8B, L.L.C. applicant and contract purchaser, on behalf of Continental-Lakeview Associates, L.L.C, property owner, in accordance with Sections 31-308 and 31-508 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to approve a Preliminary Subdivision Plat to create 70 single family residential parcels and associated rights-of-way, on property located at 7101 Bridgeway Drive, Zoning Map 6, Parcel 2G*B. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Nansemond Voting Borough, zoned RU-12, Residential Urban-12 zoning district. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as part of the Northern Growth Area, Mixed Use Core Use District. 5. Public Hearings: A. REZONING REQUEST, RZN2018-003, (Conditional), Harbour View - Bridgeway Commerce Park, Parcel 4: submitted by Edward Miller, P.E., Kimley-Horn, agent, on behalf of Ronald B. Ferrin, Harbour View Partners, applicant and property owner, in accordance with Sections 31-304 and 31-305 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to rezone and amend the official zoning map of the City of Suffolk to change the zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional zoning district, to RU-24, Residential Urban-24 zoning district, for property located at the north-east corner of Harbour View Boulevard and Hampton Roads Parkway, Zoning Map 6, Page 1  Parcel 3. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Nansemond Voting Borough, zoned O-I, Office-Institutional zoning district. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as part of the Northern Growth Area, Mixed-Use Core Use District. B. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, OTA2018-003, initiated by the Suffolk Planning Commission in accordance with Section 31-304 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to amend the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 5, Section 31-513, Phasing or Revising Approved Subdivisions or Site Plans; and Appendix A, Definitions. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance. C. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, OTA2018-004, initiated by the Suffolk Planning Commission in accordance with Section 31-304 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to amend the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 7, Section 31-709, Mini-Warehouse; and Appendix A, Definitions. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance. D. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, OTA2018-005, initiated by the Suffolk Planning Commission in accordance with Section 31-304 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to amend the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 7, Section 31-717, Temporary Uses, subsection (c)(7), Temporary Retail Sales Uses – Food Trucks; and Appendix A, Definitions. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance. E. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, OTA2018-006, initiated by the City of Suffolk in accordance with Section 31-304 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to amend the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, Design and Improvement Standards, Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstances and changes to the Code of Virginia. 6. Old Business 7. New Business A. Helivi Holland, City Attorney – Legislative Update B. Status Report – City Council Meeting, May 16, 2018 8. Commissioner’s Comments 9. Adjournment Page 2  MINUTES SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION May 15, 2018 2:00 P.M. The meeting of the Suffolk Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 15, 2018, at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 442 W. Washington Street, Suffolk, Virginia, with the following persons present: MEMBERS: STAFF: Howard Benton, Chairman Helivi Holland, City Attorney Arthur Singleton David Hainley, Dir. of Planning & Com. Dev. Oliver Creekmore Robert P. Goumas, Assistant Dir. of Planning John Rector Nicole Ward, Current Planning Manager Mills Staylor Michael Reitelbach, Planner I Anita Hicks Catina Myrick, Administrative Analyst Kittrell Eberwine Johnnie Edwards The meeting was called to order by Chairman Benton and Commissioner Singleton opened with a prayer. The roll was called by Mr. Hainley and the Chairman was informed that a quorum was present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as written. FAMILY TRANSFER SUBDIVISION PLAT: FAMILY TRANSFER SUBDIVISION PLAT FTR2018-00004, submitted by Whitney G. Saunders, of Saunders and Ojeda, P.C., agent, on behalf of Raiford E. and 1 Rhonda J. Baker, applicant(s) and property owner(s), requesting a family transfer subdivision pursuant to Section 31-514 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected property is identified as Zoning Map 52, Parcel 38, Holy Neck Voting Borough, zoned A, Agricultural Zoning District. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan designates this property as being located within the Rural Agricultural Use District. The first item of business was introduced by the Chairman followed by a staff report by Andrew Reitelbach, Planner I. Mr. Reitelbach advised that this application is to subdivide a 1.012-acre parcel, which is to be conveyed to Amanda and Jonathan Smith. A plat and deed of gift have been provided with a restrictive covenant that prohibits the transfer of the property within ten (10) years of its receipt by the Grantee. A letter from the Health Department approving the well and septic system has been provided. The Grantor and Grantee have acknowledged by the sworn affidavit that: 1) The purpose of this subdivision is to gift this parcel from Raiford and Rhonda Baker to their daughter and son-in-law, Amanda and Jonathan Smith, who are over the age of 18 and have not previously received a parcel of land under the family transfer ordinance. 2) The recipients have acknowledged that title to the property must be held for 10 years from the date of receipt, and that the family transfer parcel may not be sold, subdivided, or otherwise conveyed during that 10 year holding period. 3) And that this parcel was created to provide a place of residence for the Grantees separate from the Grantors in order to keep the property in the immediate family. In the event the Director determines that a family subdivision has been used to circumvent the 2 Subdivision Ordinance, the Director shall initiate the vacation of all or part of the plat of the original lot or parcel to the extent necessary to correct the violation. With these findings, staff found that the applicant’s request meets the criteria for a family transfer subdivision and recommended approval of this application. Speaking in favor of this application was Whitney Saunders, 705 W. Washington Street, Suffolk, VA. Commissioner Singleton made a motion to approve this application, seconded by Commissioner Creekmore and passed by a voice vote of 8 to 0. PUBLIC HEARINGS: REZONING REQUEST, RZN2018-003, (Conditional), Harbour View - Bridgeway Commerce Park, Parcel 4: submitted by Edward Miller, P.E., Kimley- Horn, agent, on behalf of Ronald B. Ferrin, Harbour View Partners, applicant and property owner, in accordance with Sections 31-304 and 31-305 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to rezone and amend the official zoning map of the City of Suffolk to change the zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional zoning district, to RU-24, Residential Urban-24 zoning district, for property located at the north-east corner of Harbour View Boulevard and Hampton Roads Parkway, Zoning Map 6, Parcel 3. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Nansemond Voting Borough, zoned O-I, Office-Institutional zoning district. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as part of the Northern Growth Area, Mixed-Use Core Use District. The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman. David Hainley advised that the applicants submitted a letter asking for this request be deferred for thirty (30) days to allow them additional time to address some issues. Commissioner Staylor made a motion to table this application for thirty (30) days, 3 seconded by Commissioner Edwards and passed by a recorded vote of 8 to 0. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, CUP2018-002, Unity Brothers Lodge, Inc.: submitted by James Johnson, applicant, on behalf of Big Bear, LLC, property owner, in accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance, to grant a Conditional Use Permit to establish a public assembly and membership club with live entertainment, on property located at 1226 White Marsh Road, Zoning Map 35, Parcel 168D. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Cypress Voting Borough, zoned B-2, General Commercial zoning district. The 2035 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as part of the Central Growth Area, Core Support Use District. The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman followed by a staff report by Andrew Reitelbach, Planner I. Mr. Reitelbach advised that the applicant proposed to combined the three suites in the shopping center (Units 216, 218, and 220) to use to operate a membership club, the Unity Brothers Lodge, as well as a public assembly space, for events such as banquets or receptions, with the possibility of live entertainment at these events. The applicant will be required to retain the services of a registered design professional to ensure that the combined space meets all building and fire codes, and these plans will be reviewed by the City’s Community Development Division and Fire Marshal for compliance before a Certificate of Occupancy is granted. The Department of Health reviewed this request and has no objections to the proposed use, as no food preparation is proposed to take place on-site. If food preparation is to occur in the future, the proper permits will be required to be obtained from the Health Department. The property is currently served by both City water and sewer. If 4 additional fixtures are installed during the renovation process, then the Public Utilities Department will review the additions to verify that the meters are adequately sized for the additional flow. There is sufficient existing off-street parking associated with the shopping center to accommodate this use. The Police Department reviewed this request and offered conditions that have been included for previous similar uses, to mitigate the effects of a large assembly of members or of guests at the banquets/receptions. In addition, for any event when the space is being rented to a customer, it is the applicant’s intent that the customer be responsible for obtaining any required permits, such as ABC permits to serve alcohol or any permits that may be required for the live entertainment. Staff reviewed the criteria as set forth in the UDO for this proposed project and this request will conform to the required criteria as described in the staff report with the conditions. Therefore, it was staff’s opinion that the site in question is appropriate for the proposed use of a membership club and public assembly use, with associated live entertainment, which is similar to and compatible with other uses in the nearby area, and the proposed use should have a minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Thus, staff recommended approval of this application with the conditions noted in the staff report. The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was James Johnson, President of the Unity Brothers. He asked for the Commission’s approval of 5 this request. Also, speaking in favor of this application was Wallace Johnson. Commissioner Hicks made a motion to approve this application with the conditions, seconded by Commissioner Rector and passed by a recorded vote 8 to 0. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT OTA2018-002, initiated by the City of Suffolk, for amendments to the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), Article 1, Section 31-105, Consistency with Comprehensive Plan; Article 4, Section 31-404, Zoning Map, and Section 31-419, Mixed Use Development Overlay District; Article 5, Section 31-511, Engineering Plans, and Section 31-512, Assurance for Completion and Maintenance of Public and Private Improvements; Appendix A, Definitions; and Appendix B, Submission Requirements. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstances and provide improved clarification. The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman followed by a staff report by Robert Goumas, Assistant Director of Planning. Mr. Goumas gave a presentation on the proposed changes to various sections. The proposed amendments are housekeeping matters that either address grammatical errors in word choice, remove references to VDOT dealing with maintenance of roadways which are now maintained by the City, and update language in various sections of the UDO that pertain to consistency with the 2035 Comprehensive Plan and the Concept Map. Staff recommended approval of this ordinance text amendment. The public hearing was opened. There being no speakers in favor or in opposition, the 6 public hearing was closed. Commissioner Staylor made a motion to approve this ordinance text amendment, seconded by Commissioner Creekmore and passed by a recorded vote of 8 to 0. CITY OF SUFFOLK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, submitted by the City of Suffolk Department of Planning and Community Development on behalf of the City of Suffolk Planning Commission. Consideration shall be given to the recommendation to adopt the Suffolk Downtown Master Plan, a component of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan. The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman. Mr. Jason Epley of Benchmark Planning gave a presentation on the Suffolk Downtown Master Plan. The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was Harper Bradshaw, Harper’s Table, 122 N. Main Street, Suffolk, VA Also, speaking in favor of this application was Ms. Linda Bunch, 1697 Wilroy Road, Suffolk, VA. Also, speaking in favor of this application as Justin Sorensen, Edward Jones Office, N. Main Street, Suffolk, VA. Also speaking in favor of this application was Richard Chaing, Suffolk Executive Office, 425 W. Washington Street, Suite 4, Suffolk, VA. There being no speakers in opposition, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rector made a motion to approve the Suffolk Downtown Master Plan, seconded by Commissioner Singleton and passed by a recorded vote of 8 to 0. 7 OLD BUSINESS: Karla Carter, Assistant City Attorney, briefed the Commission in reference to the Statutory Construction for OTA2018-001. STATUS REPORT: Mr. Hainley reported on the results of the April 18th City Council meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: Commissioner Singleton made a motion to initiate an ordinance text amendment in reference to Section 31-717, Temporary Uses, of the Unified Development Ordinance, seconded by Commissioner Edwards and passed by a voice vote of 8 to 0. Commissioner Singleton made a motion to initiate an ordinance text amendment in reference to Section 31-709, Mini-Warehouse, of the Unified Development Ordinance, seconded by Commissioner Eberwine and passed by a voice vote of 8 to 0. Commissioner Singleton made a motion to initiate an ordinance text amendment in reference to Section 31-513, Phasing or Revising Approved Subdivisions or Site Plans, of the Unified Development Ordinance, seconded by Commissioner Creekmore and passed by a voice vote of 8 to 0. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 8  MT: Singleton MT: Staylor MT: Hicks MT: Staylor PLANNING COMMISSION 2ND: Creekmore 2ND: Edwards 2ND: Rector 2ND: Creekmore MEETING TO: Approve TO: Table for TO: Approve TO: Approve May 15, 2018 thirty (30) days w/conditions VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 FTR2018-004 RZN2018-003 CUP2018-002 OTA2018-002 PRESENT ABSENT YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO X X X X X Benton, Howard C. X X X X X Creekmore, Oliver X X X X X Eberwine, Kittrell X X X X X Edwards, Johnnie X X X X X Hicks, Anita X X X X X Rector, John X X X X X Singleton, Arthur Staylor, Mills X X X X X  MT: Rector MT: Singleton MT: Singleton MT: Singleton PLANNING COMMISSION 2ND: Singleton 2ND: Edwards 2ND: Eberwine 2ND: Creekmore MEETING TO: Approve TO: Initiate UDO TO: Initiate UDO TO: Initiate UDO in May 15, 2018 in reference to in reference to Mini- reference to Phasing or Temporary Uses Warehouse Revising Approved Subdivisions or Site Plans VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 VOTE: 8-0 Suffolk Downtown UDO Text UDO Text UDO Text Amendment Master Plan Amendment Amendment PRESENT ABSENT YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO X X X X X Benton, Howard C. X X X X X Creekmore, Oliver X X X X X Eberwine, Kittrell X X X X X Edwards, Johnnie X X X X X Hicks, Anita X X X X X Rector, John X X X X X Singleton, Arthur Staylor, Mills X X X X X THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK  STAFF REPORT DESCRIPTION ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT OTA2018-006: Presented for your consideration, attached please find proposed amendments to the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), Article 6, Design and Improvement Standards, Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance and changes to the Code of Virginia. APPLICANT: The proposed ordinance text amendment has been initiated by the City of Suffolk. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request has been duly advertised in accordance with the public notice requirements set forth in Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and with the applicable provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance. STAFF ANALYSIS ISSUE AND BACKGROUND The proposed text amendments shown in attached Exhibit B are presented for consideration in order to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance and changes to the Code of Virginia. Specifically: 1. Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards need to be amended as they pertain to the replacement of trees and the establishment of mature tree canopies; and 2. Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities need to be amended in order to establish supplemental development standards for the newly established “administrative review eligible project” and “standard process project” development categories. RECOMMENDATION In that regard, the proposed text amendments shown in the attached Exhibit B are presented for your favorable consideration with a staff recommendation for approval of the proposed text amendments. Attachments  Proposed Ordinance  Exhibit A – Planning Commission Recommendation  Exhibit B – “Amendments to Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, Design and Improvement Standards, Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities, of the Code of the City of Suffolk, Virginia” ORDINANCE NUMBER AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 31, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SUFFOLK, ARTICLE 6, DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 31-603, LANDSCAPING STANDARDS, AND ARTICLE 7, SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 31-716, TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES; OTA2018-006 WHEREAS, the City of Suffolk, Virginia has initiated the aforementioned amendments to Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, for the purpose of updating and improving clarity and consistency due to a change in circumstances and changes to the Code of Virginia; and, WHEREAS, the specified amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance as shown in Exhibit “B” are in compliance with the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, as adopted; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a recommendation as stated in Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, the procedural requirements for the consideration of this request by the Planning Commission have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, that: Section 1. That Exhibit “A,” “Planning Commission Recommendation,” and Exhibit “B,” “Amendments to Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, D e s i g n a n d I m p r o v e m e n t S t a n d a r d s , Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities, of the Code of the City of Suffolk, Virginia” which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated as part of this ordinance. Section 2. That Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, D e s i g n a n d I m p r o v e m e n t S t a n d a r d s , Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities, of the Code of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, is hereby amended to read as referenced in Exhibit “B,” attached. Section 3. All phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, subsections, sections and chapters of the Code not amended hereby remain in full force and effect. This ordinance shall be effective upon passage and shall not be published. READ AND PASSED: TESTE: Erika S. Dawley, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Helivi L. Holland, City Attorney  Exhibit “A” RESOLUTION NO. 18-06-7 CITY OF SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION A RESOLUTION TO PRESENT A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL RELATING TO OTA2018-006 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 31, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SUFFOLK, ARTICLE 6, DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, SECTION 31-603, LANDSCAPING STANDARDS, AND ARTICLE 7, SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 31-716, TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES WHEREAS, the City of Suffolk, Virginia has initiated the aforementioned amendments to Chapter 31 of the Unified Development Ordinance for the purpose of updating and improving clarity and consistency due to a change in circumstances and changes to the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the specified amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance as shown in Exhibit “B” are in compliance with the 2035 Comprehensive Plan, as adopted; and WHEREAS, the procedural requirements for the consideration of this request by the Planning Commission have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, that: Section 1. Findings. The Suffolk Planning Commission finds that the proposed ordinance amendments are reasonable and warranted. Section 2. Recommendation to City Council. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council of the City of Suffolk, Virginia that the proposed amendments be; a. Adopted as submitted without modification. _____b. Denied, and that Council not pass the proposed ordinance. _____c. Adopted with the modifications set forth on the attached listing of specific recommendations, and that Council adopt the proposed Ordinance with such modifications. READ AND ADOPTED: TESTE:  “Exhibit B” “Amendments to Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, Design and Improvement Standards, Section 31-603, Landscaping Standards, and Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31-716, Telecommunication Facilities, of the Code of the City of Suffolk, Virginia”  ARTICLE 6 – DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS SEC. 31-603. - LANDSCAPING STANDARDS. … (c) GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. The following shall apply to all Sections of the landscaping provisions of this Ordinance. … (2) CONDITION. All plant materials shall conform to the standards of the AmericanHort. American Nursery and Landscape Association ("ANLA") (formerly the American Association of Nurserymen), The American Standard For Nursery Stock, (1996), which document is hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in its entirety herein. Said document may be obtained by contacting ANLA at 1250 I Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20005 (202/789-2900). Plants shall be healthy, vigorous, well rooted and free of defects, decay, disease or infestations. After implementation, all required plant material shall be maintained by the property owner. All dead, dying or diseased plant material shall be replaced by the property owner. … (4) PLANTING STANDARDS. The planting of materials shall be done in accordance with the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nursery and Landscape Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects. conform to the standardized landscape specifications as identified in the "Guidelines for Landscape Planting in the City of Suffolk, Virginia" or in the standards of the most recent edition of the American Nursery and Landscape Association ("ANLA") (formerly the American Association of Nurserymen), The American Standard For Nursery Stock, (1996), which document is hereby incorporated by reference as if set forth in its entirety herein (said document may be obtained by contacting ANLA at 1250 I Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20005 (202/789-2900), and the "Standardized Landscape Specification for the State of Virginia" by the Virginia Nurserymen's Association. All trees shall have tops which display a natural growing shape or condition. Trunks shall be healthy and free of defects or mutations such as, but not limited to, over guying. … (e) TREE CANOPY. Canopy calculations for new plantings shall be calculated from the official tree canopy maintained in the City of Suffolk Department of Planning.  All new and existing vegetation applied to canopy requirements shall comply with the plant specifications and standards of this Ordinance. (1) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. The landscape plan shall include the planting and/or replacement of trees on site to the extent that, after ten twenty (20) years from the date of planting, tree canopies shall be at least: A. Ten percent (10%) tree canopy for a site zoned office, business or industrial; B. Ten percent (10%) tree canopy for a residential site zoned twenty (20) or more units per acre; C. Fifteen percent (15%) tree canopy for a residential site zoned more than ten, but less than twenty units per acre; and D. Twenty percent (20%) tree canopy for a residential site zoned ten (10) units or less per acre. E. Ten percent (10%) tree canopy for any cemetery, notwithstanding any other provisions of this section. …  ARTICLE 7 – SUPPLEMENTAL USE REGULATIONS SEC. 31-716. - TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. (a) PURPOSE. The purpose of this Ordinance is to establish general guidelines for the siting of wireless communications towers and aAntennas. The goals of this Ordinance are to: (1) Protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impacts of towers and aAntennas; (2) Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas; (3) Minimize the total number of towers throughout the community; (4) Strongly encourage the joint use of new and existing tower sites as a primary option rather than construction of additional single-use towers; (5) Encourage users of towers and aAntennas to locate them, to the extent possible, in areas where the adverse impact on the community is minimal; (6) Encourage users of towers and aAntennas to configure them in a way that minimizes the adverse visual impact of the towers and aAntennas through careful design, siting, landscape screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques; (7) Enhance the ability of the providers of telecommunications services to provide such services to the community quickly, effectively and efficiently; (8) Consider the public health and safety of communication towers; and (9) Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failure through engineering and careful siting of tower structures. In furtherance of these goals, the City shall give due consideration to the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning Ordinance (Article 4 of this Ordinance), existing land use, and environmentally sensitive areas in approving sites for the location of towers and aAntennas. It is the policy of the City of Suffolk that new telecommunications towers be built at the lowest height possible that will still allow for cCo-lLocation opportunities. (b) DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this section the following terms are defined below: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW-ELIGIBLE PROJECT. A Project that provides for the installation or construction of a New Structure that is not more than 50 feet above ground level, provided that the structure with attached wireless facilities is (i) not more than 10 feet above the tallest existing Utility Pole located within 500 feet of the New Structure within the same public right-of-way or within the existing line of Utility Poles; (ii) not located within the boundaries of a local, state, or federal historic district; (iii) not located inside the jurisdictional boundaries of a locality having expended a total amount equal to or greater than 35 percent of its general fund operating revenue, as shown in the most recent comprehensive annual financial report, on undergrounding Projects since 1980; and (iv) designed to support small cell facilities; or the Co-Location on any Existing Structure of a Wireless Facility that is not a Small Cell Facility. ANTENNA. Communications equipment that transmits or receives electromagnetic radio signals used in the provision of any type of wireless communications services. BASE STATION. A station that includes a structure that currently supports or houses an Antenna, transceiver, coaxial cables, power cables, or other associated equipment at a specific site that is authorized to communicate with mobile stations, generally consisting of radio transceivers, Antennas, coaxial cables, power supplies, and other associated electronics. CO-LOCATE. To install, mount, maintain, modify, operate, or replace a Wireless Facility on, under, within, or adjacent to a Base Station, building, Existing Structure, Utility Pole, or Wireless Support Structure. "Co-Location" has a corresponding meaning. EXISTING STRUCTURE. Any structure that is installed or approved for installation at the time a Wireless Services Provider or Wireless Infrastructure Provider provides notice to the City of an agreement with the owner of the structure to Co-Locate equipment on that structure. "Existing Structure" includes any structure that is currently supporting, designed to support, or capable of supporting the attachment of wireless facilities, including towers, buildings, Utility Poles, light poles, flag poles, signs, and Water Towers. MICRO-WIRELESS FACILITY. A Small Cell Facility that is not larger in dimension than 24 inches in length, 15 inches in width, and 12 inches in height and that has an exterior Antenna, if any, not longer than 11 inches. NEW STRUCTURE. A Wireless Support Structure that has not been installed or constructed, or approved for installation or construction, at the time a Wireless Services Provider or Wireless Infrastructure Provider applies to the City for any required zoning approval. PROJECT. Means (i) the installation or construction by a Wireless Services Provider or Wireless Infrastructure Provider of a New Structure or (ii) the Co- Location on any Existing Structure of a Wireless Facility that is not a Small Cell Facility. "Project" does not include the installation of a Small Cell Facility by a Wireless Services Provider or Wireless Infrastructure Provider on an Existing Structure to which the provisions of §15.2-2316.4 apply. SMALL CELL FACILITY. A Wireless Facility that meets both of the following qualifications: (i) each Antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than six cubic feet in volume, or, in the case of an Antenna that has exposed elements, the Antenna and all of its exposed elements could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than six cubic feet and (ii) all other wireless equipment associated with the facility has a cumulative volume of no more than 28 cubic feet, or such higher limit as is established by the Federal Communications Commission. The following types of associated equipment are not included in the calculation of equipment volume: electric meter, concealment, telecommunications demarcation boxes, back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cut-off switches, and vertical cable runs for the connection of power and other services. STANDARD PROCESS PROJECT. Any Project other than an Administrative Review-Eligible Project. UTILITY POLE. A structure owned, operated, or owned and operated by a public utility, local government, or the Commonwealth that is designed specifically for and used to carry lines, cables, or wires for communications, cable television, or electricity. WATER TOWER. A water storage tank, or a standpipe or an elevated tank situated on a support structure, originally constructed for use as a reservoir or facility to store or deliver water. WIRELESS FACILITY. Equipment at a fixed location that enables wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network, including (i) equipment associated with wireless services, such as private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services, such as microwave backhaul, and (ii) radio transceivers, Antennas, coaxial, or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration. WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER Any person that builds or installs transmission equipment, wireless facilities, or Wireless Support Structures, but that is not a Wireless Services Provider. WIRELESS SERVICES. (i) "Personal wireless services" as defined in 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(C)(i); (ii) "personal wireless service facilities" as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(C)(ii), including commercial mobile services as defined in 47 U.S.C. §332(d), provided to personal mobile communication devices through wireless facilities; and (iii) any other fixed or mobile wireless service, using licensed or unlicensed spectrum, provided using wireless facilities. WIRELESS SERVICES PROVIDER. A provider of wireless services. WIRELESS SUPPORT STRUCTURE. A freestanding structure, such as a monopole, tower, either guyed or self-supporting, or suitable Existing Structure or alternative structure designed to support or capable of supporting wireless facilities. "Wireless Support Structure" does not include any telephone or electrical Utility Pole or any tower used for the distribution or transmission of electrical service. (b)(c) APPLICABILITY. (1) NEW TOWERS AND ANTENNAS. All new towers, or aAntennas, and other telecommunications facilities in the City shall be subject to these regulations.except for the following: (2) EXCEPTIONS. A. Amateur radio station operators and receive only operations. This Section shall not govern any tower, or the installation of any aAntenna, that is under the maximum building height of the zoning district in which such structure is located and which is owned and operated by a federally-licensed amateur radio station operator or is used exclusively for receive only operations. B. Preexisting towers or aAntennas. Legally established preexisting towers and preexisting aAntennas shall not be required to meet the requirements of this Section. C. AM array. For purposes of implementing this Section, an AM array, consisting of one (1) or more tower units and supporting ground system which functions as one (1) AM broadcasting aAntenna, shall be considered one (1) tower. Measurements for setbacks and separation distances shall be measured from the outer perimeter of the towers included in the AM array. Additional tower units may be added within the perimeter of the AM array by right. D. Towers or aAntennas used primarily by governmental agencies for public safety communications and emergency services. (c)(d) MONOPOLE STRUCTURES shall be permitted in any zoning district in which telecommunications towers are permitted. Guyed towers or lattice towers shall be permitted only in the M-l or M-2 zoning districts. Except where permitted, in residential areas, towers shall be located only where co-location on a Virginia Power transmission line tower or other suitable cCo-lLocation opportunities are utilized. (d)(e) NOTWITHSTANDING any provision to the contrary in Section 31-407, towers shall be set back not less than one hundred (100) feet one foot from the edge of the public right-of-way for each foot of structure height. (e)(f) WHERE LIGHTING IS REQUIRED and permitted by the FAA or other federal or state authority, it shall be oriented inward so as not to project onto surrounding property at ground level. In lieu of stripping, alternate lighting shall be identified per FAA requirements. The use of strobe lighting on towers is prohibited, unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). (f)(g) CO-LOCATION AND CAMOUFLAGING. (1) No telecommunication facility that is readily visible outside of the parcel on which it is located shall be installed closer than one-half (½) mile from another readily visible telecommunication facility that is not camouflaged unless: A. It is a cCo-lLocated facility;  B. It is situated on a multiple-user site; or C. It blends with the surrounding existing natural and man-made environment in such a manner that not more than twenty (20) feet of the facility is visible from outside of the boundaries of the parcel; or D. Technical evidence is submitted showing a clear need for this facility and the infeasibility of cCo-lLocating it on one of these former sites. (2) If cCo-lLocation on an existing tower is not possible due to tower height, the applicant is encouraged to rebuild the tower to the height needed for cCo-lLocation. Space shall is encouraged to be provided for at least two (2) or more additional users on the tower. (3) For purposes of this Subsection: A. "Camouflaged" means a telecommunications facility that is disguised, hidden, or integrated with an eExisting sStructure that is not a monopole or tower, or a personal wireless service facility that is placed within an existing or proposed structure or, nNew sStructure, tower, or mount within trees so as to be screened from view or camouflaged to appear as a non-aAntenna structure (i.e., a tree, flagpole with flag, or similar items). B. "Multi-user site" means a site or parcel comprised of multiple telecommunication towers or buildings supporting one (1) or more aAntennas owned or used by more than one public or private entity, excluding research and development industries with aAntennas to serve internal uses only. C. "Readily visible" means an object that stands out as a prominent feature of the landscape when viewed with the naked eye. (g)(h) SMALL CELL FACILITIES. (1) Zoning Permit Required for sSmall cCell fFacilities placed on eExisting sStructures: A. A zoning permit application must be obtained and reviewed for compliance with all applicable sections of this ordinance by the Zoning Administrator. B. The Zoning Administrator must approve or deny the application within sixty (60) days of receipt of a complete application. Within ten (10) days after receipt of an application and a valid electronic mail address for the applicant, the Zoning Administrator will notify the applicant by electronic mail whether the application is incomplete and specify any missing information; otherwise, the application will be deemed complete. The sixty (60) day review period may be extended by the Zoning Administrator in writing for a period not to exceed an additional thirty (30) days. The application will be deemed approved if the Zoning Administrator  fails to act within the initial sixty (60) days or an extended thirty (30) day period. C. Each single application may include up to 35 permit requests. D. Each permit request must include the specific location of each proposed sSmall cCell fFacility including specific identification of the eExisting sStructure on which the facility will be installed, specifications showing the size of the aAntennas and associated equipment of each sSmall cCell fFacility, and a statement from the owner of the eExisting sStructure consenting to cCo-lLocation of the sSmall cCell fFacility on the Existing sStructure. Additionally, all applications must be accompanied by the following: (i) A technical report must be submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the proposed facility will not result in any material potential interference with other pre-existing communications facilities or with future communications facilities that have already been designed and planned for a specific location or that have been reserved for future public safety communications facilities. (ii) Documentation that access to existing and planned communications facilities will not be obstructed or impacted. (iii) Evidence that facilities do not interfere with other existing or planned utility, transportation, or other infrastructure improvements. Evidence must demonstrate that the facilities will not encroach into visibility triangles and installation of facilities will result in no adverse impacts to public safety or other critical public service needs. (2) In writing and accompanied by an explanation for denial, the Zoning Administrator may deny a proposed location or installation of a sSmall cCell fFacility only for the reasons listed below: A. Potential interference with other pre-existing communications facilities or with future communications facilities that have already been designed and planned for a specific location or that have been reserved for future public safety communications facilities. B. The installation adversely impacts public safety or other critical public service needs. C. The installation is on publicly owned or publicly controlled property, excluding privately owned structures where the applicant has an agreement for attachment to the structure, and the installation would have an adverse aesthetic impact. (i) Facilities placed on publicly owned or publicly controlled property, excluding privately owned structures where the applicant has an agreement for attachment to the structure, shall blend with the surrounding existing natural and man-  made environment in such a manner that visual impacts are minimized. D. The absence of all required approvals from all departments, authorities, and agencies with jurisdiction over such property. E. When located within the Historic Conservation Overlay District and does not comply with Article 4, Section 31-413 of this Ordinance. F. When the application is determined to not comply with any applicable provisions of this section. (3) Removal: A. A sSmall cCell fFacility must be removed by the wWireless sServices pProvider or wWireless iInfrastructure pProvider that installed the facility or is otherwise responsible for the facility within one year after the owner of the eExisting sStructure withdraws or revokes its consent for cCo-lLocation of such facility; or the owner of the eExisting sStructure removes the eExisting sStructure; or such facility is no longer in use, in which case it will be deemed abandoned and must be removed by such provider on that basis. (4) Definitions. For the purpose of this section the following terms are defined as follows: EXISTING STRUCTURE Any structure that is installed or approved for installation at the time a wireless services provider or wireless infrastructure provider provides notice to the City of an agreement with the owner of the structure to co-locate equipment on that structure. "Existing structure" includes any structure that is currently supporting, designed to support, or capable of supporting the attachment of wireless facilities, including towers, buildings, utility poles, light poles, flag poles, signs, and water towers. WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER means any person that builds or installs transmission equipment, wireless facitilites, or wireless support structures, but that is not a wireless services provider. WIRELESS SERVICES means (i) "personal wireless services" as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(C)(i); (ii) "personal wireless service facilities" as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(C)(ii), including commercial mobile services as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 332(d), provided to personal mobile communication devices through wireless facilities; and (iii) any other fixed or mobile wireless service, using licensed or unlicensed spectrum, provided using wireless facilities. WIRELESS SERVICES PROVIDER A provider of wireless services. (i) ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW-ELIGIBLE PROJECTS AND STANDARD PROCESS PROJECTS REQUIRING ZONING APPROVAL. (1) Zoning approval required for an Administrative Review-Eligible Project or a Standard Process Project shall be subject to the following: A. Within 10 business days after receiving an incomplete application, the Zoning Administrator shall notify the applicant that the application is incomplete. The notice shall specify any additional information required to complete the application. The notice shall be sent by electronic mail to the applicant's email address provided in the application. If the Zoning Administrator fails to provide such notice within such 10-day period, the application shall be deemed complete. Additionally, the Zoning Administrator must approve or deny applications within the following specified time periods: (i) For a New Structure within the lesser of 150 days of receipt of the completed application or the period required by federal law for such approval or disapproval; or (ii) For the Co-Location of any Wireless Facility that is not a Small Cell Facility, within the lesser of ninety (90) days of receipt of a complete application, or the period required by federal law for such approval. (iii) Any period specified above for the City to approve or disapprove an application may be extended by mutual agreement between the applicant and the City. (iv) A completed application shall be deemed approved if the Zoning Administrator fails to approve or disapprove the application within the periods specified above or any agreed extension thereof. B. All applications must be accompanied by the following: (i) Evidence that facilities do not interfere with other existing or planned utility, transportation, or other infrastructure improvements. Evidence must demonstrate that the facilities will not encroach into visibility triangles and installation of facilities will result in no adverse impacts to public safety or other critical public service needs. (ii) A technical report must be submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the proposed facility will not result in any material potential interference with other pre-existing communications facilities or with future communications facilities that have already been designed and planned for a  specific location or that have been reserved for future public safety communications facilities. C. If the Zoning Administrator disapproves an application submitted under this section for any zoning approval: (i) The Zoning Administrator shall provide the applicant with a written statement of the reasons for such disapproval; and (ii) If the Zoning Administrator is aware of any modifications to the Project as described in the application that if made would permit the Zoning Administrator to approve the proposed Project, the Zoning Administrator shall identify them in the written statement provided under subsection (i) above. The Zoning Administrator’s subsequent disapproval of an application for a Project that incorporates the modifications identified in such a statement may be used by the applicant as evidence that the Zoning Administrator's subsequent disapproval was arbitrary or capricious in any appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action. D. The Zoning Administrator’s action on disapproval of an application submitted under this section shall: (i) Not unreasonably discriminate between the applicant and other Wireless Services Providers, Wireless Infrastructure Providers, providers of telecommunications services, and other providers of functionally equivalent services; and (ii) Be supported by substantial record evidence contained in a written record publicly released within 30 days following the disapproval. E. Appeals. Any applicant adversely affected by the disapproval of an application for an Administrative Review Eligible Project or Standard Process Project submitted under this subsection may file an appeal pursuant to § 15.2-2285.F, or to §15.2-2314 and Section 31-309 of the Unified Development Ordinance if the requested zoning approval involves a variance, within 30 days following delivery to the applicant or notice to the applicant of the record referenced herein. (h)(j)SHOULD THE TOWER, OR SMALL CELL FACILITY, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW-ELIGIBLE PROJECT, OR STANDARD PROCESS PROJECT and associated equipment building(s) no longer be used for wWireless Servicescommunications for a period in excess of one (1) year, they shall be dismantled and removed from the site. (i)(k) EQUIPMENT, BUILDINGS and associated structures shall be screened from view in accordance with the landscaping standards. (j)(l) A PERFORMANCE SURETY, in a form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted by the applicant prior to the issuance of a building permit in order to ensure removal of the tower, or sSmall cCell fFacility, Administrative Review- Eligible Project, or Standard Process Project when it is no longer to be used for wWireless Servicescommunications. THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK  RESULTS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF May 16, 2018 A. ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, OTA2018-001, initiated by the Suffolk Planning Commission to amend the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 6, Design and Improvement Standards, Section 31-601, Adequate Public Approved Facilities; and Appendix A, Definitions. The purpose of the text amendments is to update and refine the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified Development Ordinance due to a change in circumstance. THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK