City Council - Formal Session

CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH “COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME” CITY COUNCIL MAYOR ROBERT M. "BOBBY" DYER - Mayor ROSEMARY C. WILSON - Vice Mayor District 5 MICHAEL F. BERLUCCHI - District 3 BARBARA M. HENLEY - District 2 DAVID HUTCHESON - District 1 ROBERT W. "WORTH" REMICK - District 6 DR. AMELIA N. ROSS-HAMMOND - District 4 JENNIFER ROUSE - District 10 JOASHUA F. "JOASH" SCHULMAN - District 9 CHRIS TAYLOR - District 8 SABRINA D. WOOTEN - District 7 CITY HALL BUILDING CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEES VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456-9005 CITY MANAGER – PATRICK A. DUHANEY PHONE: (757)-385-4303 CITY ATTORNEY – MARK D. STILES April 16, 2024 FAX (757) 385-5669 CITY ASSESSOR – SUE CUNNINGHAM CITY AUDITOR – LYNDON S. REMIAS EMAIL: CITYCOUNCIL@vbgov.com CITY CLERK – AMANDA BARNES MAYOR ROBERT M. "BOBBY" DYER PRESIDING I. CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFING - CONFERENCE ROOM - 12:00 PM 1. AHEAD EASTERN VIRGINIA MEDICAL SCHOOL (EVMS) STUDY Dr. Ethlyn Gibson, DNP, MSN, Research Scholar, Department of Pediatrics - EVMS Dr. Hamid Okhravi, Associate Professor, Glennan Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, EVMS (Requested by Vice Mayor Wilson, Council Members Berlucchi, Remick, Rouse and Schulman) II. CITY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION 1. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING 12:30 PM III. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS 1. COMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING 1:00 PM L.J. Hansen, Director – Public Works 2. FY 2024-25 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN (BUDGET) OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1:30 PM Dr. Caitlin Pedati, Director – Virginia Beach Public Health Department HUMAN SERVICES 1:45 PM Aileen Smith, Director PUBLIC UTILITIES / WATER & SEWER CIP 2:00 PM Bob Montague, Director EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS AND CITIZEN SERVICES (ECCS) 2:30 PM Jada Lee, Director PUBLIC WORKS 2:45 PM  L.J. Hansen, Director STORMWATER CIP 3:00 PM Melanie Coffey, P.E., Engineer V – Public Works Jonas Alered, P.E., Stormwater Operations Engineer – Public Works FLOOD PROTECTION CIP 3:30 PM Toni Utterback, Stormwater Engineering Center Administrator – Public Works IV. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION/INITIATIVES/COMMENTS 4:00 PM V. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REVIEW 4:15 PM VI. INFORMAL SESSION - CONFERENCE ROOM - 4:30 PM A. CALL TO ORDER B. CITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL C. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION 1. Motion to Recess to Closed Session VII. FORMAL SESSION - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER - 6:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Robert M. "Bobby" Dyer B. INVOCATION C. MOMENT OF SILENCE D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA E. ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL F. CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION 1. Certify Closed Session G. MINUTES 1. INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS April 2, 2024 2. FORMAL SESSION April 9, 2024 3. SPECIAL FORMAL SESSION April 9, 2024 H. MAYOR'S PRESENTATIONS 1. RESOLUTION – AUTISM AWARENESS MONTH 2. PROCLAMATION – JOHN OLIVER “DUBBY” WYNNE DAY Susan Wynne accepting 3. PROCLAMATION – NATIONAL FALLEN FIREFIGHTERS MEMORIAL SERVICE DAY Chief Kenneth Pravetz – Fire Department accepting I. PUBLIC HEARING 1. POLLING PLACE CHANGE FOR JUNE AND NOVEMBER 2024 ELECTIONS  Central Absentee Precinct to Building 23 within the Municipal Center J. FORMAL SESSION AGENDA 1. CONSENT AGENDA K. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS Ordinance to AMEND City Code Section 21-230 re traffic calming Resolution to APPROVE the 2024 Plan of Financing with the Virginia Beach Development Authority (VBDA) not to EXCEED $168.5-Million, APPROVE certain documents prepared in connection with such financing and AUTHORIZE the execution and delivery of same Resolution to PROVIDE for the issuance and sale of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, in the maximum amount of $276-Million and PROVIDE for the form, details and payment thereof re authorized public improvements Resolution to GRANT a permit to Hospital to Home LLC re ambulance services Ordinance to ADOPT the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and AUTHORIZE the City Manager to EXECUTE and SUBMIT the Plans to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Resolution to AUTHORIZE and DIRECT the City Manager to EXECUTE a Settlement Agreement with the United States of American under the Americans with Disabilities Act Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+/- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors, L.L.C. Ordinance to EXTEND the date for satisfying the conditions re closing a 15-foot portion of an unimproved, unnamed alley adjacent to 650 South Atlantic Avenue and Lot 22 in Block 20 of Croatan Beach Resolution to APPROVE an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and RECOMMEND that the Virginia Beach Development Authority (VBDA) APPROVE the Extension Ordinance to AUTHORIZE temporary encroachments into a portion of City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (a/k/a Mill Pond) and into a 5’ City-owned drainage and utility easement at the rear of 2945 Sand Bend Road re maintain an existing frame shed, timber pier, timber bulkhead, concrete boat ramp, and construct and maintain an aluminum boat lift with timber piles DISTRICT 2 Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE $7,940 from the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services to FY2023-24 Human Services Operating Budget re Prevention Services Program Ordinance to TRANSFER up to $800,000 from Vacancy Savings in the General Fund to Emergency Medical Services and AUTHORIZE 2 full-time employees re establishment and administration of the municipal pharmaceutical program for EMS, Fire and rescue squad staff and members CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH for a Certificate of Appropriateness re appeal of Historical Review Board Decision on application to modify #21-20 to temporarily alter window openings (APPROVED) and remove natural slate roof and replace with synthetic slate (DENIED) at 2403 Courthouse Drive DISTRICT 2 L. PLANNING Planning Ad WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH & BHC, LLC / TRUSTEES OF WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH at 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road (DISTRICT 8) for: • Modification of Conditions to a Conditional Use Permit (Applicant has requested to amend) • Conditional Change of Zoning from R-10 Residential to Conditional O-1 Office (Applicant has requested to defer or withdraw) • Conditional Change of Zoning from R-10 Residential to Conditional R-10 • Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel A (Applicant has requested to defer or withdraw) • Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel Lot 5 • Modification of Conditions to a Conditional Use Permit (Applicant has requested to amend) • Conditional Change of Zoning from R-10 Residential to Conditional O-1 Office (Applicant has requested to defer or withdraw) • Conditional Change of Zoning from R-10 Residential to Conditional R-10 • Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel A (Applicant has requested to defer or withdraw) • Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel Lot 5 RECOMMENDATION: STAFF - APPROVAL PLANNING COMMISSION - DENIAL APPLICANTS’ LETTERS DATED APRIL 9, 2024 & APRIL 11, 2024, ARE ATTACHED CARL R. ELLIS, JR for a Variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations re subdivide the lot to create two (2) single-family dwelling lots at 2620 Broad Bay Road DISTRICT 8 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL VIRGINIA BEACH AVA RE, LLC for a Street Closure re approximately 813 square foot portion of an unnamed, unimproved right-of-way adjacent to 2375 Virginia Beach Boulevard DISTRICT 3 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL BORN PRIMITIVE, LLC / MODERN SAVAGE INVESTMENTS, LLC for Modification of Proffers to Conditional Change of Zoning re modify the conceptual landscape plan and increase the height of the building at 1489, 1477 and 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard and two (2) parcels directly east of 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard DISTRICT 6 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY DBA DOMINION ENERGY VIRGINIA / USA ENTERTAINMENT, LC for a Conditional Change of Zoning from Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional I-1 Industrial District re construct an office / warehouse building and Conditional Use Permit re bulk storage yard at 1585 Dam Neck Road DISTRICT 5 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL  TERRY MOORE MIFFLETON / CHARLES & TERRY MIFFLETON for a Conditional Use Permit re short term rental at 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403 DISTRICT 5 RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL Ordinance to AMEND Section 111 of the City Zoning Ordinance (CZO) re definition of dwelling unit, home sharing, kitchen and porch RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL M. APPOINTMENTS 90-DAY FESTIVAL TASK FORCE ADVERTISING ADVISORY COMMITTEE ARTS AND HUMANITIES COMMISSION AUDIT COMMITTEE BAYFRONT ADVISORY COMMISSION BEACHES AND WATERWAYS ADVISORY COMMISSION CLEAN COMMUNITY COMMISSION COMMUNITY POLICY AND MANAGEMENT TEAM COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD MINORITY BUSINESS COUNCIL PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION PERSONNEL BOARD PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD RESORT ADVISORY COMMISSION SHORT TERM RENTAL ENFORCEMENT TASK FORCE SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD VIRGINIA BEACH TOWING ADVISORY BOARD N. UNFINISHED BUSINESS O. NEW BUSINESS P. ADJOURNMENT ******************************** If you are physically disabled or visually impaired and need assistance at this meeting, please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 385-4303 ***************************  7.I.1 Packet Pg. 6 Communication: POLLING PLACE CHANGE FOR JUNE AND NOVEMBER 2024 ELECTIONS (PUBLIC HEARING ) Packet Pg. 7 7.K.a Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21- Packet Pg. 8 7.K.a Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21- Packet Pg. 9 7.K.a Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-  7.K.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-  7.K.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-  7.K.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: K1 Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-230 Pertaining to Traffic Calming (3825 : Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 21-  7.K.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: K2 Resolution Approving the 2024 Plan of Financing with the City of Virginia Beach Development Authority not to Exceed $168.5  7.K.a Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: K3 Resolution of the City of Virginia Beach, Virgina, providing for the Issuance and Sale of General Obligation Public Improvement  7.K.a Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: K4 Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital to Home LLC for Ambulance Services (3830 : Resolution to Grant a Permit to Hospital  7.K.a Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: K5 Ordinance to Adopt the 2024 Housing Choice Voucher Annual Agency Plan and Revised Administrative Plan and to Authorize  7.K.a Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: K6 Resolution Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Settlement Agreement with the United States of America  7.K.a Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: K6 Resolution Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Settlement Agreement with the United States of America  7.K.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: K6 Resolution Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Settlement Agreement with the United States of America  7.K.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: K6 Resolution Authorizing and Directing the City Manager to Execute a Settlement Agreement with the United States of America  7.K.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: K7 Ordinance to authorize acquisition of 1.301+- acres of property located at 2425 George Mason Drive from Enterprise Investors,  7.K.a Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Ordinance Extending the Date for Satisfying the Conditions in the Matter of Closing a 15-Foot Portion of an Unimproved, Unnamed  7.K.a Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: K9 Resolution Approving an Extension of the Town Center Option Agreement and Recommending that the City of Virginia Beach  7.K.a Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.b Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: K10 Ordinance to authorize Temporary Encroachments into City-owned property known as Sandbridge Shores Bass Inlet (aka Mill  7.K.a Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: K11 Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate Funds for the Prevention Services Program in the Department of Human Services (3822  7.K.a Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: K11 Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate Funds for the Prevention Services Program in the Department of Human Services (3822  7.K.a Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: K12 Ordinance to Transfer Up to $800,000 in Vacancy Savings within the General Fund to the Department of Emergency Medical  CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS RE APPEAL OF HISTORICAL REVIEW BOARD DECISION ON APPLICATION TO MODIFY #21-20 TO TEMPORARILY ALTER WINDOW OPENINGS (APPROVED) AND REMOVE NATURAL SLATE ROOF AND REPLACE WITH SYNTHETIC SLATE (DENIED) AT 2403 COURTHOUSE DRIVE DISTRICT 2 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 212  7.K.a Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical  7.K.a Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: K13 Appeal to COA Denial - Building 3 (3838 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach [Applicant & Property Owner] APPEAL of Historical Packet Pg. 287 Communication: Planning Ad (PLANNING)  WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH & BHC, LLC / TRUSTEES OF WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH AT 1445 NORTH GREAT NECK ROAD & 2307 MILLWOOD ROAD (DISTRICT 8) FOR: • MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO AMEND) • CONDITIONAL CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-10 RESIDENTIAL TO CONDITIONAL O-1 OFFICE (APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO DEFER OR WITHDRAW) • CONDITIONAL CHANGE OF ZONING FROM R-10 RESIDENTIAL TO CONDITIONAL R-10 • VARIANCE TO SECTION 4.4(B) OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR PARCEL A (APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO DEFER OR WITHDRAW) • VARIANCE TO SECTION 4.4(B) OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR PARCEL LOT 5 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 288  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH & BHC, LLC [Applicants] TRUSTEES OF WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH [Property Owner] Modification of Conditions to a Conditional Use Permit (Religious Use) Conditional Rezoning (R-10 Residential District to Conditional O-1 Office District) Conditional Rezoning (R-10 Residential District to Conditional R-10 Residential District) Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel A) Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Lot 5) for the property located at 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road (GPINs 2408191170, 2408099309). COUNCIL DISTRICT 8 MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: The applicants are seeking a Modification of Conditions to remove a 3.88-acre portion of the property from the Conditional Use Permit associated with the Religious Use, two Conditional Rezoning requests to rezone an approximately 2.43-acre portion of the property from R-10 to Conditional O-1 and an approximately 1.45-acre portion of the property from R-10 to Conditional R-10 Residential, as well as two Subdivision Variances, one for lot width for Parcel A and another for lot width and street line frontage for Lot 5 within the proposed development. The proposed Conditional O-1 parcel, as shown on the proffered conceptual plan, shows the retention of the existing pond as well as the 3,522 square feet building which would have the option to add an addition up to 500 square feet. 10-foot wide landscape buffers are proposed between the proposed O-1 parcel and the adjacent residential properties in Great Neck Estates which includes the retention of much of the existing vegetation as well as between the proposed O-1 parcel and the proposed Conditional R-10 parcel. The applicant has proffered the allowable uses for the O-1 parcel to include uses such as medical and dental offices, professional offices such as legal or engineering offices, nonprofits, and religious uses. A subdivision variance is required for the proposed O-1 parcel since it does not meet the 50-foot lot width requirement for the O-1 District. While the actual lot width is about 65 feet, since there is an existing 30-foot Dominion easement on the property, which by our Ordinance cannot be used to meet the lot width requirement since it is over 20-feet in width, the variance is required. The applicant is currently working with Dominion to reduce the width of that easement to 20-feet or less in Packet Pg. 289  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 2 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) order for the area to count towards the lot width requirement; however, that has not be finalized. The proposed Conditional R-10 parcel, consisting of approximately 1.45-acres will be developed with a five-lot single family subdivision. As proffered, a 10-foot-wide landscape buffer to include a six-foot tall privacy fence is proposed along both Millwood Road and N. Great Neck Road. Since the Ordinance typically only allows for a 4-foot-tall fence when within 30-feet of a public right-of-way, the applicant is requesting a deviation to allow for a height of six feet. The placement of the proposed fence was reviewed by Traffic Engineering, who confirmed that the proposed fence would not impact the required sight distance from the Millwood Road and N. Great Neck Road intersection. A subdivision variance is required for the proposed Lot 5 since the lot does not meet the 80-foot lot width and 64-foot street line frontage requirement. As shown, the lot width and street line frontage is proposed at 20-feet for the flag lot. The flag lot will allow some frontage on the public street in order for the public utility connections to be made from N. Great Neck Road. The Subdivision Ordinance requires 8% open space for proposed residential subdivisions with lot sizes ranging from 10,000 sf to 14,999 sf. Based on the proposed subdivision, 5,056 square feet of open space would be required to serve the five proposed single-family lots. Section 4.5(b) of the Subdivision Regulations allows for the open space requirement to either be waived or for other alternatives to be considered when the required open space is less than half an acre and would serve no useful public purpose. As such the applicant is requesting for Council to allow for a cash in-lieu payment in place of the dedicated open space. If approved, the amount of the required payment would be determined during the site plan review process and the Department of Parks & Recreation would bring the final terms of the agreement back to City Council, which would include the payment amount, in accordance with the City’s Cash in Lieu of Park Reservation Policy. The proposed home styles provide high quality and attractive buildings with materials consisting of high-quality architectural shingles, cementitious siding, brick or masonry stone, or a combination of those materials along with high-quality accents such as metal roofs and vinyl shutters. While a sign is not proposed for the single-family subdivision, the applicant is proposing a freestanding monument sign for the Conditional O-1 Office zoned parcel. The sign will be no taller than five feet in height and externally illuminated. Access to the proposed development will be via a shared private road off Millwood Road, serving both the proposed Conditional O-1 Parcel and the five proposed single-family dwellings. Per review by the Fire Marshal’s office, the design of the private road meets the requirements of the Virginia Beach Fire Prevention Policy. A one-foot no ingress/egress easement is proposed along the entire frontage of N. Great Neck Road, as access to the development will be from the private road. Packet Pg. 290  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 3 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Considerations: Staff finds the proposal to be in keeping with the policies and goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the Suburban Area which focuses on creating and maintaining great neighborhoods. The O-1 Office District is intended to provide an environment appropriate to office or institutional uses that are compatible with residential uses which may adjoin and where public facilities are available to meet their needs. The applicant is further proffering the allowable uses for the Conditional O-1 parcel to include uses such as medical/dental offices, professional firms, nonprofits, and religious uses, all of which would be considered compatible non-residential uses which would align with the Comprehensive Plan’s general recommendations for the Suburban Area. Furthermore, the proffered plan includes the retention of the existing pond and much of the existing vegetation to limit the physical impacts to the proposed O-1 parcel. The reduction in the property associated with the church will not adversely affect the surrounding area, as all parking will continue to be on site and the church will continue to operate as it has for the past several decades with the same building facilities, access, and parking to accommodate parishioners and guests. Also, the redevelopment of the 3.88- acre parcel provides an enhanced landscape buffer adjacent to existing residentially zoned parcels and screening along the public rights-of-way to include the retention of existing mature trees and vegetation, which further aligns with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The majority of the components of the Suburban Area recommendations for new development have been addressed with this proposal to include streetscape plantings, enhanced buffering, open space, pedestrian connectivity, and proposed house styles that enhance the surrounding community. Two letters of concern and 19 letters of opposition were received regarding these requests. One speaker spoke in support of the application at the Planning Commission hearing while ten spoke in opposition, stating concerns with the proposed office use, increase in traffic, potential flooding, and stormwater. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff Report.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend approval of this request with a vote of 5 to 5. The vote failed, resulting in a recommendation of denial. Modification of Conditions 1. All previous conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit approvals of August 3, 1966, October 15, 1973, and December 19, 1988, as well as the Modification of Conditions approval of December 12, 2000 shall remain in effect. Packet Pg. 291  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 4 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Subdivision Variances 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Agreement through the Department of Public Works/Real Estate, prior to development, for any improvements (i.e roads, structures) that will encroach into any public City easements on the property. The Encroachment Agreement shall be approved prior to the approval of the site plan, construction plan, and recordation of the subdivision plat. 3. Prior to recordation, a one-foot no ingress-egress easement shall be dedicated along N. Great Neck Road on the subdivision plat. Conditional Rezoning (R-10 to Conditional O-1) Proffers Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided and developed, it shall have the widened and improved, privately maintained shared entrance from Millwood Road, freestanding, externally illuminated monument style sign, landscape buffers and existing parking lot substantially as depicted and described on the exhibits entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, and "Freestanding Sign Rendering For Parcel A" dated December 4, 2023, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: The development of Property shall be restricted to the maintenance, renovation, and refurbishment of the existing 3,522 square foot A-Frame Office Building to include up to 500 additional square feet of floor area which will not substantially modify the exterior architectural features and appearance of the existing building. Proffer 3: The only types of uses which shall be permitted in the building on the Property are as follows: i. Business offices of advertising, real estate or insurance companies; Packet Pg. 292  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 5 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) ii. Medical, optical and dental offices and clinics; legal, engineering, architectural and similar professional offices, accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services offices; iii. Offices of miscellaneous business services such as consumer credit reporting agencies; mailing list and stenographic services, business and management consulting services; iv. Offices of non-profit organizations, such as professional organizations, civic, social and fraternal associations, political organizations, and religious organizations; and v. Religious uses. Proffer 4: When the Property is created by subdivision, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration of Easement creating an Ingress/Egress, Public Utility and Shared Maintenance Agreement for the benefit of the adjoining PARCEL R over and across the portion of "Shared Private Road" which provides access from both the Property and PARCEL R to Millwood Road. Proffer 5: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Conditional Rezoning (R-10 to Conditional R-10) Proffers Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided, developed and landscaped, it shall have the privately maintained entrance street, sidewalk extension along Millwood Road, dedicated public utility easement along Millwood Road and Great Neck Road and landscaped buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. A detailed landscape plan for the designated ten foot (10') landscape buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence as depicted on the Rezoning Plan shall be submitted for approval with the Subdivision Construction Plan. Proffer 2: When the Property is developed, it will be subdivided into no more than five (5) single family residential building lots each having a minimum of 10,000 square feet of area. The five (5) new homes will be built with a crawlspace or a raised slab foundation and they will contain a minimum of 2600 square feet of living area. Each home shall have no less than a two (2) car garage and utilize the high quality Packet Pg. 293  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 6 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) architectural features and design elements substantially as depicted on one of the five (5) renderings designated "Bishard Homes Subdivision Quality Example" (1 through 5), dated December 4, 2023 which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Quality Home Depictions") and are incorporated herein by this reference. None of the Quality Homes depicted and proffered herein may be constructed on two (2) adjoining lots. Proffer 3: When the Property is developed, the exterior building materials to be used on the residential structures shall consist primarily of high quality architectural shingles, cementitious siding (e.g., "Hardi Plank"), brick or masonry stone, or a combination of those materials along with high-quality accent or ancillary material such as metal roof accents and vinyl shutters. Proffer 4: The party of the first part shall contribute a payment in lieu of the recreational open space requirement under Section 4.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance, to the Grantee's Parks and Recreation Department. Proffer 5: When the Property is developed, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration submitting the building lots, the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffer Easement, the Shared Private Road Easements, offsite and onsite, and all maintenance agreements and obligations applicable thereto to a mandatory membership Homeowner's Association which shall control these easement rights and be responsible for maintaining the ONSITE portion of the SHARED PRIVATE ROAD and the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffers. The Homeowner's Association shall also be responsible for collecting and contributing the homeowner's share of the maintenance costs of the offsite portion of the Shared Private Road from Millwood Road to its intersection with the ONSITE Private Road. Proffer 6: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements.  Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Location Map Proffer Agreement Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Letter from Wycliffe Presbyterian Church Letter(s) of Concern (2) Letter(s) of Opposition (19) Packet Pg. 294  7.L.a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Page 7 of 7 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Denial. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 295  7.L.a Applicants Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Property Owner Trustees of Wycliffe Presbyterian Church Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 City Council District 8 5‐9 Requests #5 ‐ Modification of Conditions (Religious Use) #6 ‐ Conditional Rezoning (R‐10 Residential District to Conditional O‐1 Office District) #7 ‐ Conditional Rezoning (R‐10 Residential District to Conditional R‐10 Residential District) #8 ‐ Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel A) #9 ‐ Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations for Lot 5) Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Marchelle Coleman Location 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road GPINs 2408191170, 2408099309 Site Size 8.01 acres AICUZ Less than 65 dB DNL Watershed Chesapeake Bay Existing Land Use and Zoning District Religious Use / R‐10 Residential Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North N. Great Neck Road Undeveloped lots, restaurant, office / R‐10 Residential, B‐2 Community Business South Single‐family dwellings / R‐20 Residential East Office, single‐family dwellings / B‐2 Community Business, R‐10 Residential West Single‐family dwellings / R‐10 Residential Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 1 296  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  The applicants are seeking a Modification of Conditions to remove a 3.88‐acre portion of the property from the Conditional Use Permit associated with the Religious Use, Conditional Rezoning requests to rezone an approximately 2.43‐acre portion of the property from R‐10 Residential District to Conditional O‐1 Office District to retain a 3,522 square foot building for office and an approximately 1.45‐acre portion of the property from R‐10 Residential District to Conditional R‐10 Residential District to develop a five lot single family subdivision at a density of 3.44 units per acre, as well as Subdivision Variances to lot width for Parcel A and to lot width and street line frontage for Lot 5 within the proposed development.  Within a half‐mile radius of this section of the N. Great Neck corridor, there are a mix of zoning classifications to include R‐10 Residential, R‐15 Residential, R‐20 Residential, A‐12 Apartment, A‐18 Apartment, and B‐2 Community Business.  Wycliffe Presbyterian Church has existed on these R‐10 Residential District zoned parcels since the 1960s. A Conditional Use Permit for a religious use was granted by City Council on August 3, 1966, and for a childcare education center on December 19, 1988. Subsequently, in 2000, the City Council approved an approximately 4,000 square foot church addition.  One of the applicants, Wycliffe Presbyterian Church, intends to remove an approximately 3.88‐acre portion of the property from the Conditional Use Permit for a religious use and sell that portion to the other applicant, BHC, LLC. To remove the 3.88 acres from the Conditional Use Permit, a Modification of Conditions is required.  The remaining 4.13 acres which includes the church facilities and parking, will remain under the church’s ownership. The remaining acreage exceeds the minimum three‐acre lot area requirement for religious uses, as identified in Section 240.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.  BHC, LLC intends to subdivide the 3.88‐acre portion of the site to create a 2.43‐acre lot (Parcel A) to include the existing 3,522 square foot A‐frame building and the existing pond on the property, both of which are to be retained. The applicant has proffered the allowable uses for the existing A‐Frame building to include professional office uses such as medical, real estate, insurance, legal, and non‐profit offices, as well as religious uses. While the applicant has proffered up to a 500 square foot addition to the building, the building shall remain substantially in conformance with the exterior architectural features and appearance of the existing building. The eastern 1.45‐acre portion of site (Parcel R) will be developed with five single‐family lots accessed via a shared private road from Millwood Road. The private road will also provide access to proposed Parcel A.  The City previously utilized the existing A‐frame building to operate an Infant Program on the property. The program was established in 1987 and began using the existing A‐frame building in 1990. As stated previously, the applicant, Friends of Infant Stimulation, Inc. was granted a Conditional Use Permit for a child care education center by City Council on December 19, 1988. The City discontinued the use of the A‐frame building on September 17, 2021. Since that date, the program has operated at a location off Virginia Beach Boulevard, just west of Town Center.  As depicted on the proffered rezoning exhibit, there are 22 existing parking spaces on the Conditional O‐1 property (Parcel A), exceeding the maximum parking spaces allowed by six spaces. Since the parking lot will remain in its current condition as it has been for several decades, the Planning Director is agreeable to the excess number of spaces as allowed by Section 203(b)(9) of the Zoning Ordinance.  A 10‐foot‐wide landscape buffer is provided between the adjacent residential properties along Millwood Road and the proposed Conditional O‐1 property (Parcel A), as required by the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Existing vegetation will remain undisturbed between the R‐20 Residential District parcels to the west to satisfy the buffering requirements. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 297  7.L.a In addition, a 10‐foot‐wide landscape buffer with Category VI plantings and a six‐foot tall wood privacy fence is also Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) proposed along N. Great Neck Road and Millwood Road. The applicant is requesting a height deviation in accordance with Section 107(i) of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the installation of a six‐foot tall fence instead of the four‐ foot maximum height typically permitted within 30‐feet of a public right‐of‐way.  Per Section 4.5 of the Subdivision Regulations, 8% (approximately 5,056 square feet) of open space shall be reserved to serve residents of residential developments with lots sizes ranging from 10,000 square feet to 14,999 square feet. In instances where the resulting area to be reserved for recreational purposes would be less than one‐half acre and would serve no useful public purpose, Section 4.5(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance allows for the consideration of an alternative to the dedication, to include a cash payment in lieu of the open space dedication, if it is mutually agreed to by the city council and the developer. Since the open space dedication required for this proposal is less than one‐half acre, the applicant is requesting to provide a cash payment in lieu of the open space dedication.  The proffered house styles for the five‐lot subdivision depict dwellings with exterior materials to be comprised of high‐quality architectural shingles, cementitious siding (e.g., "HardiPlank"), brick or masonry stone, or a combination of those materials along with high‐quality accents such as metal roof and vinyl shutters.  A freestanding monument style sign is proposed at the entrance of the shared private road for the Conditional O‐1 Office District zoned parcel (Parcel A). As proffered, the proposed cultured stone sign will be no taller than five feet in height and externally illuminated. No sign is proposed for the single‐family subdivision. The proposed freestanding sign must meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance including the required landscaping around the base.  Per the Code of Virginia Beach, Section 31‐28(d), the City will not make refuse collections on private property. The applicant is aware and will be providing private services for the pick‐up and disposal of trash and solid waste for this development.  A Subdivision Variance is requested for the deficiency in lot width for Parcel A, and the lot width and street line frontage for Lot 5, as shown in the table below. Required Required Proposed Required Proposed Proposed Minimum Street Line Street Line Minimum Proposed Lot Lot Width Lot Area Lot Width Frontage Frontage Lot Area (feet) (square feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (square feet) Parcel A 50 35.2* 40 80 5,000 105,724 Lot 5 80 20* 64 20* 10,000 12,500 *Variance Requested Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 3 298  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Zoning History 5 # 1 Request SVR (Lot Width Reduction) Approved 10/05/2021 2 CUP (Vocational School) Approved 10/05/2021 3 2 3 CUP (Tattoo Parlor) Approved 01/21/2020 MDC (Church Addition) Approved 12/12/2000 4 CUP (Child Care Education Center) Approved 12/19/1988 CUP (Church) Approved 08/03/1966 1 4 CUP (Automobile Repair Garage) Approved 06/09/1992 5 CUP (Pump Station) Approved 10/15/1973 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Evaluation & Recommendation In Staff’s opinion, these requests for a Modification of Conditions to remove approximately 3.88‐acres from the previously approved Conditional Use Permit, the Conditional Rezonings to rezone an approximately 2.43‐acre portion from R‐10 Residential District to Conditional O‐1 Office District and an approximately 1.45‐acre portion from R‐10 Residential District to Conditional R‐10 Residential District to allow for the construction of a five‐lot single‐family subdivision, as well as Subdivision Variance requests to lot width for Parcel A and the lot width & street line frontage for Lot 5 are acceptable. The project falls within the Suburban Area. The request to remove 3.88‐acre portion of the site from the Conditional Use Permit while retaining 4.13 acres for the church is consistent with the policies and goals set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the Suburban Area, as the existing church complements the existing uses in the area and provides much needed services to the surrounding community. In Staff’s opinion, the reduction in the property associated with the church will not adversely affect the surrounding area as all parking will continue to be met on the site, and the church will continue to operate as it has for the past several decades with the same building facilities, access, and parking to accommodate parishioners and guests. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan recommends that developments within the Suburban Area focus on creating and maintaining great neighborhoods. Achieving this goal reflects on the ability of developments to maintain and enhance existing neighborhoods, to be compatible with surroundings, and provide quality and attractive buildings that provide effective buffering and livability. In Staff’s view, the proposed rezoning to Conditional O‐1 is acceptable since the O‐1 Office District, as stated in the City’s Zoning Ordinance, is intended to provide an environment appropriate to office or institutional character compatible with residential uses. Staff is of the opinion that the existing office building is a low intensity use that is compatible with the surrounding residential area. While the existing 3,522 square foot building could be expanded up to an additional 500 square feet, the building will remain substantially in conformance with the exterior architectural features and appearance of the existing building, as proffered. As such the building will remain, largely unchanged, as it has on the site for decades. Furthermore, the applicant has voluntarily selected uses that can operate within the office building that are also compatible with the surrounding neighborhood as detailed in Proffer 3. The site will be enhanced with a 10‐foot‐wide landscape buffer to screen the use from the adjacent residential properties to the north and northwest, to include the retention of existing mature trees and vegetation, which aligns Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 4 299  7.L.a with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Also, the five‐lot subdivision is consistent with the Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Comprehensive Plan’s land use policies for the Suburban Area in creating great neighborhoods. The conditional rezoning of the property allows Staff to review the proposed proffered plans and elevations to ensure compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan for this area. In Staff’s opinion, the proposed homes are compatible with the neighboring properties and provides quality and attractive home styles that enhance the existing character of the surrounding community. The development also provides additional landscaping and screening along the public right‐of ways. Per Section 201 of the Zoning Ordinance, Walls and fences may project into or enclose any part of any yard; provided, however, that any fence that projects into or encloses a required front yard shall not exceed a height of four (4) feet. As depicted on the proffered rezoning exhibit, a six‐foot‐tall wood privacy fence is proposed along the front yard for the proposed lots, which are along N. Great Neck Road and Millwood Road. The applicant is requesting that the increase in the height of the fence be addressed through the provisions of Section 107(i), which states the following: The City Council may, for good cause shown and upon a finding that there will be no significant detrimental effects on surrounding properties, accept proffered conditions reasonably deviating from the setback, lot coverage, landscaping and minimum lot area requirements and height restrictions … otherwise applicable to the proposed development. No such deviation shall be in conflict with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. In Staff’s view, the fencing and evergreen plantings will provide an adequate streetscape buffer along the public right‐of‐ ways and will not cause any impact to line of sight, as it meets the 775‐foot sight distance requirement. Furthermore, the height of the fence is consistent with the fence height on the corner lot in the subdivision across N. Great Neck Road. As such, Staff is supportive of the deviation request. It is the opinion of the city’s Traffic Engineering Staff that the traffic generated by the proposed development will result in 50 average daily trips for the five‐lot single‐family subdivision and 46 average daily trips for the office use. According to Public Works staff, N. Great Neck Road and Millwood Road have adequate capacity to support the proposed development. A one‐foot no ingress‐egress easement will be required along N. Great Neck Road with all future access to be from Millwood Road. The existing entrance along Millwood Road will remain in its current location, as approved by Traffic Engineering since it is located at the farthest point from the intersection of N. Great Neck Road and Millwood Road. However, the existing entrance will be widened, as depicted on the proffered plan, to accommodate emergency vehicles. The proffered rezoning exhibit has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal’s Office and they have agreed that the dimensions of the shared private access road is sufficient and allows them to adequately service both properties, the Conditional O‐ 1 parcel as well as the Conditional R‐10 lots. To ensure adequate emergency access, the applicant has indicated that they will remove Proffer 4 which states “When the Property is developed, on street parking within the community shall be restricted to one (1) side of the street” between Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that the shared access road is in full compliance with the Virginia Beach Fire Prevention Policy. Due to existing recorded easements on site and the requirement to exclude such area, Parcel A does not meet the required 50‐foot lot width required for O‐1 Office District zoned parcels and Lot 5 does not meet the required 80‐foot lot width and 64‐foot street line frontage for properties zoned R‐10 Residential District. As such, a Subdivision Variance requests are required. Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Regulations states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 5 300  7.L.a D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self‐inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. Staff finds the variance requests to be compliant with the conditions of Section 9.3. Parcel A has 80 feet of lot frontage along Millwood Road. Per Section 802 of the Zoning Ordinance, the minimum lot width required in the O‐1 Office District is 50 feet, measured at the 30‐foot front yard setback. The lot width for this lot is 65.2 feet; however, there is an existing 30‐foot‐wide Dominion Virginia Power Easement running along Parcel A, which cannot be counted towards the minimum lot width requirement, resulting in a lot width of 35.2 feet, which creates a deficit of 14.8 feet. Since easements 20‐feet or less in width can be counted towards the lot width requirement, the applicant has been working with Dominion Virginia Power to vacate 10 feet of the 30‐foot easement on the property. However, since this has not been finalized, the Subdivision Variance is required. In addition, Lot 5 is depicted as a reverse flag lot with 20 feet of lot width and 20‐foot street line frontage, where an 80‐foot lot width and 64‐foot street line frontage is required. The applicant is requesting the variance to Lot 5 to preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the western portion of the site, including the existing pond, to allow for it to remain in its existing condition. As such, Staff is supportive of these requests. Prior to development, all improvements that encroach into an existing public drainage or public utility easement on the property must be reviewed by Public Works/Real Estate through the Encroachment Agreement review process. As depicted on the proffered plan, it appears that the shared private road and fencing will encroach into these public easements. As noted in Condition 2 of the Subdivision Variance requests, an Encroachment Agreement shall be approved by Public Works/Real Estate, prior to the approval of the site plan, construction plan, and subdivision plat for this development. Regarding the proposed single‐family subdivision, information provided by the Virginia Beach City Public School (VBCPS) Staff indicates that the increase in student enrollment will be minimal with a total of three students, one student for each level of education: elementary, middle, and high school. The increase in student population will be below maximum occupancy levels. There is an existing school bus stop adjacent to this development, at the corner of Millwood Road and Selden Street, to serve students of the Great Neck Estates neighborhood. According to VBCPS staff, nine students are picked up at this stop in the morning and seven are dropped off in the afternoon. Given this and the limited number of school‐aged children anticipated with the proposed residential development, VBCPS stated they did not have any concerns with this development in relation to the existing school bus stop location. They did note that this is the current location of the existing bus stop and it is subject to change from year to year, as student ridership counts change. Based on this, the proposal is not expected to negatively impact the school population. This site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and a narrative was provided by the applicant that indicates the intention to address water quality and quantity through the pond on the property. If additional treatment is needed, infiltration systems, bioretention planting beds, or underground storage facilities will be installed by the applicant. The pond is situated almost entirely on the proposed Conditional O‐1 parcel (Parcel A). A 10‐foot public drainage easement running through the pond was dedicated to the City by subdivision plat (M.B. 122 PG. 40) and was acquired on 9/29/1977 when the plat was recorded. The City’s existing easement allows the City to maintain water flow through the pond and into Lake Conrad #3. Staff support of the application does not constitute an agreement by the City to assume additional maintenance responsibilities for the pond. The pond is handling drainage for the church and will continue to do so. It is the opinion of Staff that all future maintenance of the pond shall be the responsibility of the property owners of the proposed Conditional O‐1 parcel and the church, except for the City’s discretionary maintenance of the flow of water through its existing easement. An in‐depth review of the stormwater management strategy will occur during the Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 6 301  7.L.a site plan review process to ensure compliance with all stormwater regulations and that no negative impacts will occur Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) upstream or downstream as a result of this development. Based on these considerations above, Staff recommends approval of the request subject to the conditions and proffers below. Recommended Conditions for MDC 1. All previous conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit approvals of August 3, 1966, October 15, 1973, and December 19, 1988, as well as the Modification of Condition approval of December 12, 2000 shall remain in effect. Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Proffers for CRZ (R‐10 to Conditional O‐1) The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided and developed, it shall have the widened and improved, privately maintained shared entrance from Millwood Road, freestanding, externally illuminated monument style sign, landscape buffers and existing parking lot substantially as depicted and described on the exhibits entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408‐09‐9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, and "Freestanding Sign Rendering For Parcel A" dated December 4, 2023, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: The development of Property shall be restricted to the maintenance, renovation, and refurbishment of the existing 3,522 square foot A‐Frame Office Building to include up to 500 additional square feet of floor area which will not substantially modify the exterior architectural features and appearance of the existing building. Proffer 3: The only types of uses which shall be permitted in the building on the Property are as follows: (i) Business offices of advertising, real estate or insurance companies; (ii) Medical, optical and dental offices and clinics; legal, engineering, architectural and similar professional offices, accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services offices; (iii) Offices of miscellaneous business services such as consumer credit reporting agencies; mailing Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 7 302  7.L.a list and stenographic services, business and management consulting services; Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) (iv) Offices of non‐profit organizations, such as professional organizations, civic, social and fraternal associations, political organizations, and religious organizations; and (v) Religious uses. Proffer 4: When the Property is created by subdivision, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration of Easement creating an Ingress/Egress, Public Utility and Shared Maintenance Agreement for the benefit of the adjoining PARCEL R over and across the portion of "Shared Private Road" which provides access from both the Property and PARCEL R to Millwood Road. Proffer 5: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Proffers for CRZ (R‐10 to Conditional R‐10) The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided, developed and landscaped, it shall have the privately maintained entrance street, sidewalk extension along Millwood Road, dedicated public utility easement along Millwood Road and Great Neck Road and landscaped buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408‐09‐9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. A detailed landscape plan for the designated ten foot (10') landscape buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence as depicted on the Rezoning Plan shall be submitted for approval with the Subdivision Construction Plan. Proffer 2: When the Property is developed, it will be subdivided into no more than five (5) single family residential building lots each having a minimum of 10,000 square feet of area. The five (5) new homes will be built with a crawlspace or a raised slab foundation and they will contain a minimum of 2600 square feet of living area. Each home shall have no less than a two (2) car garage and utilize the high quality architectural features and design elements substantially as depicted on one of the five (5) renderings designated "Bishard Homes Subdivision Quality Example" (1 through 5), dated December 4, 2023 which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Quality Home Depictions") and are incorporated herein by this reference. None of the Quality Homes depicted and proffered herein may be constructed on two (2) adjoining lots. Proffer 3: When the Property is developed, the exterior building materials to be used on the residential structures shall consist primarily of high quality architectural shingles, cementitious siding (e.g., "Hardi Plank"), brick or masonry stone, or a Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 8 303  7.L.a combination of those materials along with high‐quality accent or ancillary material such as metal roof accents and vinyl Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) shutters. Proffer 4: When the Property is developed, onstreet parking within the community shall be restricted to one (1) side of the street. Proffer 4: The party of the first part shall contribute a payment in lieu of the recreational open space requirement under Section 4.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance, to the Grantee's Parks and Recreation Department. Proffer 5: When the Property is developed, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration submitting the building lots, the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffer Easement, the Shared Private Road Easements, offsite and onsite, and all maintenance agreements and obligations applicable thereto to a mandatory membership Homeowner's Association which shall control these easement rights and be responsible for maintaining the ONSITE portion of the SHARED PRIVATE ROAD and the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffers. The Homeowner's Association shall also be responsible for collecting and contributing the homeowner's share of the maintenance costs of the offsite portion of the Shared Private Road from Millwood Road to its intersection with the ONSITE Private Road. Proffer 6: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Recommended Condition for SVR 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408‐09‐ 9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Agreement through the Department of Public Works/Real Estate, prior to development, for any improvements (i.e roads, structures) that will encroach into any public City easements on the property. The Encroachment Agreement shall be approved prior to the approval of the site plan, construction plan, and recordation of the subdivision plat. 3. Prior to recordation, a one‐foot no ingress‐egress easement shall be dedicated along N. Great Neck Road on the subdivision plat. Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg. 9 304  7.L.a Previous Conditions from 1966 CUP Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) 1. Standard site plan requirements. 2. An additional 25‐foot dedication for the widening of Great Neck Road. Previous Conditions from 1973 CUP 1. Standard site plan requirements (Engineering). Previous Conditions from 1988 CUP 1. The utilization of Best Management Practices for controlling stormwater runoff which are reasonably applicable to the development of the site. Previous Conditions from 2000 MDC 1. Land disturbance for the addition shall be kept at a minimum. Any removal of existing mature trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. The replacement trees shall be a minimum 2‐1/2 inch to 3‐inch caliper. 2. The building addition shall be constructed substantially in accordance with the submitted elevation titled “WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, Virginia Beach, VA.”, dated 22 August 2000, prepared by Tymoss & Moss Architects, that is on file in the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department. Comprehensive Plan Recommendations The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site as being located within the Suburban Area. The general planning principles for the Suburban Area focus on creating and maintaining great neighborhoods through stability and sustainability; protecting and enhancing open spaces and places of cultural and historical significance; and creating and maintaining a transportation system that provides connectivity and mobility. Achieving these goals requires that all land use activities either maintain or enhance the existing neighborhood through compatibility with surroundings, quality and attractiveness of site and buildings, improved mobility, environmental responsibility, livability, and effective buffering with respect to type, size, intensity, and relationship to the surrounding uses. Overall, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations for this area. Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts The site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The site is wooded with mature trees and shrubs. The impervious area of the site includes the church, several accessory buildings, and parking areas. The site also contains a freshwater pond. The pond is considered non‐tidal wetlands and does not fall under the jurisdiction of City Code, Appendix A, Article 14 – Wetlands Zoning Ordinance. Vegetated wetlands are defined in the city’s Wetland Zoning Ordinance as lands lying between and contiguous to mean low water and an elevation above mean low water equal to the factor one and one‐ Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 PacketPage Pg.10305  7.L.a half (1½) times the mean tide range at the site of the proposed project in the City of Virginia Beach. The tidal elevation Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) based off NAVD 88 datum for this portion of the Lynnhaven is as follows: Mean Low Water (MLW) elevation: ‐1.2, Tidal Range elevation: 1.9, Mean High Water (MHW): 0.7. While this area is classified as a lake habitat wetland on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Wetland mapper, the elevations limit the local Wetlands Board jurisdiction, as described in the city’s Wetland Zoning Ordinance from MLW to an elevation of 1.7 feet (1 ½ times the mean tide range). Traffic Impacts Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic 55,000 ADT (LOS 1 4 Existing Land Use 2a – 46 ADT N. Great Neck Road 38,800 ADT1 Existing Zoning (2.5 ac parcel zoned R‐10) 2a – 75 ADT “D”) Proposed Land Use 3a – 46 ADT No Data Available Proposed Land Use (with up to 500 sf addition) 3a – 58 ADT Millwood Road 1 No Data Available 1 Existing Land Use 2b – 0 ADT Proposed Land Use 3b – 50 ADT 1 Average Daily Trips 2a as defined by an 3a as defined by a 35,222 4 LOS = Level of Service existing 35,222 office office use building 3b as defined by a five‐lot 2b as defined by a single family subdivision vacant 1.45‐acre R‐10 zoned parcel Master Transportation Plan (MTP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) N. Great Neck Road is a six‐lane suburban arterial in the vicinity of this site. N. Great Neck Road has a variable right‐of‐ way width, and the MTP shows a divided highway with a bikeway and an ultimate right‐of‐way width of 120 feet. There are currently no CIP projects scheduled for this segment of N. Great Neck Road. Millwood Road is a two‐lane residential roadway that intersects with N. Great Neck Road at a unsignalized intersection. Public Utility Impacts Water Each proposed parcel must connect to City water with a separate and exclusive water service line and meter. There is an existing eight‐inch City water main along Millwood Road and a 16‐inch City water main along N. Great Neck Road. Sewer Each proposed parcel must connect to City sanitary sewer with a separate and exclusive sewer lateral and cleanout. There is an existing 12‐inch City gravity sanitary sewer main along Millwood Road and an eight‐inch City gravity sewer main along N. Great Neck Road. There is also an existing 16‐inch HRSD sanitary sewer force main along N. Great Neck Road. The proposed parcels within this development will be served by public utilities with individual connections being made from N Great Neck Road and Millwood Road and not via a shared public or private utility easement within the proposed private roadway. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.11 306  7.L.a School Impacts Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) School Current Enrollment Capacity Generation 1 Change 2 Dey Elementary 728 students 788 students 1 student 1 student Great Neck Middle 1,056 students 1,128 students 1 student 1 student Cox High 1,614 students 1,883 students 1 student 1 student 1 “Generation” represents the number of students that the development will add to the school. 2 “change” represents the difference between the number of potential or actual students generated under the existing zoning and the number generated under the proposed zoning. The number can be positive (additional students) or negative (fewer students). Public Outreach Information Planning Commission  The applicant & applicant’s representative met with the Great Neck Estates Civic League and the surrounding community on March 6, 2024 at 7:00 p.m. at the Wycliffe Presbyterian Church to discuss the details of the request.  As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 12, 2024.  As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian‐Pilot Beacon on Sundays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024.  As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024.  This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of www.VirginiaBeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. City Council  As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian‐Pilot on Tuesdays, April 2, 2024 and April 9, 2024.  As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on April 1, 2024.  The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city‐council on April 12, 2024. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.12 307  Proposed Resubdivision Plat Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.1308 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Conditional Rezoning Exhibit Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.14 309 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Street View Perspective Exhibit Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.15 310 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Proposed Housing Style Renderings Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.16 311 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Proposed Housing Style Renderings Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.17 312 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Proposed Housing Style Renderings Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.18 313 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Proposed Freestanding Monument Sign Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.19 314 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Site Photos Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.20 315 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Site Photos Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.21 316 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Disclosure Statement Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.22 317 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Disclosure Statement Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.2318 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  X Disclosure Statement 3/26/2024 Marchelle L. Coleman Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.24 319 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Disclosure Statement Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.25 320 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Disclosure Statement Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.26 321 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  X Disclosure Statement 03/26/2024 Marchelle L. Coleman Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.27 322 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days.  Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff.  Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757‐385‐8074.  If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757‐385‐4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757‐385‐5692.  Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid.  The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC Agenda Items 5‐9 Page Packet Pg.28 323  R10 R10 R10 7.L.a R10 R10 R10 Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe R10 R20 R10 R10 R10 t B2 Millwood Road Gr ea Neck B2 Ro R20 R20 ad A12 B2 R20 B2 Site Property Polygons Zoning Building Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road µ Feet Packet Pg. 324 0 45 90 180 270 360 450 540  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Items # 5-9 Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL Madam Clerk: The next item on the agenda, is agenda items number five through nine. Wycliffe Presbyterian Church, and BHC, LLC for a modification of conditions for Conditional Rezoning R-10 Residential to Conditional O-1 Office, and R-10 Residential to Conditional R-10, and Subdivision Variants of Section 4.4B of the Subdivision Regulations for Parcel A, Section 4.4B of the Subdivision Regulations for Lot 5 at 1445 North Great Neck Road, and 2307 Millwood in District 8. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Mr. Bourdon: Madam Chair, I've provided the clerk with handouts that I would like you all to each have prior to beginning the presentation. I'd like for you all to have the handouts before we start the presentation. Madam Chair, we've got two speakers who I will call up after I make the presentation, who are pastor, and member of the church, who will also be speaking, but not for 10 minutes, promise. One of the handouts is just to highlight a copy of the 0-1 zoning district, and the legislative intent, and then the heavier one are a series of examples of office and commercial use located as is stated on the cover sheet and, it's not an exhaustive list either of offices and commercial uses in neighborhoods and at the entrances, sharing entrances with residential neighborhoods. For the record, my name is Eddie Bourdon. I'm a Virginia Beach attorney, and I'm here today represent Wycliffe Presbyterian Church. I represent along with the Bishard Companies on this application today involving this 3.9 acre property. Existing property owned by Wycliffe Presbyterian Church, which is zoned Unconditional R-10 Residential District. In August of 1966, the third year, our City of Virginia Beach existed, the church sought and received a use permit for religious use from the new City Council on what were then its three contiguous parcels on a two lane Great Neck Road containing over 8.5 acres of land. That use permit did not contain any conditions attached to it whatsoever, and it wasn't even called a religious use permit, just a use permit, but it was for religious use. In July of 1973, the City purchased the Wycliffe, from Wycliffe 2000 square feet fronting on Millwood Road, a parcel it carved out for the church from the church for its use. There were no church facilities on that 2,000 square foot parcel nor any conditions contained that required any use permit to be modified and none was. The property was zoned RS- 3, RS, which were 10,000 square foot lots at that time, but they didn't buy it to build a Packet Pg. 325  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) house on it, the City didn't. In January of 1976, the City acquired by condemnation, a drainage easement across the northeastern portion of the Wycliffe property as part of the widening of Great Neck Road to six lanes. Through that stormwater transmission pipe on the Wycliffe property, public stormwater from Great Neck Road is collected over 48 acres of developed property, and is to the north, and the east, and the south, and is dumped through that pipe, into the pond on the church's property. You all heard about that, some of it, what I've said this morning in the informal session. A 76% of the stormwater that is draining into that pond, is public water coming from offsite? A 24% is coming from the Wycliffe’s property and an office building directly to the south that drains through the Wycliffe’s property. The pond, I contend, does serve a purpose because there's a lot of property in that 48 acres. Not the majority anymore because a lot of it's redeveloped, but a lot of property that was developed before there were any stormwater regulations whatsoever. So, I do contend, although I'm not going to stand here, and we're not going to get into a big argument about I heard what L. J. Hanson said this morning, and said about the weir and things of that nature, but I do think while there probably is tons of capacity in the larger lake the City owns, I would suggest that this lake or pond is in fact providing some stormwater benefits to the City, and not just to the church or to the property that we are here to talk about today. In 1988, Friends of Infant Stimulus, Inc. applied for and was granted a conditional use permit on Wycliffe's Northern Parcel for a childcare education center, which approved two additions to the A-frame building. One that was built, one that never was, and for the use of that building as a child care education center. The sanctuary, that was once in the chapel. The chapel was once a sanctuary. The new sanctuary was built in 1984 and this former small chapel had no longer any utilization needed by Wycliffe. In 1990, the child care education center opened, and operated until September of 2021. That property has not been used for religious purpose since 1990. The church has ministered and operated on the southernmost parcel of its property containing 4.123 acres of land under its 1966 use permit with no conditions. Any modification to that use permit was made one time in 2000 to construct a 4,000 square foot addition for classrooms, and office adjacent to the sanctuary. There is no required church parking nor building which has been utilized for religious use on this excess 3.9 acre parcel upon which there is a CUP for a child care education center granted in 1988, and operated until 2021 for which the only condition attached was for stormwater management. Now, this morning, Marchelle Coleman and Caitlyn Alcock did a wonderful job of explaining the application in terms of the different aspects of it, but after what has transpired previously the church and the Bishard’s have come up with a way to make sure that pond that is cherished by a number of people remains as it is, and to make Packet Pg. 326  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) it very clear, these proffers make it clear that you cannot fill it without going through the same process, you can't alter it significantly without going through this process, only a significant alteration would be to fill it, and the taking unconditional R-10 zoning, and zoning it conditional R-10 means you what you see is what you get, and not some other configuration or different way to develop the property by-right under the R-10 zoning that exists on this property today. Now, the subdivision variances the one on parcel A, the parcel that's proposed to be conditionally rezoned to 0-1, that subdivision variance will not, we're going to ask that it be approved today, but we already have a letter from Dominion Power. The only reason, as Ms. Alcock and Ms. Coleman explained, the only reason that's on here is that way back in the 60s, the, the church gave Virginia Power a 30-foot easement across their property, which really just serves the church, and they have agreed to reduce that width to 15 feet, and also the line will be buried, so that there will no longer be an overhead line, but we've got to get the I's dotted and the T's crossed, but we're 99.9% certain that, by the time we get to Council, this variance for Parcel A for the subdivision variance will not be necessary. The other subdivision variances, again, just so we can get utilities into Lot 5 from Great Neck Road, and it's a common practice, and it's, you know, been something that's been, I've done it many times over the years in similar circumstances, as have others. The O- 1 zoning district, I provided you all with a handout that's, and I'll quote from it, the O-1 office district was set up to provide an environment appropriate to offices compatible with residential uses that may adjoin it. It's the least dense or least problematic type of offices, and we have proffered a very limited list from the list that is allowed, including no conditional use options as well. The church attempted to listen to what some of the complaints were, and we're keeping the building, the additional 500 square feet is pretty much what was approved, could have been, and could have been built back in 1990, but that's not to say that it would have been at the other end of the A frame, but the intent is to be in a position to possibly create an entrance to the building that might be more effective than what exists there today, but not to take the building down, not to build 500 square feet, you're not going to build much in anyway in 500 square feet. This is the handout that I provided you. I hope you'll take a look at that. There are a series of examples, including one that a gap wedge from the church's property would hit right down the street to the south. There's also Kenstock, the entrance to Kenstock, the Lynnhaven Colony examples, Little Neck examples. Holly Road example across the residential street from, Extremely expensive homes that are perfectly fine in a neighborhood, and none of them are on the property that this is on with the amount of open area on this property, that's a 2 point some odd acre parcel. It just, it's anyway, it's a very, it's a keeping things away. They've Packet Pg. 327  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) always been and that's what I listened to from the opposition, and you all listened to from the opposition previously. So all these do need to be voted on together because it's a package deal to try to again make sure that the lake doesn't get filled and to keep the A frame as it is, and that's the purpose why we're here. I think staff's recommendation is appropriate. It should be approved in my opinion. I don't know of any legitimate reason why it shouldn't be, and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Ms. Cuellar: Are there any questions from the commissioners for Mr. Bourdon? Mr. Bourdon: Okay. I'd like to have David Gangwer come up and followed by Pastor. Ms. Cuellar: Could you please state your name for the record? Mr. Gangwer: I am David Gangwer, one of the trustees of Wycliffe's Presbyterian. Madam Chair, Mr. Vice-Chair, Commissioners, as a trustee, I represent the entire congregation, and the Presbyterian Church, we have what we refer to as submittal to the brethren, the majority rules. The vote was taken, and what, regardless of my personal view, I'm before you to represent the church, and I've been a member there for the past 30 of the past 60 years that the church has been in existence, raised my children there, and you may know me better as the zip tie man, those who looked at the property, and saw the signs and complaints that they may not have been up. Well, I got the Costco size bag of zip ties, and put extra stakes down so that the community would be informed. The sad truth is the church is a business. We'd all like to think that we just go to church, put our money in the plate, go home, God's going to take care of us. But in the whole world, this claim was staked 60 years ago when Great Neck Road was a bucolic rolling, maybe not so rolling two lane road. Now we look at it. In our inflationary times, this is all pre COVID, in 2018, the church's board looked at all the assets they had, looked at the vision and mission that we had for the church, and realized this stuff doesn't come free. So, of the assets that we have, in a declining membership base where some elder, big givers were passing away, unfortunately, we knew that for the viability of the church, something had to happen. So in our resources, we have this huge claim that was staked 60 years ago. All we ask is that the City unencumber us so that we can take some of that asset. We still want to be the bright shining light in the Great Neck Corridor, but it takes money. There are half-truths and innuendos out there that this is about greed and about things that simply aren't true. I'm not a Facebook guy, so I can't address them specifically, but I can share with you, as the trustee, that we need your help. And to that end, my wife is on a bigger area, Tidewater Area Committee of the Presbyterian Church. This afternoon, she's signing on the papers of a church closure. Wycliffe is not going to be Packet Pg. 328  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) that church, but we need your help in taking up the slack from those churches who are folding and whose properties are being cashiered. Thank you very much. Ms. Cuellar: Before you leave, are there any questions from the commissioners? Thank you very much for being here. Pastor Bug: Good afternoon. I am the Reverend Dr. Garrett Bug. It is my pleasure to speak with you today. I've been at Wycliffe Presbyterian Church since about 2013, so I'm fairly new to Virginia Beach. But in that time, there have been a lot of changes, both in our church, in this fair city, nationally, and globally. One of the things that has not changed is the good work of ministry that has been going on for over 60 years at Wycliffe Presbyterian Church. It began as a mission congregation in 1963, and met at John B. Dye School. In 1966, one of our charter members discovered a property for sale at 1445 North Great Neck Road, and petitioned the Presbytery of Norfolk to assist in purchasing the property. That property was chosen because of its size, Wycliffe could grow on that property, and Wycliffe did grow. When I came to Wycliffe, I looked out over a congregation whose average age pushed 80. I think it was about 78. Over these past years, we have lowered that average age to about 67. Also in those 10 years, about 70 members of our congregation have died. The story is not uncommon to you, if you are part of a religious institution, and as trustee Gangwer just said, we at Wycliffe have no desire to become a statistic. Through our commitment to the mission of making disciples for Jesus Christ, we have brought in, over these past 10 and a half years or so, 75 new members, crossing the threshold to net growth. We accomplished this with one full-time pastor, one full-time administrator, and one congregation of dedicated people, but we have come now to this point today, because we intend to continue our mission for Christ into the future. We love people. We love our planet. We love our neighbors. We are not a church that looks so longingly to the past that we can't plan, and think about the future. We recognize that if we are going to strengthen our ministry for the future, we would need to fund additional staff. To make our ministries more robust, and to that end, we've hired an associate pastor. We also recognize that more time and energy was being required to maintain the northern part of our property, which we have not made excellent and frequent use of as a church since about 1990. In addition, the church has a particular liability with the stormwater retention facility, Lake Conrad II. In these past few years, we've recognized that our church property was also being used apparently very frequently by our neighbors, which is great. We want to be a good neighbor. At least it was great, until it became seen as an entitlement, and not a kindness. I am a pastor, and I minister both to the members of our church, the majority who voted to proceed with this sale in October of 2021, and with those who did not vote to proceed with the sale. Packet Pg. 329  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) I minister to those church members who live in the Great Neck Estates community to our north. Some of whom, again, are in favor, and some of whom are not. But the church is hopeful that today, you will vote in favor of this application, and to all of us engaging in this civic process, I leave these words of Paul, “Love one another with mutual affection, outdo one another in showing honor, contribute to the needs of the Saints, extend hospitality to strangers. Bless those who persecute you. Bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice. Weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another, if it is possible, so far as it depends on you. Live peaceably with all.” Thank you. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Pastor Bug. Commissioners, any questions for him? Thank you, and thank you for the work that you're doing in our community. Madam Clerk, are there any speakers for this item? Madam Clerk: Yeah, we have quite a few. I'm going to start with Derek Copeland, followed by Kim Johnson. Ms. Cuellar: Madam Speaker, how many speakers do we have signed up? Madam Clerk: I believe it's 9 or 10. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Mr. Sully: Hello, I'm Ryan Sully. I asked Derek if I can hop in there first. Derek is a great guy, and he's awesome with facts and statistics. I'm going to ask you guys to hear me from a slightly different approach possibly, but Derek is also part of our community, Great Neck Estates, as am I. First off, I'm Ryan Sully. I am part of the Great Neck Lakes Association, which represents 100 homes that back up to Great Neck Lake, which is called Conrad 3, as well as Conrad 1 and 2. Conrad 2 is the one that you all decided to vote against, and not have filled in, which I'm going to get to that huge thank you there in a moment. I have been Great Neck Lakes Association President for the past 3.5 years, since we first got wind of the Bishard project with Wycliffe, and I live on Millwood Road which is the proposed area where the new development is going to be right there at the neighborhood entrance. I have to say that we as a community of the Lakes Association, and myself as living on the street, we have many, many, many concerns. Church, Reverend Bug, we understand that churches go through hardships, and we're never against that, and we're just here to show you guys that we also care about our community, and what our community is turning to. Showing the love for the neighborhood would be defined another way, I believe, and if selling this property, I have to ask, is that going to be the long-term solution or is that just Packet Pg. 330  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) going to be a short-term band aid for the good of the church. We want to be with the church in this decision, but we can't see our neighborhood get turned into something that we did not originally sign up for. Eddie, I loved hearing you say, and speak the words today that the Lake Conrad 2 does serve a purpose because we’re here a year ago in August wanting to fill in that very Lake, and then it didn't serve a purpose, or was spoken. In everything that Eddie said, I understand that the 76% runoff is coming from the other side of Great Neck Road, and 24% from the Wycliffe property, but we're trending in the wrong direction. We keep on, you know, saying, oh, it's only a little bit of land, and it's only a little bit more runoff and it's, you know, we keep on trending in the wrong way. Like, when is it gonna stop? I think by a show of people that are here today in opposition of this development, I would like you guys just to stand up for a moment. Please stand up. Thank you, and I'm not sure if everybody here is signed up to speak, but you could see that an overwhelming amount of people in this courtroom today are here because they care. If they do decide to speak, you'll hear their heartfelt stories about why we don't want this change to go through. So let me backtrack up to the up to the top again – Ms. Cuellar: You have three minutes and the red light. Mr. Sully: I’m sorry, I thought I was told, I had 10. Ms. Cuellar: I just take clarification with the clerk, If I may. Madam Clerk: He didn't specify that he was representing a group when signing up. Mr. Sully: Yeah, it's a Great Neck Estates. Ms. Cuellar: You have seven more minutes. Mr. Sully: Okay, thank you so much. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. I just wanted clarification with the buttons. Mr. Sully: But like I said, we do have our concerns. Like our concern as a Lake Association President, and how it's going to affect the lake. I have concerns as an individual. Just obviously, I'm not one for change in myself. To be honest, I just don't want to see five homes built, you know. All of those aside the deeper concern, is what the hardest I think, as we’re promised that this would, you know, be a religious use permit when it first came in to the neighborhood, and that was be rezoned for residential, and now it is being asked to be rezoned for office. Packet Pg. 331  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Again, I ask where does this stop, and I know that we have been told, and is it going to remain exact – once it rezoned for office, when is the next step going to be taken for this three story possible office building gonna be built where people are coming all the time. It's just in the progression of things. This is where things are trending, and I know we've been promised otherwise, but again, you see where I'm going with this. Back in August, I never got the chance to see you guys again for voting in our favor. So, thank you for listening to us on that day, on August 9th. It was the most empowering moment, I've ever been a part of as a community member. To come down here and you know, we're all nervous and we're just common folk. I'm a school teacher, took off one of my wellness days for today, just to kind of be here. And, you know, to have this voice heard, I just, I never thought it was possible. So the fact that we're even here again today, I'm truly appreciative to all you guys, and for being able to just hear what we're having to say and taking the time and the patience to hear us. Thank you for that. When we moved in, I was, it was just me and my wife, and now I have a five-year-old Braylon, and now I have a two-year-old Collins, and that brings me to my next point about this office rezoning. Once you're a parent, there's nothing that's going to stop you from speaking up for your kids. As I see them playing in our yard, as they get older, they're learning to ride their bikes down the street. It brings me great fear and makes me very upset, that somebody with the conscious to put in an office building in our neighborhood could be allowed. We all know that the type of offices being allotted, you know, are smaller, but still there's dentists appointments. There's office doctors’ visits. These are the potential of things that are to come, and to think about my child entering that intersection of that area is just heartbreaking. There's a lot of facts out there about the flooding issues, the runoff, the nutrient pollution that's going to be added to the lake, impermeable surfaces going up. Yes, those are terrible things for the environment, and terrible things to the lake, but there is no doubt that I speak on behalf of every father in that neighborhood, and maybe every father in this community, that if you let one extra car come down there speeding, recklessly driving, missing the turn, whatever it is, we don't want one extra let alone, 50-100, whatever the potential could be, I don't think there's anybody would disagree with they don't want that to happen, and when you move into a neighborhood that does not have office zoning, and then you create office zoning, there's just something not right about that. I hope you guys can see that point. So if you guys can please just hear us out today, and hear some of the facts, and the issues, and the concerns that our neighbors have, we would truly appreciate that. We thank you for your time today. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Mr. Sully. Are there any questions? The next speaker. Packet Pg. 332  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Madam Clerk: Derek Copeland followed by Kim Johnson. Mr. Copeland: Hi, thank you for hearing us speak today. My name is Derek Copeland. I'm the President of the Great Neck Civic League, and today I want to speak on behalf of the voice of the members of our community of Great Neck Estates. I've spoken with many of them, and kind of they can't all be here today. You're going to hear from those that have made it. They're going to have a lot of information to share, facts, concerns, and I hope that you just take a moment to listen to what all they have to say. But I want to keep it simple today and what we're focused on. We're here for a civic discussion, you know, and that just means that everyone, everyone can speak their concerns, if there's difference of opinions, and a vote has to be made at the end of the day, or recommendation has been made at the end of the day. That is great, and I applaud that. We, you know, we have the ability to do that, and the ability to build homes on the church's land that they want to sell is by-right of what it's stated in the law, it's by-right, and while there's a lot of concern on that development of what that means to the flood mitigation system, what that means to the community at-large, and flooding concerns is always a major issue. I think there's a lot of opposition that we've had for what does that mean previously wanting to fill in the lake. I want to focus on what I believe is the most important topic here today that's in this vote, and that is the rezoning to O-1 office space. That is something that is the target of this discussion. It cannot happen in a suburban area or community where we've moved there to have a quiet neighborhood. There's plenty of workspace in the City of Virginia Beach to go to work, where there's traffic, where there's office. This is a neighborhood. This is where we go to live when we get off of work, where we go to have community events, and neighborhood working with each other, and getting to know each other. This is our home. This isn't a business decision for us. This isn't a, you know, I could make money. If this doesn't work out, I can go somewhere else to the next investment. This is our home. The decision that you make today to recommend, or not recommend will affect us the rest of our lives. The only choice we have is to move. If we don't like the end result of what office space could do to this community. We are told that the office space will result in minimal changes. We're told that the office space has conditions set on it to reduce what kind of offices, and businesses run out of there, but there are no promises that anyone can guarantee in the future. For the developer, when this is done, they move on. For us? When the decision is done, and things do go in the wrong direction, we don't get to go anywhere. We will continue to have to work with that impact, and how it affects our community, our Packet Pg. 333  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) neighborhoods, our streets. There is, I'm sure you've seen some of the information. This is the projected flyer image of what they want to do to the neighborhood to build 5 homes. On here, there's a picture of at the entrance to the new road for the development of the office space and homes, there's a sign that's going to be put there. It is a 5 feet tall, 8 feet wide sign. I'm 6 feet tall, so we're talking about a sign about 5 feet tall, 8 feet foot wide that is going to go inside of our neighborhood community. Now, most children, they're under 4 feet. So you are putting a 5 feet tall, 8 feet wide sign that is going to be something that a child standing behind could be unseen by oncoming traffic. We're talking about children here that, you know, may not have the best decision making skills. So does that mean that, “Hey, I'm sorry, neighborhood, we just don't let your kids go play over there.” I know it's our community. I know it's our neighborhood, our home, but that's a dangerous area. Not only is there oncoming potential traffic that we can't foresee, dentists appointments running late to their appointment. I know that for me, I'm not the best with time management when it comes to my dentist appointments. I might be running late. I might be distracted. I might miss a turn following Google, and if I miss it, where am I going? I'm going further down into the neighborhood community to make a U-turn in someone's driveway. This is our major concern. We do have a vote within our community, within our civic league. We unanimously voted that we oppose the use of office space being added into our entrance. Yes, we have concerns of five homes being built, and what that means and what that does to open space. That's what we're here today to voice differences of opinions. Yes, we, you know, we would like to see that be used for other purposes. But no, you cannot ask us to say office space is okay. It was stated before that, well, we came to you with an alternative. What if we filled in the Lake, and built 10 homes? You didn't like that. So you like nothing because we've given you a second option, which is slightly less bad than the first. Filling in an entire lake, Lake Conrad 2 is not good, and it wasn’t recommended, and here the alternative of replanting a new option is to, well, let's put office space there instead. We're told that we're not being very, we're one-sided. We're just saying no to everything. We're not. We have not been presented with an option that actually outreaches what would benefit the neighborhood. We're told this is a neighborhood community, and that the church, the developers want to partner with us. All I've heard is what they want to do and how do you feel about it, and if you didn't like our first option, well, here's our second. If you don't like our second option, you must like nothing. That is not true, but we have unanimously agreed that we do not want to see office space in our neighborhood going through our neighborhood. Packet Pg. 334  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Is there an option to, you know, has the developer presented an option to build a road off of Great Neck to office space? I don't know. I just know that the current proposed plan is what we're primarily here focused on. You're going to hear a lot of other information today from my neighborhood community members, from my friends, and that are in the neighborhood, but I'm speaking on behalf of the vote, and the community at-large who unanimously said we cannot see office spaces through our neighborhood. Thank you very much. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Any questions? Thank you very much Mr. Copeland. Madam Clerk: Kim Johnson, followed by James Turner Allen. Ms. Johnson: Hello. Good afternoon. I'm Kim Johnson. I do not live in the Great Neck Corridor. The last time that we spoke with one another, we talked about common sense. We talked about the differences between the two plans. We talked about the need for establishing codes, and laws, and things and following that. We also talked about codes are different than morals and values. We talked about that you are volunteers, and that you put your heart and soul into what you're doing as are the applicants, and that we want to make things fair for all whenever possible. We want to be sure that we have a community that's connected. We want to be sure that we have a community that follows the current plan. We want to do what our consciences tell us is right. Many people often act out of fear. Fear is not a good place to act. Fear hurts others. So let's be brave. This is our country, and it's the home of the brave, and we need to make very difficult decisions sometimes that affect lives deeply, and for future generations. If you serve on this board because you care about future generations, the City of Virginia Beach, the connectedness of the community, and are here, and I'm going to paraphrase, for what the Planning Commission stands for, to protect its citizens, for the health, the safety, and the welfare, then you need to vote no today. You are not going to be sued because you vote. No, you are making a recommendation to City Council. Governments, they do the best they can, and you're a portion of that. We all are, and here I am. I think it was what Thomas Paine said, correct me if I'm wrong, that it's the duty of a patriot to protect its citizens against government. So if there's some law or some code that was written and it says, “Hey, don't do this,” but it omits something instead of being artificial intelligence, and just looking at this is the code. We need to take a look at, how do we implement a better code, and how do we create solutions in the future? So let's create a solution and I'll get to that in a second. That's what didn't get done. That's why you need to go back to the drawing board. That's why we all need to do better, better for our communities. All right, so what we have here is a situation where you got to vote, you got to vote today, and you're going to impact Packet Pg. 335  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) a lot of lives and you need to think about what your legacy is going to be on this committee. Did you vote against a lot of current rules and regulations that are going to get sidestepped in order to put a residential section. I'm a realtor, I'm not representing HRRA today, but I do stand on the professional committee, and I'm going to say. Here, you want facts? I have never seen a fact where somebody's searching for a place that's going to flood or has a high flood potential. I have never seen a situation, very respectfully, that anybody says, I want to live. One of the main criteria for me is that I want to make sure my family lives where there's a commercial zone right in the middle of it, and my kids can play, and I want to be sure that people are not harmed. Ms. Cuellar: Ms. Johnson, we need to be fair to everyone. It's three minutes for each speaker unless you're representing a league. Thank you. Madam Clerk: James Turner Allen, followed by Susie Rice. Mr. Allen: Honorable Planning Commission, my name is James Turner Allen. I've stood before you guys once before, and I have basically the same thing that I would like to say, and hopefully that you'll listen. I've lived in the Great Neck Estates community for 39 years. Our community is an old community. It came with some issues. Since development, we have drainage issues. We still have them. We had serious draining issues just the other day at my driveway, and many others in my community. We had two, a couple of feet of water standing there. The kids used to call it the Allen's Pond, but we love our community. Some of the houses, most of them are built on larger lots. We have a little bit of, you know, we have a little bit of privacy. We kind of like that. So it's not a bad community. We love it. Even with the issues that we have to deal with, we have smaller streets, but the people in the community can walk their kids. They can walk their dogs without getting run over. They can isolate some of them, let the kids ride their bikes alone through our community without being afraid of them. Getting run over by somebody at this point. Now, we are facing development and zoning issues, and we've talked about here, I'm -- I'm telling we've talked about it before, and everybody has pretty much the same feeling about their community, we like ours. As a matter of fact when I first moved into the community I thought Wycliffe Church was a beautiful place, and my God, we got a church right here in the community, and I can put on my suit, in walking distance, I can put on my suit and walk up to the church, but I tell you what, guys, I walked up, I put on my suit and walked up to your church one day, and somebody told me that the sermon had already started, and I didn't get in, so I walked back to my house, back in Great Neck States, and I put off my suit, and I started working in my yard. Packet Pg. 336  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) My tithes and offerings go to somebody else. Yeah, it's a financial thing. All right, but it's also a place where somebody should be able to go and sit. I can also do the same thing underneath the tree and communicate with God. I just thought I'd throw it out to you, and not one single time has anybody from that church come through, invited anybody that I know to join your congregation. I just thought I'd throw that out. We need your support. Especially in the zoning area, and we look forward to you guys looking into it with open eyes and just giving us a little nod. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Mr. Allen. Madam Clerk: Susie Rice, followed by Jenny Pesaris. Ms. Rice: Thank you for having us as part of your agenda today. My name is Sue Rice. I live in Great Neck Estates, where I have been for 40 years. I first taught school at Thalia Elementary in 1962, when this was a county. I have seen things, a lot of things, and most of them have been pretty good. We have a great city, a place where people would really like to live. I do have more to add to that though. It is with profound sadness that an organization that serves the worship needs of its community required resources. That, in my understanding, would eventually be provided to them, without this massive energy, emotional impact, and time consuming effort on all sides. The current proposed solution will heavily impact Lake Conrad 1 and 3, and I live only four houses from the church whose surrounding communities have in the past 30 years heavily invested financially, energetically, and physically in their maintenance without any support from the City of Virginia Beach, other than cleaning up two fish kills, threatening several neighbors with severe fines for existing growth, which, by the way, was withdrawn by the city once they realized what had happened, and sloppily repairing the existing dam, to the Lynnhaven River. Furthermore, the proposed sites will further add to an already dangerous intersection where constant U-turns are required to reach Wycliffe Church, and businesses along the West Corridor of North Great Neck Road. Construction and possible removal of trees will further impact the existing environment, and also reduce the protection we have from the sound of that road, add to stormwater removal concerns, and at least add to existing traffic woes. It is time for the City to reconsider the appropriate use of the property that we have in question. Resources are there, if our city thoroughly invested in the option to buy and maintain the property in question as an open natural space and educational park for the adjoining communities as well as for Wycliffe Church. The existing structure was for years used by the city. So, it is not a stranger in this process. I also understand that grant funding is available for a massive park on an existing city golf course, and perhaps a portion could be made available to the smaller projects. Grants can be altered. Thank you for your attention. Packet Pg. 337  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Madam Clerk: Jenny Pesaris, followed by Wendy Crutchfield. Ms. Pesaris: Hello. I'm a teacher too. I just brought y'all a whole bunch of literature and facts. So, and I took off this afternoon. I didn't use my wellness day. But that's okay, because I'm a volunteer too, and I've been working hard since last June, I believe it was, all summer, and we are trying to get across the point that we understand. First of all, let me say, I represent almost 9,000 signatures, petitions online, and I've emailed that to you. I emailed you a whole bunch of stuff last night. Some comments off the next door. I emailed you pictures of current pollution in there because it's coming in from the road. So, you can imagine if this house is there, it's going to be even more, okay? So, today, we understand that the church has a right to sell the property, but they haven't, you know, and they have a need, apparently. I will get to that in a minute, but what we don't want is houses put it there to impact the stormwater. I brought you an article from the EPA, and a nice little graphic on the back that shows exactly what houses, what the rainwater does when it hits the houses, okay? We do have Lake Conrad 2, which basically acts as a filter for Lake Conrad 1, which flows into Lynnhaven River, and then on to the Chesapeake Bay. Okay, so that's a very important part, and I'm very glad y'all voted last time not to fill it in. So the next thing I'm gonna get to is I gave you traffic reports. You were told this morning that we have one traffic accident a year on Great Neck Road, sorry, no, 2023 a 130 incidents on Great Neck Road. Now were they all down near Wycliffe? No, but they were definitely down towards, oh gosh, now I can't remember the name of it, but you'll see it here. So I gave you a whole list, there's like four pages, traffic incidents. Then 2024, we've already had seven. Now those are more closer to Wycliffe. Okay. Plus we've had two deaths. One at Cox High School, and I don't remember exactly, I think the other one was down there too. People speed in the Great Neck Corridor. I'm happy to see more police out there. Give tickets. But anyway I'm transgressing, oops, okay, I also want to make let you know that the Wycliffe Church is a landmark. They are the beginning of the Great Neck Corridor. That green space, it just catches your eye when you're driving by, and then you see the church, and it's always been there. Those trees are 100 years old. I've been here for 50 and they were as big. I know I've got nine seconds. Last thing, I want to show you is I did my son is a realtor, and I know that the coastal type homes that Bishard wants to build do not match the red brick that's all along Great Neck Road. I think they should go in coastal areas, not in the front of an old traditional brick one story neighborhood. Not to mention the safety problems, the traffic is going to be horrendous. So here's another one on the code and ordinances too. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you so much. Packet Pg. 338  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Madam Clerk: Wendy Crutchfield, followed by Julia M. Cherry. Ms. Crutchfield: Hello, I'm Wendy Crutchfield, a resident. I want to thank you for receiving my lengthy letter about spot zoning, and thank you to those who have gone to the property and heard from residents. Last week, the developers and church met with a small group of us to show their new plan, carving out a business lot out of a residential lot within a neighborhood completely surrounded by housing lots. They shared that there is going to be additional runoff from their recently redesigned housing development into Lake Conrad. The exact word, is that there will be more water associated with this than comes off the property as grass today, and described precisely the body of water will go into Lake Conrad to an asset of the City's stormwater management facilities. I thought that wasn't allowed today. The planning department concurred that there are no BMP requirements for the housing development for drainage into the lake, since it will be a separately owned property under this new carved out design. We also know there is no water filtration system, which the developer told the community he would provide back in February 2023 under his previous design plan. Public Works verified that this week, one was promised to the lake residents by the city back in 2019 before the shooting, funded by state and federal sources, but suddenly it isn't needed. In this new and rushed redesign, there is only a 10 feet vegetative buffer between the top of the lake, and the new private road that will run alongside it. This is less than half the minimum standard of 25 feet provided by the State of Virginia for wet pond buffers. Their new private road basically skims the top of the lake's bank. Why not move it farther away? Why on earth would we lower State standards in Virginia Beach after the flood referendum? Today you heard the state defines this as a wet pond, but the city doesn't. Again, why lower standards? So as you're hearing, we're getting more water, more pollution because of this project and lower standards. But why? There is no need for additional office space in this area. R-10 zoning is already allowed for child care, elder care, community centers, and nonprofits. There is no need to rezone if these uses are actually the intent. The developer said last week that he has every intention of maximizing the market value of his new business park. We fully expect a proper change in the near future. The time to resolve all the concern is now before any zoning change. They need to go back, and address the many concerns of the residents in this valuable ecosystem. The citizens have provided substantial evidence that the community will not be harmed by the proposed new zoning. We feel that as taxpayers who have supported the church to operate tax free for decades, we should have some discernible benefit. All we have right now are a long list of very Packet Pg. 339  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) real, and very measurable detriments. Thank you for your time and attention to this critical decision. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Crutchfield. Are there any questions? Madam Clerk: Julia Cherry followed by Lisa Smith. Ms. Cherry: Hi, Commissioners. Thank you for your time. My name is Julia Cherry. I'm a resident of Great Neck Estates, and second vice-president for the Civic League of Great Neck Estates. The traffic issues, I've supplied you with pictures. I hope everybody has the pictures that I sent to you, and have you reviewed them? Because they're very important. They tell a big story. This is the school bus picture that I've provided from, so, I guess it was seven something in the morning. The traffic along Great Neck Road is extremely, extremely dangerous, and busy. The police department has labeled Great Neck Road as an area of concern. They've increased their patrols, and they've been to multiple accidents. Some of them extremely serious. Millwood Road, this is just a picture of a work truck parked where the entrance is. There is no room when you make that turn for any type of error. There's just not enough space. So, I've also included the FOIA records to the City for the traffic accidents. Millwood Road and Harbor Lane are right across from one another. In 2023, there have been four accidents at the front of our entrance. Godfrey Lane is at our other entrance to Great Neck Estates. We have two entrances. Godfrey Lane alone has had six accidents in the last year alone. Great Neck Circle, one accident. I've highlighted on my sheet, everybody's received this, the FOIA police reports. Now, I'm going to go to the application -- the joint application, that was provided by Bishard Homes. This is for the wetland delineation. The address listed on this application is 3207 Millwood Road, how is this accurate? It’s not accurate. I don't know how they even passed this through to get where they've gotten so far. That's very frustrating. The applicant has been allowed to come back and redesign based on the original application. That's unfair. I'm going to go to the signs, and I did file a complaint and asked that this be delayed indefinitely just based on the signage. The community is not aware of what is going on because the zoning and variance signs have gone up and down for over a year now, and I just ask you to please, please vote with the information that we've provided with you. It's not safe to add any more traffic to our Millwood Road in Great Neck Estates, and to allow a business in there would be totally against the standards of the City's plans. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Ms. Cherry. I appreciate it. Thank you. Packet Pg. 340  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Madam Clerk: Lisa Smith, followed by Jim Haney. Ms. Smith: Hi, good morning. Thank you for allowing me to speak today, and thank you friends for allowing me to join you. First of all, I'm Lisa Smith. I'm a resident and homeowner since 1989 in the Great Neck area. I do not live. I live in Laurel Cove, which is the neighborhood right next to Great Neck Estates, and I have a number of friends in Great Neck Estates. I have previously presented to City Council, and to you regarding the misinformed name of calling Lake Conrad a pond, which it is not, it is Lake Conrad 1, Lake Conrad 2. It is not a pond. So, I'm not here specifically to talk about the fill in, but we definitely don't want to have that filled in. The specific reason that I'm here is, specifically for the not. Asking you specifically not to have the rezoning of an O-1 to allow an office building into that neighborhood. There are a number of other concerns that have been brought up related to the traffic, but there are a couple of reasons for that. Number one, there are no, along Great Neck Road from Virginia Beach Boulevard to the bridge toward Shore Drive, there are no buildings, houses, buildings, offices greater than two stories. There are none. The only building that's greater than two stories is Great Neck Middle that is set back hundreds of feet from the road. So, number one, no building taller than. Number two, the other area is related to the zoning of O-1, you'd be entering in through Millwood, and turning down to that area passing four or five houses that Bishard is looking to plan that is also not something that makes sense in any neighborhood. You're coming into a neighborhood. If they wanted to have an office building, they can do it over enter in through the church parking lot and go into there. There's no reason for that. The three asks that I have are, number one, do not approve the O-1 zoning to allow for an office building to go into down Millwood Road, and go into that space. Number two, do not allow Lake Conrad to be referred to as a pond. Perform a traffic assessment on both North Great Neck Road, and Millwood, you can put those little traffic counters there, see how much traffic is going in there in and out, and also specifically on Great Neck Road in that area. I think that would prove to see some of the higher volume, particularly if you're going to build those five homes and an office building in that area, you have much increased traffic there. So I ask you for your consideration for the group specifically as it relates to the office building number one, but also from a traffic study. Thank you very much. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you, Ms. Smith. Madam Clerk: Jim Haney, followed by Kim Mayo. Packet Pg. 341  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Mr. Janey: Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Jim Haney. I've been a member at Wycliffe since 1979. They talked about all those people in the 80’s that weren't going to make it. I'm one of them. I'm getting close to it. Not the oldest one there, but I'm getting close. I would just like to state two or three things that I consider fact. Number one, the church needs to sell this property. It's our only desire is to sell the property. I don't think the city has kept a church from selling property previously. We need it because we want to be there a long time. I think it's pretty evident that the people who have spoken are against any change. Any change at all? If they had taken the same arguments they made, Great Neck Road would still be a two lane road. We wouldn't have those neighborhoods that are there. So, as far as the A frame building and this zoning, it's part of the process that has to take place for us to be able to sell the property. The city operated a program, a business, the (inaudible) stem out of that building for 20 years. The church, in essence, gave the building to the city. We started with no rent. By the time they left, we were getting $11,00 a year, I think, for utilities for them to run that program. That was as big a business that will ever be in there. So we just ask for your consideration on letting the church move forward, hopefully survive, and have a chance to sell our property without all the problems that we're looking at. Thank you for listening. Ms. Cuellar: Any questions? Thank you, Mr. Haney. Madam Clerk: Kim Mayo via Webex is our last speaker, Madam Chairman. Ms. Mayo: Kim Mayo, I'm a civic leader and speaking for the community at-large. This new submission seems like spot zoning, and is one of the more flawed development efforts I've seen. Please do not remove the CUP, and honor the Land Use decision of 1966. I'm under 50 years old, and a parent, and a member of a Presbyterian church and find this very sad. I grew up in a semi-rural community. We embrace change but not recklessness. This land is made for you and me. Because it's made for us, it's up to us to preserve it. Thank you, community leaders, for all your tireless efforts and passion, and thank you, Planning Council, for your time this afternoon. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk: That was our last speaker, Madam Chairman. Ms. Cuellar: We now have the applicant to come up and rebut. Packet Pg. 342  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Mr. Bourdon: Well, appreciate people coming down and expressing their opinions and it's pretty clear to me, and I suspect to most of you, that this is primarily intended to put more pressure on the City to buy this property for a park that they have been advocating for since we were here last, using somewhat different arguments now. Last time, you know, we heard, don't fill the lake. I never said that the church was filling the lake, or in favor of filling the lake. In fact, I said specifically, if there was a drainage easement the City had through the lake, they wouldn't be able to fill the lake. That's exactly what I said, and no plan was presented at that meeting to do anything with this property other than the idea that we have to remove a use permit, which is not zoning on a property that hasn't been used for religious use in over 30 years. It has been used for an office use for over 30 years, and arguably doesn't even have a use permit for religious use anymore. But rather than just try to plow ahead, and build eight houses, and leave the lake alone or as you heard this morning, the lake does not provide -- does not provide any needed storage capacity according to the Public Utilities Director. It probably does provide, I believe it absolutely does provide some quality benefits to the City of Virginia Beach, but Lake Conrad, the big lake, or whatever 2 or 1, that's not man made, or maybe it's man made too, but he clearly acknowledges this was man made. It's not a natural body of water. That lake apparently has enough capacity that, you know, this doesn't have to be there. It could be piped. That's what I heard. Now, the church has never been in favor of doing that, and this gives the best assurance other than an impoundment easement, but even that could be vacated by the City of the lake or the pond, staying a lake or a pond, and that's what the church, and that's what this application provides is that the back two plus acres, would basically stay unchanged. Some of the uses that were proposed when this was moving forward to council of the A frame, which we're not proposing to build a new building, as I heard some people say, that building gets to stay. That's the whole purpose of this, trying to keep the change to a minimum, but there are houses fronting Great Neck Road, in Great Neck Estates, and on the other side of Millwood that have been there since, I was probably about five years old, and to put houses that are better situated that back up to the road like all the other neighborhoods that have been developed in more recent times is exactly the way housing ought to be developed along a six lane thoroughfare, that's what this property is zoned. It's not -- this isn't a rezoning to residential. It's residential R-10. It's going to be, if it's approved, conditional residential R-10. No change in dimensions or anything else, but instead you have a plan that what you see is what you will get, and that's a very nice plan with homes that will be certainly not diminish the value of anybody else's home in Great Neck Estates or Great Neck Manor, by any means, will that be the case. I've provided you all with a ton of examples in some of the nicest neighborhoods, Packet Pg. 343  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) entrances to some of the nicest neighborhoods in our city. That have not just a quaint, formerly chapel, you know, office renovated 32 years ago at their entrances, and the earth hasn't, you know, they haven't just fallen in. It hadn't cratered. There is no flood risk and will be no flood risk under our current storm water ordinances, and this is high part of Virginia Beach, not a low part of Virginia Beach, and if there's so much capacity in the other bigger 20 some acre lake that this is really not necessary for the quantity, and again, I heard Mr. Hanson say that this morning, then there's certainly plenty of capacity for this little bit of new development, and it is very minimal. Again, when you're talking about 74-75% percent of the water going through there is not coming from here. This, I mean, it's a fraction of a fraction. So, this is not a flood hazard for anybody in any of the neighborhoods around it, will not be under any circumstances, neighborhoods with almost no exception that were developed prior to even having a stormwater management ordinance, much less all of the very, very stringent ordinances, and requirements that we have today for stormwater to create resilience. Again, use permit on the property is not zoning, and there are countless examples that a use permit, when it's abandoned, it goes away. It goes away. In fact, the use permit for the child care facility that was in here it went away apparently last year. I won't get into all of that, but I'd be happy to answer any questions any of you may have. I don't know, you know, I can't address some of these things that are, you know, more emotion driven than anything else, but the church provided the City an opportunity, the sought the opportunity to buy the property if they wish to do so, and that did not happen. There was no interest. I want to say one thing about what you all talked about this morning. I'm sorry it's not a rebuttal, but about the open space contribution. No one asked the question. The potential to create a 5,000 square foot postage stamp for the benefit of these five homeowners does exist, but again, it won't serve anybody else. It won't be for anybody else's benefit, and they won't be able to get to it because it would be, you know, next to the, the church's remaining property behind the houses that, you know, it just doesn't, you know, it just doesn't seem to make any sense to staff nor to, I think, anybody else and based on the history of these small little teeny parks, and little small neighborhoods, they don't get maintained because the property owners don't have the wherewithal to maintain them. So it makes a lot more sense to pay the money to the city, and let the city use it to improve other existing parks, or potentially put along with other capital funds to buy park space rather than to try to create some little 5,000 square foot postage stamp behind one of the lots. So, I'd be happy to answer any questions any of you may have. Packet Pg. 344  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Commissioners, are there any questions for Mr. Bourdon? Mr. Cromwell: Mr. Bourdon, on lot number five, the lot requirement, it requires, it says 80 feet as far as the lot width. Mr. Bourdon: Yes, Mr. Cromwell. Mr. Cromwell: And, you only have 20 feet. Mr. Bourdon: That's because it's a reverse flag. The lot is 80 feet in width facing the private street. So it's, and the private street is the access, not the public street. It's 80 feet in width set back from the public street, and that's why the variance is because we're not utilizing -- we're not using Great Neck Road to access any of those lots. All of those lots, the other four have the frontage, but they're not accessing it. There's a one put, no ingress, egress easement, that'll be platted along Great Neck, and along Millwood for the five houses, so that they cannot access the road, they actually front upon. So all of the lots will be accessing a private road, not the public street. So the 20 feet reverse flag, is there for the purpose of bringing in the utilities, which will come to all of the lots from Great Neck Road to the frontage on Great Neck, that’s really back of those lots. So that is the purpose for the reverse flag, but the lot itself will be 80 feet in width for the houses being built will be the same, they meet the required width. They don’t just have that width at the 30 feet set back from the Great Neck Road. The others do, but it's, and we're creating, just so I’ll also make this clear, wasn't brought this morning, there's a 5 feet easement that's being granted on the churches, or the 5 lots before you get to the 10 feet landscape buffer and, fence, so it's actually 15 feet between the public right-of-way, and the fence on the property because there's also, we're providing dedicating an easement for the City of Virginia Beach for utilities, and 5 feet of the subject property. Mr. Cromwell: I don't have questions. I just would like to make a statement if you're ready for that after Mr. Bourdon finished. No, no questions. Ms. Cuellar: I have one question for you. There's a lot of conversation in opposition to the 0-1 development, and so when we came today, when we're looking at this application, can you just kind of take us back a little bit with your applicants and, you know, looking at the parcel, kind of how the 0-1 idea came into play, if you will? Mr. Bourdon: Well, the reason we did the 0-1 zoning, the church and Bishard’s because we heard a lot of love and appreciation expressed here, and at city council for preserving Packet Pg. 345  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) the A frame, the setting, the land around it, not, you know, clearing it and building houses on it. So that's the reason that the church and the Bishard's, when the city didn't want to buy it for open space park, you know, so we felt the best thing to do was to leave it as it is, and prove it by renovating the building and, you know, putting I mean, that's why we thought this was the best way because the other way is to put three more houses on that piece of property, and that's what it's zoned for. So, we just felt like it was something that, and the uses that we've proffered would be allowed. It's very unlikely, I mean, Ryan, so the gentleman, we had some nice conversations, but we've got this to the point, it's just not a new building. It's the same building. It's gonna be a very limited subset of people or businesses that would even be interested in going there. And, so the, the amount of drama about. You know, how terrible traffic is going to be, I'm sorry, based on a lot of experience that we've all had, and you look at all those examples that I've provided, this would be almost assuredly a low, and with the proffers, a very low impact use that similar, if not identical or less than what was there for 31 years. That's what we're shooting for. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Any more questions, Mr. Parks? Mr. Parks: I just have one question. Looking back at the zoning, R- 10 allows for child care facilities, which is essentially what it was used for the first 30 years. Mr. Bourdon: It allows for with a conditional use permit now in conjunction with a church or a school. When the use permit was approved back in 1988, the zoning ordinance allowed it as a standalone zone for Childcare Education center that changed subsequent to this being used for Childcare Education Center. Mr. Parks: But is there, there's no intention to potentially use it as a childcare facility, and keep it R-10 to alleviate some of these concerns with rezoning to one. Mr. Bourdon: Most childcare education centers have today with the way they've evolved. This was a specialized, use. They actually created a sizable amount of traffic. More, more than a use of this building is likely to provide now nonprofits, and some of those things that are allowed with the use permit, but there's just so few, and far between could go there with the use permit. The uses that are proffered here are not high traffic volume uses and certainly not in a building of this nature. Again, the intent is to reuse the building, and it could conceivably also be a religious use. You know, that's a loud use in a 4,000 square foot building in O-1 zoning as a by-right use, and that is also a possibility. I mean, we just don't -- we've got to put it out in the market, but, I believe because, because of the way it's situated, and the total lack of visibility, I think it will wind up being something very similar to what it has been for the last, well, for the 31 years up to 2021, when it ceased. Packet Pg. 346  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Ms. Cuellar: Any more questions from Mr. Cromwell? Mr. Cromwell: How many offices do you see going into the A frame building, more than one or only one? Mr. Bourdon: I believe the likelihood is one. It is conceivable that you might have two, but they would be small, but I suspect it will be one or two at the most. How they would, you know, share the space would also be a bit interesting, and it's situated, that it would be, you know, the non-profit, you know, Lynnhaven River now, if it is on Lynnhaven River. I mean, there's lot, lots of, you know, lots of folks who I think would be interested, especially in this corridor, you know, just given the number of retirees, who are active in a lot of different causes. I do think there is an opportunity there for a number of potential businesses, it is clear, not going to be a super high rent building, but we’re not, again, there is going to be investment in fixing the building up, but it is not like, you’re coming in, and having to do a whole lot of work, and we’re not developing a new building on the property. So, the rent scenario doesn't have to be, it won't be the kind of rents you're getting on everything else like on those examples I gave you, and up and down Great Neck Road, it's not going to be that type of a use. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Any other questions? We'll now open for discussion. Mr. Plumlee? Thank you, Mr. Bourdon, Mr. Plumlee. I don't mind being the first to stick out my chin. I think I've started jotting down notes when somebody came up, and talked about change brings fear. I think, I can't remember who the speaker was, and it's kind of ironic when the change is coming from a church that it still brings fear. This morning, a very large truck came by my house with a lot of workers and they -- I'd forgotten that my neighbor was having a lot of work done, major work, to their house, and I felt the invasion and the feeling of, you know, strangers coming, people I didn't know walking around, and it was bothering me, and intimidating me. My instinct was negative, and later I got to thinking, well, maybe it was timing, you know, I needed to have that feeling coming in to feel the empathy of people who are having that. Same feeling come over them about change coming, and so it was useful, and then almost immediately I began to have the feeling and memory because I've been supporting watermen working in the Lynnhaven River for 20 years, and who are the biggest complainers? The upland homeowners. When they look out the water, they see it all as theirs, and the watermen are nothing, but an invasion in their view, and their beauty, and Packet Pg. 347  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) the silence that they have, but they don't own the water, and that's the acceptance of change that there are things you don't control, and you don't own your neighbor's land. In September, I was the first to object to this. I think this is a better product. I think it's far superior. It's leaving two and a half acres essentially undisturbed with 22 parking spaces that are over right next to it, very modest number of homes. I know of a school that we all are familiar with that had to sell a vast majority of the property it held in order to save the school, and they came under so much criticism, and the accusations was that they were going to cheat, and use the money for corrupt purpose, and not save the school, and all those accusations were false, every single one of them. I've not heard any objection about the actual uses in the office. The proffer is very specific about this use, it's explicit, and it gave everyone a chance to come up and say, not this or not that, but I didn't hear any objection based on that. So, this morning we heard from the Public Works Department, and I disagree I think this should be an impoundment for the city, but that's my opinion. I would recommend it to city council to consider that point, but it's not my place. I don't spend city money. I can just point out things I think that's needed, but despite whether the lake becomes a public impoundment, the developer will be required in the planning process to maintain the volumes. That's state code, city code. So I think this planning commission has done a great job with this matter since back in September, August timeframe, trying to get a better product for the community. It's not going to stop the fear. I understand that, but those are the reasons why I support and would recommend this project. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Commissioner Hippen? Ms. Hippen: So I'm sure a few of you saw me looking at my phone because I was looking at maps of the city to see this project. I came to the commission in between the first submission and this submission, and when people that I know found out, I was on the planning commission, I started getting all, I knew where Wycliffe was, before I ever attended a meeting here. I live on the other side of town. I live over in the portion of Virginia Beach, which is pretty close to Greenbrier Mall, and I am the first owner. I built the home that I live in while I was still in the Navy, and I remember that there were a lot of trees, a lot of trees over there. Our street and another street where the last two built, and there were people pissed at us because this was an open space that the kids could play in. Never mind that there's a park a block away from me, or maybe two blocks. Then came a developer who says, we want to put in this corner here, mixed use. So I went to all of the meetings. I was very active with my civic league, and I went to all of the meetings. I was like, this ain't never going to work. So, they put up the cascades, and there have been small businesses in and out of there. We never got a restaurant. There's a coffee shop in there. We never got the restaurant because I was thinking, man, I could Packet Pg. 348  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) just walk down the street, grab dinner here, and there, you know, sit next to the fountain, maybe hear some, you know, some guitars, you know, acoustic music, that's never happened. Then came Magnolia Run and Magnolia Chase, two apartment complexes and they tore down all those trees, and I was like, oh, here we go. Then came the Royal Farms, and one of my neighbors, I live on a cul-de-sac. One of the people across the street from me, they built that Royal Farms, and we're moving. I got news for you. They're still there. Okay. This is a hard one. This is very very difficult. I recognize, that the church needs to sell this land, I understand. I'm not happy when the priest sends the basket around the second time at my church. I can tell you that right now. I didn't just go to the site visit. I drove around the neighborhood, and I got out and I walked around, and I see what some of you are talking about. I don't know if I fully agree with some of the things I've heard or disagree with some of the things I've heard. As I was looking, I noticed, I had -- I did not see anywhere where an office building of any type was off the Beaton Road. They're on Lynnhaven. They're on Centerville. They're on Princess Anne. You don't have to drive off of the road to get to them unless you go into a private area. I was talking with my architect friend here, and some of the roads that the road is smaller, the private road is smaller. My concern is emergency vehicles. You know, okay, well, we're only going to let them park on one side. Well, no, we're not going to let them park on the street. Now, you and I both know that people park where they want to, when they want to, you have a party, you gonna park where you want. The road entrance, the private road entrance is very, very close to the waterway, that concerns me too. As far as what the office building will be used for they are very specifically delineated. I don't know that that office building is going to create a lot of traffic. But man, those houses are going to be close to each other, and those people are going to back up to a major thoroughfare. I don't know if this is the right thing to do, but I know that that church needs to take care of their mission, and they need money to do that. God loves us all, but it still costs money. I wasn't here for the initial one. I know when I thought they were going to fill in, the waterway, I was like, um-umm, but I don't know if we've gotten to where we need to get to yet. Thank you. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Commissioner Parks? Mr. Parks: I agree with Ms. Hippen as the architect friend. I think there are some admirable things about this proposal, but I still think the main concerns of stormwater have not been fully addressed, which to be fair at this stage would not be because it goes through site plan approval. That's why they have that process, but I do understand the communities outburst as I spoke to many of you guys after the meeting last time about the stormwater issues. I mean, that's something that I've been passionate about and Packet Pg. 349  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) have staked my career on. So, for that reason, I agree with Ms. Hippen that I don't think we're there yet, but I do think this is a better proposal than what we saw in September. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Commissioner Coston? Mr. Coston: Well, I sympathize with both parties concerned. I can remember when my church was growing, and the pastor would say some Sundays, you know, you can't say Amen, and pay for the light bill. I understand that churches need funds. My church actually sold a lot last year to increase the reserve, so that we don't run around with nothing in a bank account to support a church that seats 1,500 members. So, I think that I can trust, I know that I can trust those members of staff who will decide what the water looks like, what the runoff looks like, and they will ensure that there's no extra water produced on this property that will end up on your property. That's the requirement. Some say that we're probably the most stringent in this requirement up and down the East Coast. I trust them to do that to make sure that this development's water does not end up in your backyard. We were explained today, we talked about. If anything, the small pond probably backs up water more than it helps. So maybe a pipe would have worked better, but, we're trying to meet you in the middle, and make sure that the pond remains as it is. The piece of property that is on remains as it is. I think I'll have to support this. I think it's the best way we could go at this time. Ms. Cuellar: Commissioner Byler? Ms. Byler: Thank you all for being involved in this process. I think it's important that everyone have an opportunity to speak, not just to hear themselves speak, but because these opinions are important, and they need to be considered and weighed. So, as a real estate broker and a professor of real estate law, I recognize that a person has the right to convey title, and if the church wants to sell regardless of their need, it is their absolute right to sell the property. I don't think anyone's denied them that right. They could sell it. The issue is, they want to sell it for the highest value. In order to do that, the potential buyers are seeking approval for a higher and better use of the property. I opposed the first application last September. I thought it would bring problems on the neighborhood. I didn't think that the city should grant the conditions in order to allow it to proceed. This proposal, I do not find as offensive. The only thing, I have concerned with is changing the zoning to the O zoning. However, with the restrictions that have been placed on that O zoning, it's exactly what you already have, so if they're going to change it beyond that, they'll have to come back through this process again, and everyone will have an opportunity to speak, and to present the logic of why at that time. Thank you. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Any commissioners? Commissioner Estaris? Packet Pg. 350  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Ms. Estaris: Good afternoon. It is a very difficult decision to be made. I too am from a religious institution. I understand how churches congregations are getting older. Younger generations are doing virtual, so how do you get those collection plates filled, right? They're not present. So I can understand the church's dilemma. I too was in opposition in September, and I thank those that are here today. I do see a lot of common faces from last time. By the way, James Allen, here's your nod. We do hear you. We do hear all of you. We've read all those emails that have come in, some of you are present, some are not. For those who are listening in, please read those emails. This is a much better proposal. I hope you agree with that. I am not in agreement where there is enough information going forward, but it is definitely a better proposal. I think the planning staff has done a great job listening from the last time, and making the changes to address the concerns that were addressed last time, but as I see the progression of what was presented in August, and not getting all the information then, and then feeling the same way, not feeling I got all the information again, and can those changes, of course, we can't control those things, and clearly the planning commission doesn't have a final decision, so city council has that. So, just as passionate you are about coming here today, I ask you to be just as passionate in bringing forth the City Council should this go into consent, so the fight continues on, but again, as I shared, I'm in agreement that this proposal is much better than the first, but I'm not so ready as I'm not sure if all the information is readily available. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Commissioner Mauch. Mr. Mauch: So, this is my third meeting. I feel like it's my initiation though. This one's a really tough one. I've spent, and absorbent amount of time researching, listening, writing, writing emails, reading emails, understanding the area, the community, and it's very tough. This is a tough decision because on one hand, you want to make sure that the church is able to sell their land, and use their asset for whatever they please as long as it's within the guidelines that have been given down by the city. In that respect, I see that five houses are extremely acceptable. Even given the variances, it's better than having the entire place full of houses, but with that respect, they have that ability too, if the use is taken off of religious use. I do have some anxiety about office, and what that would do with this development. I don't think I'm there with the office, but the houses are fine, by the way, I think, and if this, whether it passes and goes to city council, please share your voices. If it fails, I would like to be able to propose that we allow for the use to be the modification of conditions to be dropped, so that the church has the ability to sell, and that's where I'm at. Packet Pg. 351  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Anybody else? I feel incredibly privileged to have the opportunity to discuss this application. I've met so many people in the community over the course of the last year, and meeting with all the stakeholders has been incredibly important to me. Just last week, I had the opportunity for the first time to meet Mr. Bishard, and to talk with him about this proposal. His decision making project process to even take on this parcel as an opportunity, and most importantly, the person that I felt I wasn't hearing from, and I called him myself was Pastor Bug. We talked a lot about his ministry. I'm a person of faith. We talked a lot about just how we were moving forward, and what's happening and how we're having change in our community. And yes, change is hard. I even shared with him as a newly 16-year-old driving up and down Great Neck Road that landscape has changed quite a bit, but I'm not afraid of change. Often I can embrace change. I've learned a lot from Marchelle Coleman in particular, the time that she has invested in this. I applaud her, and her commitment to our city, and to her profession, and I'm looking very closely at property owner's rights, and how we can move forward. So many people from the community have actually said these words, they know by invitation they have access and that has been a privilege. I hold all of our green spaces dear, but today I'm going to vote in favor of this application. Do I have a motion from the Panel? Mr. Plumlee: I'll make a motion to approve as presented. Ms. Cuellar: Is there a second? Mr. Coston: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Are there any Planning Commissioner abstaining from the vote? I have a motion of approval by Commissioner Plumlee, and a second by Commissioner Coston. Staff will now call for the vote. Madam Clerk: The vote is now open. Okay, I'm going to defer to you on how to call this into the record. Ms. Wilson: Okay, this was a motion to approve. It fails because there is a tie vote. So it fails, and it will go up to City Council with a recommendation of denial. Madam Clerk: Okay, by a vote of 5:5, this application has been recommended for denial. Ms. Cuellar: I'd like to thank everyone who came out to speak on this application. You are welcome to stay for the rest of the hearing, but having that said, if you'd like to excuse Packet Pg. 352  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) yourself, thank you again for voicing your opinions on this, and we appreciate your participation. AYE 5 NAY 5 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell NAY Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris NAY Hippen NAY Mauch NAY Parks NAY Plumlee AYE CONDITIONS FOR MDC 1. All previous conditions attached to the Conditional Use Permit approvals of August 3, 1966, October 15, 1973, and December 19, 1988, as well as the Modification of Condition approval of December 12, 2000 shall remain in effect. CONDITIONS FOR SVR 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Agreement through the Department of Public Works/Real Estate, prior to development, for any improvements (i.e roads, structures) that will encroach into any public City easements on the property. The Encroachment Agreement shall be approved prior to the approval of the site plan, construction plan, and recordation of the subdivision plat. 3. Prior to recordation, a one-foot no ingress-egress easement shall be dedicated along N. Great Neck Road on the subdivision plat. PROFFERS FOR CRZ (R-10 TO CONDITIONAL O-1) The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the Packet Pg. 353  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided and developed, it shall have the widened and improved, privately maintained shared entrance from Millwood Road, freestanding, externally illuminated monument style sign, landscape buffers and existing parking lot substantially as depicted and described on the exhibits entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, and "Freestanding Sign Rendering For Parcel A" dated December 4, 2023, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: The development of Property shall be restricted to the maintenance, renovation, and refurbishment of the existing 3,522 square foot A-Frame Office Building to include up to 500 additional square feet of floor area which will not substantially modify the exterior architectural features and appearance of the existing building. Proffer 3: The only types of uses which shall be permitted in the building on the Property are as follows: (i) Business offices of advertising, real estate or insurance companies; (ii) Medical, optical and dental offices and clinics; legal, engineering, architectural and similar professional offices, accounting, auditing and bookkeeping services offices; (iii) Offices of miscellaneous business services such as consumer credit reporting agencies; mailing list and stenographic services, business and management consulting services; (iv) Offices of non-profit organizations, such as professional organizations, civic, social and fraternal associations, political organizations, and religious organizations; and (v) Religious uses. Proffer 4: When the Property is created by subdivision, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration of Easement creating an Ingress/Egress, Public Utility and Shared Maintenance Agreement for the benefit of the adjoining PARCEL R over and across the portion of "Shared Private Road" which provides access from both the Property and PARCEL R to Millwood Road. Proffer 5: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Packet Pg. 354  7.L.a PROFFERS FOR CRZ (R-10 TO CONDITIONAL R-10) Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When the Property is subdivided, developed and landscaped, it shall have the privately maintained entrance street, sidewalk extension along Millwood Road, dedicated public utility easement along Millwood Road and Great Neck Road and landscaped buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence substantially as depicted and described on the exhibit entitled, "REZONING PLAN FOR WYCLIFFE EXCESS PROPERTY GPIN: 2408-09-9309 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated December 4, 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, copies of which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Rezoning Plan") and are incorporated herein by this reference. A detailed landscape plan for the designated ten foot (10') landscape buffers with six foot (6') privacy fence as depicted on the Rezoning Plan shall be submitted for approval with the Subdivision Construction Plan. Proffer 2: When the Property is developed, it will be subdivided into no more than five (5) single family residential building lots each having a minimum of 10,000 square feet of area. The five (5) new homes will be built with a crawlspace or a raised slab foundation and they will contain a minimum of 2600 square feet of living area. Each home shall have no less than a two (2) car garage and utilize the high quality architectural features and design elements substantially as depicted on one of the five (5) renderings designated "Bishard Homes Subdivision Quality Example" (1 through 5), dated December 4, 2023 which have been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council are on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (the "Quality Home Depictions") and are incorporated herein by this reference. None of the Quality Homes depicted and proffered herein may be constructed on two (2) adjoining lots. Proffer 3: When the Property is developed, the exterior building materials to be used on the residential structures shall consist primarily of high quality architectural shingles, cementitious siding (e.g., "Hardi Plank"), brick or masonry stone, or a combination of those materials along with high- quality accent or ancillary material such as metal roof accents and vinyl shutters. Proffer 4: The party of the first part shall contribute a payment in lieu of the recreational open space requirement under Section 4.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance, to the Grantee's Parks and Recreation Department. Packet Pg. 355  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Proffer 5: When the Property is developed, the party of the first part shall record a Declaration submitting the building lots, the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffer Easement, the Shared Private Road Easements, offsite and onsite, and all maintenance agreements and obligations applicable thereto to a mandatory membership Homeowner's Association which shall control these easement rights and be responsible for maintaining the ONSITE portion of the SHARED PRIVATE ROAD and the ten foot (10') Fencing and Landscape Buffers. The Homeowner's Association shall also be responsible for collecting and contributing the homeowner's share of the maintenance costs of the offsite portion of the Shared Private Road from Millwood Road to its intersection with the ONSITE Private Road. Proffer 6: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Subdivision and/or Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Packet Pg. 356 Packet Pg. 357 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 358 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Michelle Conti To: Marchelle L. Coleman; Naomi Estaris Subject: Ripple Effect Makes Waves at Historic Wycliffe Property Date: Friday, March 1, 2024 7:55:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.  Planning Commission and City Council,  As a 25 year member of the original Wycliffe congregation, the philosophy of the Presbyterian church doctrine compels me to speak up. We are called on to be active regarding social and moral issues including environmental concerns. As a Virginia Beach resident you only have to look around to realize the biggest threat we face is the one our sister city Norfolk is drowning in, water. It is constantly in the news and our leaders promote ways of dealing with flooding and standing water. Our city actively promotes retention ponds as a formidable tool to combat stormwater runoff. These projects include absorption buffers much wider than the revised project before you now. As a city we have spent countless dollars to stay above water. Building infrastructures that include drainage are a large part of our public works budget. Having a natural watershed is a priceless blessing. Our watershed was even dredged to maintain its integrity. The open space uplands portion of the Wycliffe property is also an integral part of natural filtration. Packet Pg. 359  7.L.a This decision should not be driven by the monetary Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) income it creates for the businesses engaged in the transaction. The church has received over 60 years of tax relief and now is requesting a modification of use and boundary change to profit at the detriment of the neighbors and wildlife that call this area home and have for decades. The church is not entitled to a zoning change any more than its neighbors are. Maintaining the status quo provides reasonably expected stability to surrounding properties. The financial need of the church does not negate the conditions they accepted when purchasing the property. The lake was here first and its health should be the priority in any encroaching development. That includes the green space that provides natural filtration to water that eventually enters the Lynnhaven River. While the project may look possible on the paper plans, just because it could be built doesn’t mean it should be built. I would suggest the city of Virginia Beach’s large public works budget include regular maintenance of this watershed. The church could donate or sell the wetland portion of the property to its financial benefit and realize a goal while relieving itself of any ongoing burdens it may bear. It would set an example of responsible ownership and goodwill to its neighbors. After all, isn’t that what it’s all about? Packet Pg. 360  7.L.a In closing, the city of Virginia Beach and Wycliffe Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Presbyterian church should practice what they preach. We cannot say one thing while doing another. The Ripple Effect is in play here as this project is in defiance of the Bond Referendum. We are all connected in the outcome of this application, let us make the common sense decision. Michelle Conti Packet Pg. 361  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Haley Cool To: Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: Wycliffe Rezoning Proposal Date: Friday, March 8, 2024 11:35:50 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello,, Although I do not live in the neighborhood concerned, I do live off of the Great Neck corridor, and the proposed re-zoning gives me much cause for concern. I am sure I do not need to bullet point the potential negative ramifications of such a project but will suffice it to say that the precedent has already been set for NO business rezoning in this area. Please do your best to represent the citizens and not the developer who has solely monetary gain in mind. Hopefully, Haley Cool Great Neck Point resident Sent from my iPhone Packet Pg. 362  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Mrs M To: Marchelle L. Coleman Cc: Jmcherry29@icloud.com; Kaitlen S. Alcock; Carrie L. Bookholt; Holly Cuellar; Richard T. Lowman Subject: Deadly Concerns Lake Conrad2 / Wycliff Great Neck Road Date: Thursday, February 8, 2024 10:49:04 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Marchelle Coleman- Thank you for being very professional and helpful. I appreciate your offer to email me the current site plan submission for Bishards proposed development of Office park and house sites around Lake Conrad 2 on Wycliffe land. 1) Great Neck Road at Millwood needs a traffic light installed for SAFETY! North Great Neck Road is deadly. Too many accidents and critical injuries. An office park will increase traffic! Packet Pg. 363 Packet Pg. 364 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) 2) I am opposed to the minimal buffer that will harm lake Conrad2. Bow Creek has a “Typical 80 ft buffer” and it is discriminatory if there is proposed less than an “80 ft buffer” around Lake Conrad2. The pollution and function of the SWMF Lake Conrad2 could be hazardous to the 37 acres of homes that depend on Lake Conrad2 to minimize flooding. 3) Developers shortcuts and special treatment should be avoided. Packet Pg. 365  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) The Citizens of Virginia Beach need Planning to prevent development problems. I believe this Developer is also involved in Atlantic Park where there is a DEQ investigation of toxic water? Due care and due diligence is expected in this review. It seems like an Office Park in an establishment neighborhood is very poor idea. Rona Marsh District 8 Packet Pg. 366  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Mrs M To: Bryan Plumlee; Holly Cuellar; Kathryn Byler; nestaris@vbgov.com; Susan B. Hippen Cc: Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: Wycliffe - Bishard Spot zoning with road abutting National Watershed Date: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 5:34:46 PM Attachments: 453F2FFD-0365-4382-9292-230E8B0192B9.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Planning Commissioners: I am opposed to the spot rezoning for an office in a neighborhood and development of 5 houses with a road built barely 10 feet from Lake Conrad2. Virginia Beach should do better than building a road abutting Lake Conrad2 National Watershed. Packet Pg. 367  In Virginia Beach Bow Creek gets an 80ft typical buffer. But Lake Conrad2 gets inferior buffer? Packet Pg. 368 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 369 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 370 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  Other localities value their wetlands and protect them with 100 ft buffers. Packet Pg. 371 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 372 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a This rezone and Development is not well planned and the new road the Developer wants Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) should be adjacent to Great Neck Rd. Please use common sense and deny the zoning and Developer changes. We need Legacy open space wetlands. We already have an abundance of impervious surfaces. Respectfully Rona Marsh District 8 757-270-7900 Packet Pg. 373  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: GS Passaris To: Bryan Plumlee; George Alcaraz; Holly Cuellar; John Cromwell; John H. Coston; Kathryn Byler; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; Michael Anderson; Naomi Estaris; Susan B. Hippen; William Parks; City Council; angela.bohon@wtkr.com; brett.hall@wavy.com; kerry2d@gmail.com; stacy.parker@pilotonline.com; johndmoss4109@gmail.com Subject: Oppose Wycliffe Development Date: Saturday, March 2, 2024 1:03:54 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please see my video posted on FB today as I walked the very saturated property at Wycliff today during the rain. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/n2KkyEgvMqVvwKUG/?mibextid=K35XfP I oppose any development at Wycliffe and changes to the zoning laws so that Bishard Homes can absolutely destroy this beautiful and pristine property. It has been under a religious cup for 60 years and that needs to remain to ensure the open space and ecosystem that so many plants and animals live in. In addition, the bond referendum that the citizens voted on needs to be activated and not postponed. Our land needs to be protected from flooding and developers. The City Council and the Mayor are supposed to protect our city and the majority of citizens do not want to become a large metropolitan city like New Jersey. We are a Peninsula, not an endless mass of land. Enjoy the video. Ginny Passaris VP Great Neck Estates Neighborhood Watch Coordinator Packet Pg. 374  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: GS Passaris To: Holly Cuellar; Kathryn Byler; angela.bohon@wtkr.com; Bryan Plumlee; brett.hall@wavy.com; City Council; George Alcaraz; John Cromwell; John H. Coston; johndmoss4109@gmail.com; kerry2d@gmail.com; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; Michael Anderson; Naomi Estaris; Susan B. Hippen; stacy.parker@pilotonline.com; William Parks Subject: Re: Oppose Wycliffe Development Date: Sunday, March 3, 2024 5:19:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi I’m sharing photos of litter currently in Lake Conrad 2 and flowing into Lake Conrad 1. Thank you, Ginny Passaris Packet Pg. 375 Packet Pg. 376 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 377 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 378 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) On Sat, Mar 2, 2024 at 1:03 PM GS Passaris <ggpassaris@gmail.com> wrote: Please see my video posted on FB today as I walked the very saturated property at Wycliff today during the rain. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/n2KkyEgvMqVvwKUG/?mibextid=K35XfP I oppose any development at Wycliffe and changes to the zoning laws so that Bishard Homes can absolutely destroy this beautiful and pristine property. It has been under a religious cup for 60 years and that needs to remain to ensure the open space and ecosystem that so many plants and animals live in. In addition, the bond referendum that the citizens voted on needs to be activated and not postponed. Our land needs to be protected from flooding and developers. The City Council and the Mayor are supposed to protect our city and the majority of citizens do not want to become a large metropolitan city like New Jersey. We are a Peninsula, not an endless mass of land. Enjoy the video. Packet Pg. 379  Ginny Passaris VP Great Neck Estates Neighborhood Watch Coordinator Packet Pg. 380 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Julia Cherry To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; miclemon@vbgov.com; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; gealcara@vbgov.com; Bryan Plumlee; John H. Coston; dhhorseley@vbgov.com; Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: Opposition Letter - Please Deny Applicants Request Date: Monday, March 4, 2024 12:33:44 PM Attachments: IMG_2385.HEIC IMG_2388.HEIC IMG_2529.PNG IMG_6876.PNG IMG_6878.PNG IMG_6877.PNG Wycliffe Zoning Signs.pdf FOIA_GreatNeckRd_20240212.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Honorable Virginia Beach Planning Commissioners, I am sending you this email not just as a concerned resident of Great Neck Estates, but as a voice for our community and the silent whispers of our cherished environment. Imagine, if you will, a morning where the serene hum of nature is replaced by the incessant honking of cars, where the air we breathe is no longer crisp but laden with the fumes of congestion. This is the future we face if we choose to rezone our precious open and religious space into a commercial area. But today, we have the power to choose a different path. Let's talk about reality - the kind that's happening right outside our windows. Our roads, once the arteries of our community's lifeblood, are now choked with traffic, accidents waiting to happen at every turn. Did you know that the number of car accidents in our area has been climbing steadily? With each crash, we don't just tally numbers; we're counting fathers, mothers, children whose lives are forever altered. It's a dangerous dance on the tightrope of safety, and with every new vehicle added to the mix, we're inching closer to a catastrophe. It's not just a matter of if, but when. Now, let's ponder the consequences of rezoning. It's like opening Pandora's box, isn't it? By transforming our wetlands and open space into commercial zones, we're not just inviting more traffic; we're courting disaster. Imagine the domino effect: more cars, more accidents, more lives irreversibly changed. And what of our environment? Wetlands are our natural sponges, soaking up floodwaters. But what happens when we pave paradise? We're left to grapple with flooding, an adversary that no amount of regret can hold back. It's a stark choice between preserving our natural defenses or facing the wrath of nature head-on. But here's the heart of the matter: the people, your constituents, have spoken. An online petition has over 8,600 signatures. The pulse of our community beats to the rhythm of preservation, not development. There's a chorus of voices, from every corner of our town, united in opposition. We've seen what happens when the balance tilts too far toward progress at the expense of safety and sustainability. It's a lesson etched in the heartbreak of communities around us, a cautionary tale we dare not ignore. We stand at a crossroads, and the path we choose will define the legacy we leave for generations to come. Packet Pg. 381  7.L.a There have also been a number of items out of compliance with the laws set by the City Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Council. Such as the subdivision variance, rezoning to business, and modification signage posted on Great Neck Road and Millwood Road. These signs are to be posted and legible for 30 days prior to the hearing. Unfortunately, as you can see in the below photos, they were out of compliance. This would lead our citizens to not know or understand what is being proposed. Below you will see each day with dates and times that these signs were not in compliance with the City Code.   Furthermore, there are many mistakes made in the joint application including the address (the correct address is 2307 Millwood Road, however in the application it is listed as 3207 Millwood Drive), a misrepresentation of trees and plants, disruption of the stormwater drainage system, and a disturbance of natural habitat. There are endangered birds, butterflies, long eared bats, and long standing trees that call Lake Conrad 2 and surrounding space home and have also been left off the application. In section 7, Historic Resources Information, it was marked “NO” for any buildings or structures 50 years old or older located on the project site. The current A Frame building and bridge are both older than 50 years old, making them historic properties. If the builder cannot provide an accurate representation, shouldn’t the city feel the need to deny at least until a third party Quality Assurance is conducted? How can you make an informed decision based on inaccurate data on the application? I would also urge you to deny the removal of the Conditional Use Permit for religious purposes of the entire eight acres. In 1966, Great Neck Road welcomed the church with the intentions of keeping the allotted eight acres for religious purposes and sacred ground. The city deemed the land a benefit to the community, and removing it would truly result in public detriment. However, all is not lost. We're presented with a golden opportunity to lead by example, to show that progress does not have to come at the expense of our safety and our environment. Instead of rezoning, let's invest in solutions that enhance our community while preserving the integrity of our wetlands, open green space, and historic structures. Imagine improved infrastructure that addresses our current traffic woes without compromising on safety. We have the chance to be pioneers, to chart a course that marries innovation with preservation. It's a vision of the future where progress and nature walk hand in hand. In closing, I urge you, esteemed members of the city council, to consider the legacy we wish to leave behind. We have before us a choice that will echo through the ages. A vote against rezoning is not just a vote for safety; it's a declaration of our commitment to our community, to our environment, and to future generations. Let us choose a path of preservation, of safety, of sustainability. Let's vote NO on rezoning. Together, we can safeguard the heartbeat of our community and ensure that the morning hum of nature is not lost to the cacophony of progress. Sincerely, Julia M. Cherry Packet Pg. 382  7.L.a 2408 Cedar Bark Road, Great Neck Estates Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Great Neck Estates Civic League 2nd Vice President ATTACHED: - Wycliffe Zoning Signs with date and times showing out of compliance - IMG_2388 and IMG_2385 - images of the application where the property address is incorrect - E18F207C - Image of a bus attempting to make a left turn from Millwood Road onto an already very busy Great Neck Road - FOIA of Great Neck Road - IMG_2529 shows how deadly Great Neck Road already is - IMG_ 6878,6876,6877 - Images showing crashes and their date and time stamps to show again the dangers of Great Neck Road and the bottleneck of traffic that are already being experienced Packet Pg. 383  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Natalie G To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; gnecivic@gmail.com Subject: Rezoning of Great Neck Estates Foreground Date: Saturday, March 9, 2024 1:00:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council: I am opposed to rezoning the front of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning. This neighborhood is part of the Suburban Areas of Virginia Beach, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The city committed to enhance or maintain existing neighborhoods in the Suburban Areas. The plan as presented degrades the community and devalues the properties of an established neighborhood in order to serve the best interests of two private entities. The Virginia Beach Zoning code is intended to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. It also specifically should protect and improve the quality of the waters. This plan does not encourage the best purpose of this land and lake and threatens all Suburban Areas throughout Virginia Beach by violating the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Respectfully, Natalie Taoras Packet Pg. 384  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Beth Wesolowski To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; gne@gmail.com Subject: Wycliffe Development *BUSINESS ZONING* Date: Saturday, March 9, 2024 4:30:49 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council: I am opposed to rezoning the front of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning. This neighborhood is part of the Suburban Areas of Virginia Beach, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The city committed to enhance or maintain existing neighborhoods in the Suburban Areas. The plan as presented degrades the community and devalues the properties of an established neighborhood in order to serve the best interests of two private entities. The Virginia Beach Zoning code is intended to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. It also specifically should protect and improve the quality of the waters. This plan does not encourage the best purpose of this land and lake and threatens all Suburban Areas throughout Virginia Beach by violating the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Respectfully, Beth Wesolowski Packet Pg. 385  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Kathie McGrattan To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; Great Neck Estates Civic League Subject: Please consider saying no to the Wycliff/Millwood development Date: Saturday, March 9, 2024 10:32:16 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commission and City Council, I am opposed to the rezoning of the parcel of property that Wycliff Church is attempting to sell to Bishard Homes for 5 R-10 homes and an office building. First and foremost, as the city continues to address flooding issues throughout our city, it is very concerning to me that the city would approve to tear down mature trees, infill sloping land towards Lake Conrad and build 5 homes with concrete driveways and a roadway on land that currently is a part of our stormwater runoff plan and is an area that is already prone to flooding. Where will all of the water go when the homes, driveways, possibly swimming pools and a roadway to these 5 homes are in place? We keep hearing that one of the problems with our current city budget is due to the need to resolve our current flooding issues in our city. Please don’t approve this development that is certain to create additional flooding problems for Wycliff, the existing Great Neck Estates neighborhood and these 5 new proposed homes and the office building. I think most of us believe this will create yet another flooding issue, that we the taxpayers, will then be on point to fund. Next, it does not seem reasonable to put an office building smack dab in the middle of an established neighborhood and between the existing neighborhood and the new proposed residential development. It is concerning to think the roadway that is currently the entrance to that existing neighborhood would also be shared not only with those 5 new home, but also with that office building. Please don’t allow this to happen to the residents of this neighborhood or any other neighborhood in our city for that matter. I do not live in the Great Neck Estates neighborhood nor any of the immediately adjacent neighborhoods, but I am becoming increasingly concerned with what seems to be prioritizing the desires of developers over the desires of the tax paying residents. A decision to NOT allow this project to go forward, could be a positive turning point for the citizens of this city. I hope you will hear the plea from citizens to not approve this project. Thank you for your consideration of my and many other citizens concerns. Kathie McGrattan 1708 Herford Way Virginia Beach, VA 23454 Packet Pg. 386  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: GS Passaris To: City Council Cc: Kathryn Byler; Susan B. Hippen; John Cromwell; Holly Cuellar; Michael Anderson; Naomi Estaris; John H. Coston; gealcara@vbgov.com; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: Have you forgotten already? Date: Sunday, March 10, 2024 5:44:10 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mayor Dyer, City Council, and Planning Commissioners of Virginia Beach- Our citizens have not forgotten the flooding problems from the past and are still dealing with it still today. I adamantly oppose the development at Wycliffe Church so our neighborhood won't look like the ones below or have major flooding problems on Great Neck Road. Great Neck road is a very heavily traversed road and extra water on it won't help accidents from happening. We have had major accidents resulting in death on this road in the past year. Not to mention, a tornado visited us less than a year ago. Our lawns are soaked from the rain just this week. We have sitting water in our yards and collection of water in our streets. Building 5 homes on the property at Wycliffe is a bad design on top of a horrible plan. REMEMBER- the water has to go somewhere and replacing green space with non pervious surfaces is only going to lead to disaster. The church is more than welcome to sell their property after the contract is up with BISHARD HOMES to the city for a park. This is what the parishioners truly want to see happen to this beautiful open space that serves and protects the animals, ecosystem, stormwater inlet, flooding, etc. (I think you get the point.) Most of the congregation would rather see a park for open space than 5 overbuilt vinyl siding homes that don't match our brick one story neighborhood. You make regulations for neighborhoods, BUT then you don't follow them, so what good is having them in the first place? Regarding the BOND REFERENDUM that the citizens voted for in 2021-even if you haven't enacted it for the city to follow for controlling runaway development, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN, THEY ARE TIRED OF THE OVERDEVELOPMENT OF VIRGINIA BEACH AND NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODING. It passed with our VOTE, therefore it should be in full force whether you say it is or not! The people want to see you follow their request, not the Developers! We outnumber them and they are making our once beautiful city UGLY. You make it look like you are working on it, but really you are just kicking the can down the road so developers can get as much development done before you implement the BOND Referendum completely. Whatever negative outcome arises from your decisions, remember it is your fault and responsibility. NOT HAPPY with your current standards. https://www.wavy.com/news/vb-taxpayers-will-pay-more-than-originally-expected-for-ashville-park- flooding-fixes/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUIQq6F3ygw https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=TxOSkUl9LDo&pp=ygUpZmxvb2RpbmcgcHJvYmxlbXMgaW4gdmlyZ2luaWEgYmVhY2ggdG9kYXk%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0kRlEEY6ok Packet Pg. 387  Constantine Passaris II https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7wakWFXons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqMYQQLRlQ Packet Pg. 388 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Cindy Kube To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council Cc: GNEcivic@gmail.com Subject: Rezoning of Great Neck Estates Date: Monday, March 11, 2024 8:00:37 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. March 10, 2024 Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council: I am opposed to rezoning the front of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning. This neighborhood is part of the Suburban Areas of Virginia Beach, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The city committed to enhance or maintain existing neighborhoods in the Suburban Areas. Where is your commitment to the citizens of this city, and where is your commitment to environmental stewardship? As our city faces the real and growing threats to our infrastructure from climate change, the time for responsible planning has never been more crucial. The plan as presented degrades the community and devalues the properties of an established neighborhood in order to serve the best interests of two private entities. The Virginia Beach Zoning code is intended to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. It also specifically should protect and improve the quality of the waters. This plan does not encourage the best purpose of this land and lake and threatens all Suburban Areas throughout Virginia Beach by violating the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Respectfully, Cynthia Kube 2217 Poplar Point Road Virginia Beach Those who contemplate the beauty of the Earth find reserves of strength that will endure as long as life lasts. ~Rachel Carson~ Packet Pg. 389  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Jeff FISHER To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; GNECivic@gmail.com Subject: Opposed: Rezoning the Entrance Area of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning Date: Monday, March 11, 2024 4:48:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council: I am opposed to rezoning the entrance area of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning. This neighborhood is part of the Suburban Areas of Virginia Beach, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The city committed to enhance or maintain existing neighborhoods in the Suburban Areas. The Bishard plan as presented degrades the community and devalues the properties of an established neighborhood in order to serve the best interests of two private entities. The Virginia Beach Zoning code is intended to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the city. It also specifically should protect and improve the quality of the waters. This plan does not encourage the best purpose of this land and lake and threatens all Suburban Areas throughout Virginia Beach by violating the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Respectfully, Jeff Fisher, PE, PMP Packet Pg. 390  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: John Carbone To: Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; Holly Cuellar Subject: REZONING WYCLIFFE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH PROPERTY Date: Monday, March 11, 2024 4:50:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Distinguished Members of the City of Virginia Beach City Council and Planning Commission. My comments are regarding the developer's plan to acquire a parcel of property from the Wycliffe Presbyterian Church on North Great Neck Road, obtain rezoning so that he may convert an existing religious building to commercial use, erect some new multi-story commercial structures and then squeeze a few houses on this pristine, lake side, park like property. Like many thousands of other long standing Virginia Beach Citizens, I am absolutely opposed to the rezoning and commercial development on this property adjacent to my Great Neck Estates neighborhood. Such development would be contrary to the city Comprehensive Plan, which for a wide variety of sound, long standings reasons has historically prohibited commercial development on North Great Neck Road property north of the church. For what it's worth, notwithstanding the developer and his attorney's protestations, the word in our neighborhood is that the church no longer has a financial problem and would if they could walk away from the unfavorable sales contract. Sincerely, John A. Carbone Captain USN Ret Initial resident in Virginia Beach 1962 and resident in Great Neck Estates since 1977 Packet Pg. 391  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Jim & Calmetta Allen To: Planning Administration Subject: Wycliff Presbyterian Church & Bishard Homes Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 10:10:57 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 03/12/2024 Subject: Wycliff Presbyterian Church & Bishard Homes Honorable Planning Commission: I am James Turner Allen, and I have lived in Great Neck Estates for 39 years. Our neighborhood is an older community with issues dating back to development. Our homes are built on somewhat larger lots that give us some breathing room and privacy; a luxury we all love. Today, however, we are facing new developmental and zoning challenges that—if allowed to proceed—would negatively impact our lives. I strongly oppose any zoning changes that would allow for office business to operate in our community. We do not deserve this and I would think you would not allow it to happen where you live. I appreciate your time, James T. Allen MSG US Army Ret. Jim & Calmetta Allen jallen182@verizon.net Packet Pg. 392 Packet Pg. 393 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: julia cherry To: City Council; Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; miClemon@vbgov.com; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; geAlcara@vbgov.com; Bryan Plumlee; John H. Coston; dhHorseley@vbgov.com; Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: Wycliffe Development Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 11:12:42 AM Attachments: Great Neck Traffic NIGHTMARE.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Honorable Virginia Beach Planning Commissioner’s, Please find the attached photo documentation of the traffic conditions on Great Neck Road and in the Great Neck Estates neighborhood. In an earlier email, I included the FOIA report from VBPD of accidents along Great Neck Road for your review. There are many serious incidents that have occurred. I’m truly worried about the safety of residents in GNE if a change of zoning to business in our residential is approved. In my humble opinion, there should have been a traffic impact study done by the city and developer. Please vote to deny any zoning changes on Wednesday, March 13th, 2024. Wycliffe Church Pastor Bugg has stated the church sought out a zoning change twice and was denied by the planning department. The city will not allow any new driveways on N. Great Neck Road. We, the community do not want any additional traffic congestion to negatively affect our peaceful environment in Great Neck Estates. Respectfully yours, Julia M. Cherry Great Neck Estates 2nd VP Sent from my iPhone Packet Pg. 394 Packet Pg. 395 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 396 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 397 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 398 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 399 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 400 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 401 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 402 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 403 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 404 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 405 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 406 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 407 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Packet Pg. 408 7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants)  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Monti Dutta To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman Cc: gnecivic@gmail.com; Mishtu Dutta Subject: Re: Comments on proposed application by Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC for the rezoning to Conditional O-1 Office District for property at 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 3:14:28 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Planning Commissioners: As residents (and voters) in Great Neck Estates in Virginia Beach, our household strongly opposes the application by Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC for the Conditional Rezoning of the R-10 Residential District to Conditional O-1 Office District for the property located at 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road. The existing A-Frame building on the property was most recently used from approximately 1988 through 2021 under a Conditional Use Permit by Friends of Infant Stimulation, Inc., to operate a program for special needs infants. This prior program had minimal impact on traffic and there were a very small number of cars that regularly accessed the property during the day, so we had no concerns about that previous use of the existing building. Even though the current parking lot for the existing building has 22 spaces (exceeding maximum permitted by six parking spaces), we don’t recall more than a handful of cars ever using that parking lot at the same time and never saw a high number of cars entering and exiting the property. However, the current proposal includes the rezoning of the property from R-10 to Conditional O-1 Office for the purposes of professional offices, such as medical offices and dental offices. These types of offices can be high traffic frequency tenants with groups of patients coming and going for appointments every twenty minutes to a half hour throughout the day. Such high traffic offices are only appropriate for buildings and properties that directly connect and access to major arterial roads. The current proposal is for these patients and clients to access the rezoned “office” building from an entrance only from Millwood Road (residential road), not directly from a major commercial road, such as North Great Neck Road. Furthermore, patients for medical offices and dental offices, for example, can frequently run late for appointments for procedures, so there is the risk of late patients speeding on residential Millwood Road for overdue appointments as the only way to access the rezoned “office” building of their provider. This is yet another reason that zoning should require that office buildings need to only be accessed with an entrance directly from major commercial arterial roads, which have greater law enforcement presence, not exclusively accessed directly from a residential road, like Millwood Road. In addition to the presence of children (nine in the morning and seven in the afternoon, as confirmed by the school district) at a school bus stop adjacent to the proposed development at Millwood Road and Selden Street, numerous pedestrians (adults and/or children) frequently recreationally walk on Millwood Road, which has no sidewalks nor paved bicycle paths. Under this proposal, patients and clients will be driving exclusively on residential Millwood Road throughout the day to access the “office” building under the newly proposed Conditional O-1 Office zoning and frequently encountering pedestrians and/or bicyclists on residential Millwood Road without any sidewalks, stoplights, stop signs, or bicycle paths at the entrance on Millwood Road to the planned development. The proposal calls for widening the access entrance from Millwood Road to both the “office” site and new five single family house development for emergency vehicle access. The widened entrance will become directly across Millwood Street from the driveway of the existing house at 2304 Millwood Road.   Per the Planning Commission Staff report, the City’s Packet Pg. 409  7.L.a owns Traffic Engineering staff projects that 50 average daily trips for the five-lot new single- Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) family subdivision and 46 average daily trips for the office use for a total of 96 daily trips. Planning Commissioners, please ask yourselves the following question: How would you like a widened entrance directly across the driveway of your house to a busy office building and five home subdivision with 96 cars coming and going throughout the day? The existing R-10 zoning of the current structure already permits the use of “childcare centers or childcare education centers in conjunction with public or private elementary schools.” Childcare centers, for example, would be subject to traffic at set predictable times with longer duration between cars coming and going versus the high frequency short duration usage throughout the day of busy professional offices, such as medical and dental offices. Therefore, already permitted childcare centers under the existing R-10 zoning would have less adverse traffic impact throughout the day than busy professional offices under Commercial O- 1 Office zoning upon the Great Neck Estates neighborhood. The existing R-10 zoning of the property supports a lower adverse traffic impact on the existing residential Great Neck Estates neighborhood rather than using the Great Neck Estates neighborhood as the sole exclusive passageway to access the newly proposed redesignated Commercial O-1 Office zoned property. In conclusion, we request that the existing R-10 zoning of the current structure be retained, and please accordingly reject the conversion of the property located at 1445 North Great Neck Road & 2307 Millwood Road to a Commercial O-1 Office zone. We thank you for your service to our community. Thank you for your consideration of this critical matter. Sincerely, Arijit Dutta and Sucharita Dutta (Residents of Great Neck Estates neighborhood) Packet Pg. 410  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Windy Crutchfield To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; City Council Cc: Marchelle L. Coleman Subject: FW: Threat to my neighborhood Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 3:21:00 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I am forwarding on behalf of a resident who is having troubles sending her email to you all. She planned to come to the hearing but at 93 years old the trip and time sitting are difficult for her so she decided today not to come. Thanks for including her comments in the record. Windy C. From: Verna Brainard Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 3:13 PM To: windy.crutchfield@gmail.com Subject: Threat to my neighborhood Dear Planning Commission and City Council, I have lived in Great Neck Estates since 1978, and am here because of it’s beauty, safety, quiet and natural environment.   Please note that I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED to rezoning the front area of Great Neck Estates to Business Zoning. We value being part of the Suburban Areas of Virginia Beach, according to the Com[prehensive Plan.   This City is, I hope, committed to enhance or maintain existing neighborhoods in its Suburban Area. Contrarily, the plan as presented significantly degrades our community and devalues properties of an established neighborhood for the purpose of serving the best interests of two private entities. If our City Zoning Code is intended to protect and promote the health, safety and general welfare of the people, you need to look seriously at the plan, as presented!!! The Code should also protect and improve the quality of the waters.     This proposed plan does NOT encourage the best purposes of the land and the lake.   It threatens all Suburban Areas throughout Virginia Beach by violating the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. I believe there is a threat to my quality of life in Great Neck Estates, devaluation of my property, as well as the threat of floods when open areas are built on and paved.     Please use your integrity and Packet Pg. 411  7.L.a your commitment to improve, not degrade, my neighborhood and our City, and oppose the plan. Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Respectfully, Verna M. Brainard 1420 South Twin Lake Road Virginia Beach, VA 23454 Packet Pg. 412  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: carol watkins To: City Council; Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; Michael Berlucchi; Christopher Taylor; schulman@vbgov.com; carol watkins; GS Passaris Subject: Opposition to Wycliffe Development Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 4:15:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Carol Watkins 2408 Pineland Lane Virginia beach, VB. 23454 Dear Mayor Dyer and city council members, My name is Carol Watkins and I have lived in Great Neck Estates for almost 30 years. I am writing this letter to express my strong opposition to the proposal of rezoning a parcel of the Wycliffe Presbyterian property to build housing and rezoning another parcel for office space.   First: I understand the proposed plans are to build 5 houses on the front of our entrance backing up to great neck road. While I understand the need for more housing in Virginia beach, I feel this proposed plan would have a very negative impact by leading to increased traffic congestion in and out of our neighborhood as well as the design of these houses being build by Bishard simply are not in keeping with the character of our neighborhood or on the great neck corridor. Second:The proposed plan to add to the existing A- frame structure for office as well a widening of the existing driveway where there will be very little buffer between Lake Conrad 2 is a cause for concerns of excess runoff and pollutants from more paved areas. In conclusion I strongly urge you to reconsider this propose housing and office space as it would greatly alter the aesthetic of our neighborhood and replace beautiful green space that is homes for our wildlife. We in Great Neck love and appreciate our wildlife. At the rate our city council is going, the foxes, opossums, and raccoons will have to live in our garages. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Carol Watkins Packet Pg. 413  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: freitodd@aol.com To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council Subject: Wycliffe Church Proposal Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2024 7:43:20 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I have been a resident in the Laurel Cove neighborhood off Great Neck Road since 1998. I have just reviewed the presentation regarding the proposed rezoning and construction on part of the property currently owned by Wycliffe Church. I strongly disagree with the proposal for a few specific reasons: 1. Adding a large area (road, driveways, buildings) of impervious surface WILL add to the burden on the storm water facilities of the series of Lake Conrads. This is counter to the statements and intent City Council made and agreed to when the funds were being discussed for storm water upgrades city wide. 2. Wording in the presentation mentions protecting the western portion of the proposed division "...to the greatest extent possible...". These few words open the door widely for encroachment and reduction or elimination of the "pond" which is a registered storm water facility. 3. The current sediment infiltration and street / parking lot pollution that has been damaging to all of the lakes will be increased and continue to degrade the water quality. 4. Great Neck Estates does not have a neighborhood park; this area has been used for decades for recreation, appreciation of wildlife, and a place to quietly contemplate.   I have reviewed informal notes after an assessment of the water quality of Lake Conrad #1 and Lake Conrad #3 was completed. Low dissolved O2 and high nitrogen and potassium are present. This project will make them worse. Having lived here since 1998 and seeing the erosion of one of the spillways, significantly increased algae and weed "islands", and informing the city when water overflows the entire dam and nothing is done is beyond insulting. I and many neighbors who are physically able to do so spend untold hours treating the invasive growth, pull literally tons of weeds and debris, and help our neighbors who are elderly in maintaining the areas they own. The city has done nothing except threaten us with fines. You have a difficult job. The developer is offering cash to offset the damage they will do to Great Neck Estates, and all residents on the lakes, yet the neighborhood will not benefit. There is much mention of maintaining or enhancing neighborhoods. How Packet Pg. 414  7.L.a does any of this maintain or enhance the surrounding neighborhoods? Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) Unfortunately I anticipate nearly all of you recommending approval and the City Council allowing it to move forward. After years of inaction and threats why assume anything else?   To the few who do not support this I thanks you for keeping residents at the forefront vs developers. The rest of you have lost your way. Packet Pg. 415  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: wiley77@cox.net To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council Subject: Fwd: Great Neck Lake Development - bad for our lake, bad for the environment Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:09:43 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. City Council Members: My family has lived on Great Neck Lake since 1973, and we strongly object to the planned development of the property adjacent to Wycliffe Presbyterian Church on Great Neck Road for the following reasons: 1. It will damage the short- and long-term health of Great Neck Lake which we have carefully nurtured and preserved for decades. 2. It will damage the health of the other, smaller lake, Lake Conrad, as well. 3. It will cause property values to fall in Great Neck Estates. After years of sitting on City wait lists, our lakefront property owners spent thousands of dollars each two years ago to dredge our coves to enable small boats to maneuver and for the health of the lake and the creatures in and around the lake. And much of our lake association dues go to maintaining the lake water quality, flora and fauna. Why should our nonprofit lake association incur expensive costs to repair a very small crack in the dam spillway when the development’s planned parking lot (nonpermeable surfaces) and reduced vegetation buffer will cause the crack to expand, cause more erosion of property owners’ yards and force more runoff and sediment into the lake? Why should we endure our consistent, diligent stewardship being destroyed by thoughtless greed and disregard for the environment? And frankly, why should we have to endure our hard-earned money having to be spent over and over again to maintain our peaceful lake? It’s not right, and it’s not fair. We urge you to vote to stop this development for good. Thank you. Respectfully, Pam Wiley 2221 Poplar Point Rd Virginia Beach, VA 23454 757-971-1906 Packet Pg. 416  7.L.a Attachment: 01_ARF Package for Wyclife Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (3831 : PLA - Wycliffe Presbyterian Church & BHC, LLC (Applicants) From: Jamie Curran To: Holly Cuellar; Naomi Estaris; John Cromwell; Michael Anderson; Kathryn Byler; George Alcaraz; Bryan Plumlee; Susan B. Hippen; John H. Coston; William Parks; Michael C. Mauch; Marchelle L. Coleman; City Council; "and" Subject: Wycliffe Development Project Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 8:03:57 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Virginia Beach. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Whom It May Concern, Good morning. I was hoping to attend today's meeting, but I have a pressing business obligation that will prevent me doing so. My wife and I have lived in Great Neck Estates, and we raised two boys here and this neighborhood holds a special place in our hearts and lives. I wanted to write you to let you know of our opposition to the ill-conceived development of the Red Bridge property. There are many facets of this project that do not pass a vetting of the proper channels. From the beginning this project has been shrouded in backdoor tactics. The lawyer has misrepresented himself numerous times when meeting with Great Neck Estates residents at Wycliffe Church and then again at City Planning and City Council meetings. I became clear to me that he and the developer pander to the City Council and that this relationship is reciprocal. Secondarily Wycliffe has operated as non-profit religious organization for 60 years but is now a commercial and real estate entity. Are the local, state, and federal tax accessors aware of this situation? The biggest objection is the effect on the residents of Great Neck Estates, Great Neck Manor, and the Reserve. There are well over 450 homes that will have their daily quality of life interrupted in the immediate future and the possibility of flooding in the aftermath of this development that is very concerning. And why, because an overzealous developer wants to build 5 homes and a commercial building smack in the middle of a residential area. Wycliffe church sates that they no longer need to sell the property, the residents of the three mentioned neighborhoods don’t want to see the property developed and the repercussions of developing this area with no regard for flooding, traffic flow and a lack of open space for these communities is glaring. Again, hundreds of residents being impacted daily for a single developer to build 5 houses, borders on criminal. I would urge City Planning and City Council to exercise common sense and see this situation for what it is. Do not develop in this residential neighborhood. You have an opportunity to serve the people of Virginia Beach in a fair and ethical manor, please do not fail us and Virginia Beach residents. Respectfully, Jamie Curran 757-580-9052 Packet Pg. 417  CARL R. ELLIS, JR FOR A VARIANCE TO SECTION 4.4(B) OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS RE SUBDIVIDE THE LOT TO CREATE TWO (2) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING LOTS AT 2620 BROAD BAY ROAD DISTRICT 8 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 418  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: CARL R. ELLIS, JR. [Applicant & Property Owner] Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Regulations) for the property located at 2620 Broad Bay Road (GPIN 1499688214). COUNCIL DISTRICT 8 MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: The existing lot was created by deed in 1952, prior to the adoption of the City’s Subdivision Regulations. Lot 8 is currently developed with a single-family dwelling. The applicant seeks to subdivide the lot into two single-family dwelling lots. A Subdivision Variance to Section 4.4 (b) of the Subdivision Regulations is needed as the two proposed lots will not meet the lot width requirement of 80 feet, measured at the 30-foot front yard setback. Proposed Lot 8A is deficient by 0.97 feet and proposed Lot 8B is deficient by 1.49 feet. Since the Subdivision Regulations require a 50-foot right-of-way width and the current right-of-way width on this portion of Broad Bay Road is 40 feet, the applicant is proposing a 5-foot right-of-way reservation, which will be dedicated prior to the development of these lots. The proposed home styles provide high quality and attractive buildings that will be compatible with the variety of housing sizes and styles in this area. Except for the lot width, the proposed lots meet all the dimensional standards for property zoned R-10 Residential District.  Considerations: Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Regulations provide criteria for which City Council may grant Subdivision Variance requests. The Planning Commission concurred with Staff’s recommendation of the approval of this request. The applicant has agreed to Condition 3 that the dedication for the road width will occur after the plat is recorded and prior to any development of the lots. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff Report. Seven (7) letters of support and thirty (30) letters of opposition were received for this application. Three (3) speakers were in attendance at the Planning Commission hearing and expressed concerns that the new homes will change the look and feel of the neighborhood, decrease property values, and affect the privacy of surrounding neighbors. Packet Pg. 419  7.L.a Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Page 2 of 2 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of this request by a vote of 8 to 2. 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled “PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION OF LOT 8 BROAD BAY COLONY,” prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, dated April 13, 2022, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The exterior of the proposing residential dwellings shall substantially adhere in appearance, size, colors, and materials to the elevations entitled “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8A”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8B”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, and renderings entitled “ELLIS – LOT 8A – 1-17-2024” and “ELLIS – LOT 8B – 1-17-2024”, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning & Community Development. 3. The applicant shall reserve for dedication to the City toward making Broad Bay Road a minimum 50 feet wide. Said reservation for future dedication shall be a minimum of five (5) feet wide along Broad Bay Road that fronts the proposed lots, and the dedication shall be completed prior to the development or redevelopment of any of the proposed lots.  Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Location Map Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Letter(s) of Support (7) Letter(s) of Opposition (30) Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 420  7.L.a Applicant & Property Owner Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section City Council District 8 Request Subdivision Variance (Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations) Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Marchelle Coleman Location 2620 Broad Bay Road GPIN 1499688214 Site Size 26,681 square feet AICUZ Less than 65 dB DNL Watershed Chesapeake Bay Existing Land Use and Zoning District Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential South Broad Bay Road Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential East Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential West Single-family dwelling / R-10 Residential Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg. 1421  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section • The subject lot is zoned R-10 Residential District and is currently developed with a single-family dwelling. The lot was established by plat in March 1952 (M.B. 29, PG. 48), prior to the adoption of the City’s Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. • The applicant seeks to subdivide the property to create two residential lots. While both lots would meet the 10,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement, the lots will not meet the lot width requirement of 80 feet measured at the 30-foot front yard setback. Therefore, a variance to Section 4.4(b) of the Subdivision Regulations is required. • As shown below, the proposed lots, Lots 8A and 8B, meet the dimensional standards for properties in the R-10 Residential District, except for the minimum lot width requirement. Required Proposed Required Proposed Required Minimum Minimum Street Line Street Line Minimum Proposed Proposed Lot Lot Width in Lot Width in Frontage in Frontage in Lot Area in Lot Area R-10 R-10 R-10 R-10 R-10 (square feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (square feet) Lot 8A 80 79.03* 64 85.02 10,000 12,757 Lot 8B 80 78.51* 64 84.77 10,000 10,924 *Variance Requested Zoning History # Request 1 SVR (Creation of new lots without direct access to public 3 1 2 street) Approved 01/22/2002 SVR (Lot width reduction) Approved 05/13/1997 3 SVR (Creation of new lots without direct access to public street) Approved 01/28/1997 2 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Evaluation & Recommendation Section 9.3 of the Subdivision Regulations states: No variance shall be authorized by the Council unless it finds that: A. Strict application of the ordinance would produce undue hardship. B. The authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and the character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg. 2422  7.L.a C. The problem involved is not of so general or recurring a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of general regulations to be adopted as an amendment to the ordinance. D. The hardship is created by the physical character of the property, including dimensions and Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section topography, or by other extraordinary situation or condition of such property, or by the use or development of property immediately adjacent thereto. Personal or self-inflicted hardship shall not be considered as grounds for the issuance of a variance. E. The hardship is created by the requirements of the zoning district in which the property is located at the time the variance is authorized whenever such variance pertains to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance incorporated by reference in this ordinance. The request to address the reduction in lot width for Lots 8A and 8B is, in Staff’s opinion, acceptable. Staff believes the proposed lots will not be out of character with the surrounding area and finds the variance request to be compliant with the conditions of Section 9.3 and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s vision for the Suburban Area. Development within this area focuses on creating and maintaining great neighborhoods. Achieving this goal reflects on the ability for developments to maintain and enhance the existing neighborhood, to be compatible with surroundings, and provide quality and attractive buildings with effective buffering and livability. Staff finds the proposed buildings to be high quality and attractive. Condition 2 is recommended to ensure that the design and exterior building materials shown are developed in substantial conformance to the elevations, as conditioned. As stated previously, it is the intent of the applicant to subdivide the 23,681 square foot site into two lots for the development of two single-family dwellings, which requires a variance to the lot width requirement of 80 feet. Proposed Lots 8A and 8B meet all the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for the R-10 Residential District, except for the lot width requirement, both of which are just shy of the required 80 feet. Section 4.1 (m) of the Subdivision Regulations, requires a 50-foot right-of-way width; however, the existing right-of-way is currently 40-feet wide, as originally platted in MB 29, PG 48. The applicant has agreed to provide a five-foot right-of-way reservation, as noted in Condition 3. The applicant is agreeable to this condition that the reservation for the road width will occur and will take place immediately after the plat is recorded and prior to any development of the lots. A reservation for this future dedication will be shown on the subdivision plat. Based on these considerations, Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions listed below. Recommended Conditions 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled “PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION OF LOT 8 BROAD BAY COLONY,” prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, dated April 13, 2022, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The exterior of the proposing residential dwellings shall substantially adhere in appearance, size, colors, and materials to the elevations entitled “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8A”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8B”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, and renderings entitled “ELLIS – LOT 8A – 1-17-2024” and “ELLIS – LOT 8B – 1-17-2024”, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning & Community Development. 3. The applicant shall reserve for dedication to the City toward making Broad Bay Road a minimum 50 feet wide. Said reservation for future dedication shall be a minimum of five (5) feet wide along Broad Bay Road that fronts the proposed lots, and the dedication shall be completed prior to the development or redevelopment of any of the proposed lots. Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg. 3423  7.L.a Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Comprehensive Plan Recommendations The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this property as being within the “Suburban Area.” Guiding principles have been established in the Comprehensive Plan to guard again possible threats to the stability of the Suburban Area and to provide a framework for neighbors and places that are increasingly vibrant and distinctive. The Plan’s primary guiding principle for the Suburban Area is to create “Great Neighborhoods,” and to support those neighborhoods with complementary non-residential uses in such a way that working together the stability and sustainability of the Suburban Area is ensured for now and the future. Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts This site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. There does not appear to be any significant natural resources or cultural features associated with the site. Traffic Impacts Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Land Use 2 – 10 ADT Broad Bay Road No Data Available 1 No Data Available 1 Proposed Land Use 3 – 20 ADT 1 Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by one single-family 3 as defined by two single-family dwelling dwellings Master Transportation Plan (MTP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Broad Bay Road is a two-lane residential street. No CIP projects are planned for this area. Public Utility Impacts Water Each proposed parcel must connect to City water with a separate and exclusive water service line and meter. The existing water service line may be reused or must be abandoned. There is an existing 12-inch City water main along Broad Bay Road. Sewer Each proposed parcel must connect to City sanitary sewer with a separate and exclusive sanitary sewer lateral and cleanout. The existing sanitary sewer lateral may be reused. There is an existing 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main and a 6-inch City sanitary sewer force main along Broad Bay Road. Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg. 4424  7.L.a Public Outreach Information Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Planning Commission • The applicant reported that they met with the surrounding property owners. 8 letters of support have been received by Staff. • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 12, 2024. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot Beacon on Sundays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of www.VirginiaBeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. City Council • As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Tuesdays, April 2, 2024 and April 9, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on April 1, 2024. • The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city-council on April 12, 2024. Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg. 5425  Existing Site Layout Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg. 6426 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Subdivision Variance Exhibit Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg. 7427 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Proposed Building Rendering for Lot 8A Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg. 8428 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Proposed Building Elevation for Lot 8B Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg. 9429 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Site Photos Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg.10430 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Disclosure Statement Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg.11431 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  Disclosure Statement Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg.12432 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  X Disclosure Statement 3/26/2024 Marchelle L. Coleman Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 7.L.a PacketPagePg.13433 Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-5692. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Carl R. Ellis, Jr. Agenda Item 10 PacketPagePg.1434  R10 7.L.a o m Dr R10 Absal Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property in ive Pen R10 sula a d Absalo R o Ro a Bay B ay R10 d d ad Ro a Br o m Driv o ad e ay R ro a dB a d B o R R10 ss o M Site Property Polygons Zoning Building Carl R. Ellis, Jr 2620 Broad Bay Road µ Feet Packet Pg. 435 0 20 40 80 120 160 200 240  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 10 Carl R Ellis, Jr RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Madam Clerk: Okay, our next agenda item is agenda item number 10, Carl R. Ellis Jr., a subdivision variance of section 4.4(b) of the subdivision regulations at 2620 Broad Bay Road in District 8. Mr. Bourdon: Madam Chair, members of the Planning Commission, Eddie Bourdon Virginia Beach attorney represent Dr. Carl Ellis Jr. who's the applicant on this case. I have given you all, provided you all a lot of handouts. I think it's extremely important that you take a moment or two to review them. I'm going to discuss them with you. But start with very simply, Ms. Ellis has owned this property for many, many years. It is a parcel that was created on the original subdivision plat of Broad Bay Colony, which I've given you a copy of. It happens to also share its western boundary with a prior subdivision, different subdivision, different development called Broad Bay Point, and at that, where the two come together, the two parcels that were developed by separate developers on separate flats, you'll notice that the road, which I've circled on that plat in orange makes an extreme immediate turn to the northeast, and not even a turn, and creates a situation that is really the contributor to the need for this one de minimis little variance. You'll note that the two lies to be created both exceed in one case by 2,750 square feet, and the other by 924 square feet, the minimum lot size. The street frontage, you will also note 85.02 feet and 84.77 feet. It is only at the setback that one is a little less than a foot short, and the other is a little less than a foot, and a half short, but the lots are well, much larger than, than the 10,000 foot requirement. The homes are very attractive. They're also will be expensive, and they're also in keeping with the redevelopment that has been occurring over decades in both Broad Bay Colony and Broad Bay Point. Staff recommendation is acceptable. The conditions are acceptable. Most importantly, this is what has been an ongoing redevelopment over many, many, many years. You will note on what I handed out to you, a lot of lots that are, outlined in yellow, and have either the 1, 2, 3 for the 3 that were the 3 subdivisions, 1 being a 3 lot, other two being 2 lot, re-subdivisions that were done from the original platted lots, and the others labeled A through G being subdivisions of existing Packet Pg. 436  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section original lots under these plats that were subdivided into two lots of which there are I believe 22. There are 22 current lots just on this little postage stamp on the composite map. That are highlighted, that were subdivisions of the original parcels as platted in in the plats that I gave you, and I've highlighted those original on those two plats as well. This is absolutely the way that the newer, more valuable homes have developed at, and not on slabs, but up, and let me hasten to answer a question that was asked this morning. This property, the only CVPA impact is on the front. Of the property, not where the houses are to be built. There's no RPA encroachment at all with these two lots. The property next door, I've labeled G, and I've provided you with the subdivision plat of that property that was done in the year 2000. That piece of property had just barely 20, 000 square feet, and two lots that were created that just barely get over the 10,000 square feet. Very, very much similar to these only smaller. No right-of-way dedication or reservation, even though the subdivision order is the same then as it is now, was required. Had it been, they wouldn't have had, 10,000 square feet per lot. The lot that's labeled one, the two lot subdivision there, there's no road frontage. That was a variance for that one. The variances on lot two, or the variance on lot two was for a 70 feet lot width, instead of a 80 feet lot with granted, and again the three, which is kind of off the side Bay Road that also was a lot frontage variance to not lot frontage, on a public street. So, the notion that this is somehow, I'm going to set some precedent, not at all. This is the type of organic redevelopment that we're blessed in the City of Virginia Beach to have. This property has been zoned R-10 since we got, since we've had zoning. It just so happens that it was platted before we had zoning or subdivision ordinance, if we'd had a zoning and a subdivision ordinance, the issue with the starting of this plat, and the road the way it begins, which creates the problem would not have occurred, but we didn't have a subdivision ordinance when these subdivisions were put to record back in the early 1950s, but the simple fact of the matter is there, of the people who, and I've given you petitions of folks who are in favor of this application, the folks who've given you opposition, 13 of those people that y'all had the map bought this morning with the stars, 13 of those are on lots that are re-subdivisions of original lots, and these roads are not 50 foot roads on Bay Island, they're narrower right of ways, and the value difference is incredible. The property adjacent that I've listed is G. It's given you the addresses, and it's got, it's got actually a picture of both of the houses. The original, before it was subdivided into two lots, the land was valued at 100,000, just the land, and the, the year after it was subdivided, each lot was worth 130,000 or 260,000. The houses on those lots today, the lots are worth 400 or assessed at $431,000 to $432,000 each, and the total values are Packet Pg. 437  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section $790 and $770. The lots at number two, those lots are all and the houses are all well over a million, and when the property was subdivided into three lots, the value of the whole thing was in the mid-four range. So it's organic redevelopment, and the houses that were built originally have zero stormwater. There was no stormwater ordinance for many years after these plats, even after we had zoning. So the redevelopment, as it's been occurring, at least on those lots, there is, and they will be required for quality reasons, for stormwater quality, they will have to implement BMP’s for that. They’re not on site holding of the water, other than to meet the quality requirements. So that’s another benefit. So there will be stormwater quality benefit, by the redevelopment of this lot, just as been the case with the majority of the other ones that are noted on the exhibit I have passed out to everyone, and so just to be clear, when I read this petition, there’s a lot of things in there that are just not factually accurate with the history of these properties, and these two subdivisions on the Bay Island, and these will be high quality homes that will not do anything other than. The negative is, it continues to increase in property values, and the taxes that along with it. I will be happy to answer any questions? Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Are there any questions? Mr. Mauch? Mr. Mauch: How many of the 22 previously subdivided lots are opposed to subdividing? Mr. Bourdon; There’re 13, that I counted on the map, because I had all those map. There were 13 of those including Ms. Black, who subdivided lots directly adjacent to Dr. Ellis. Ms. Black tried to get Dr. Ellis to provide her with some additional land because the initial survey that she had done on her property actually indicate that she had less than 10,000 square feet. Then she had another surveyor go out and survey it to determine that she had a little more than 10,000 square feet, but Dr. Ellis knew that, you know, if he was gonna subdivide what she planned on doing he needed every inch of the width, so he couldn't give her property off of his east side, so she would have 10,000, but then, a surveyor certified that she did have 10,000, a little over 10,000, but that was without having to do any right-of-way dedication, which Dr. Ellis is able to do. Mr. Mauch: Maybe this is for staff, but with what he's provided about this being done before a President already being there? Is that the case in your eyes? Ms. Cuellar: I don't have a copy of what was provided because I wanted to make sure there was enough for the group. Packet Pg. 438  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Mr. Mauch: You can answer that question after review. You don't have to wait. Seems like Commissioner Byler might have a question in the meantime. Ms. Cuellar: Commissioner Byler. Ms. Byler: Attorney Bourdon, you indicate if I heard correctly that there were 13 other lots of this, and they're now opposing, but in fact, they're sitting on redeveloped lots, correct? Mr. Bourdon: Thirteen of the people who sent in the form letters, they all sent in, are people who live in houses on lots that were created by dividing the original lots. Ms. Byler: Previously re-subdivided. So are all 13 of those lots that did not meet the minimum 80 foot width requirement? Mr. Bourdon: No, I didn't suggest that. I didn't suggest that. It's a character of the neighborhood argument, and that they'll devalue, that there'll be cheap lots, that those, that are set forth, but there are three just in this area. There are others, there are others on Bay Island. These aren't the only three that were approved, these subdivisions that were approved with variances either. There are other, this, I just used this -- just this little subset. There are plenty more. I didn't do the whole, you know, the whole Bay Island. This was sufficient to show that it's, it's in character with and it's, again, it, these lots, you know, these two lots are well over 10,000 square feet versus, and that's with giving the city a right-of-way, you know, dedication, which couldn't be done next door. They wouldn't have had -- they wouldn't have had 10,000 square feet, and these are lot. Ms. Byler: Right. So they're in excess of the square footage requirement, but they still do not meet the 80 feet width requirement. Mr. Bourdon: Don't meet the 80 feet width at the 30 feet setback. Ms. Byler: I just wanted to make sure we weren't -- that we were comparing different items because they're not the same. Those 13 who objected. Mr. Bourdon: People are free to object. I'm no one suggesting, that I didn't say they couldn't object. I simply said that the basis for their objections stated in their form letter isn't accurate. These aren't cheap lots. It's not changing the character of the neighborhood. They're -- it's been going on in this neighborhood for decades, and will continue to. Packet Pg. 439  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Ms. Byler: It's just that these lots don't meet the 80 feet required minimum. That's the distinction. Some have been approved with variances because they don't meet street frontage or lot width. Not just these three that are shown in, that the city has noted in that area, there are others on the island that are in the same. Whether or not anyone, and I didn’t look. I mean, it’s possible. I don’t recall trying to make the determination, I was looking in there, and you had the red stars up there, but actually, I do think that I am pretty sure, one of them, but I had to look at the map with the red stars with the one they got the 70 foot, the lot, not the person objecting, that has the lot with the 70 feet frontage instead on the opposite side of Broad Bay Road. Ms. Cuellar: Any other questions? Madam clerk, do we have any speakers on this item? Madam Clerk: Yes, ma’am, we have Stacy Lawler, followed by Robert Lawler. Mr. Lawler: Good afternoon Planning Commission. My name is Rob Lawler. I'm a homeowner at 2032 Long Creek Road in Bay Island. I live within 500 feet of the proposed variance request to allow for the subdivision of a lot at 2620 Broad Bay Road to build two homes. I am here to strongly oppose the subdivision and variance requests. I believe, and my neighbors believe, this request sets an incredibly poor precedent for all planned neighborhoods in Virginia Beach. All zoning laws are enacted for a purpose, and this is especially true, for residential neighborhoods. When these laws are not protected, it compromises the reason people purchase and invest in their communities. The existing lot minimums are in place for a reason. When you start compromising with variance, especially when it's significant, it's building two homes on a lot zone for one, you put the integrity of all neighborhoods on a slippery slope. It is very important to note, 30 neighbors within 500 feet of 2620 Broad Bay Island are very much opposed to this variance request. Conversely, there is one residence within 500 feet in favor. Simple math, 30 against, 1 in favor. All viewers sent copies. A Form Letter that was personally signed, read, and commented on by the 30 people post this variance request. These letters were mailed to Marchelle Coleman, Planning Development City Planner, Virginia Beach on March 7th. Ms. Coleman said she would forward these letters to the Planning Commission, and City Council for review prior to this meeting. I'm assuming you all had a chance to review them. A few, or in this case, the one, should not take precedence over the vast majority of neighbors near the property who opposed this variance request. It's a simple argument. The laws are the laws. Zoning laws are in place for a reason, and I'm asking, on behalf of myself, and the 30 people opposed to this variance, to simply maintain the integrity of the established zoning laws in place. Thank you for your time. Packet Pg. 440  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk: Beth Dubinsky, and Dennis will follow Beth. Ms. Dubinsky: Hello, my name is Beth Dubinsky, and I live at -- my husband and I own 2030 Long Creek Road, and it is adjacent to 2620 Broad Bay Road. The handout that I'm giving, Mr. Ellis Rick's house is in the middle. The Jarvis’s house is next to the White House, and then my house is the one that's pinned, so the majority of my backyard butts up next to Rick's backyard. Both my husband and I, we strongly oppose this request for the zoning variance to subdivide the property. I've only been on Long Creek Road since about 2016, and we were drawn to the property because of the charm of the neighborhood, and the privacy of the backyard. I respectfully disagree that the way of the neighborhood is keeping those, you know, half acre lot, people are bulldozing and building new, which is exactly what my husband and I did. We moved into a house that was built in 62, bought it from the children of the original owner, and much to our surprise, the none of the wiring, and the plumbing was up to code, so we had to do something. We didn't even think to subdivide our lot. We wanted to keep the integrity of the neighborhood and our privacy. I think it is an expectation that when you buy a piece of property in an established neighborhood such as Bay Island, that the property lines that have been there for decades will remain the same. Our backyard, like I said, does directly face Mr. Ellis's backyard and the proposal that he has to put the houses on there is going to, this two story house is going to directly overlook our backyard, and I know that some houses are like that, and that they buy, you know, but that's not the piece of property that we bought, and there's no guarantee how far back on the property he's going to go. I know in the letter that he sent to, you know, walked around the neighborhood, he said that he was going to set the houses as far back as he could on the property, that's going to be right up to my backyard. I would also like to point out that six of the seven letters in support of the variance request live quite far away our pieces of property. There, you know, some of them are almost a mile away, and that’s not gonna affect their daily life and their property. When they go out and sit in their backyard, they're not gonna worry, you know, someone staring down at them. That's about all I have to say, and I just appreciate the time today to speak and have you listen to my thoughts on this issue. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much for being with us. Any questions? Madam Clerk: Our last speaker is Dennis Janikowski. Packet Pg. 441  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Mr. Janikowski: Good afternoon. I'm Dennis Janikowski. Thank you for hearing my perspective today. I am one of the people that is on the next door. I live next door to Rick Ellis. I'm on the subdivided lot that Ms. Black separated years ago. Interestingly, on our size of our lot, there's no windows on the side that were so close to Barbara Black, but on the side of the house facing Rick Ellis, we've got bedroom windows, kitchen windows, living room windows. So part of our personal concern is for our privacy. I have passed out a few things that are maybe also discuss what the lawyer had brought up. For one, I think when you, we bought on the island because when you drive around there, it has character. There's one road in, one road out. The Planning Commission details did not discuss traffic, but the city's been studying traffic and speeding on the island for the last 20 years, and it's a problem. They're about to put in eight speed tables in our neighborhood. So more density in our neighborhood is not super desirable to a lot of people. That's why I think we focused, we went around and with the “Form Letter” and asked the neighbors, the only neighbors within 500 feet. We didn't go out to friends and family that are somewhere else in the neighborhood, and 30 people said that they were opposed to this. They did not want increased density. They did not support the idea of dividing lots. So one of those handouts has just probably the same thing your stars had, but it was reflecting how many people within 500 feet that answered the door because not everybody, the other people didn't oppose only one person. There were two people who opposed, one of them changed their mind, and rather supported. One changed their mind and opposed later on. When it comes to the division of plats that the lawyer brought up, that may be true, or I believe it's true, but I don't know when that happened, but if you drive around the island today, you will see that there are certain homes that it looks like, yep, that's a split lot. One of those handouts that's in there is, I think it's 2000 White Hill Road, and 2029 Hackberry. That's an example of a typical what people are doing when they split the lots. When we moved into the island in 2003, we've been there 24 years. In 2001, we were told there were 384 homes on the island. I've heard recently that there's 410. I can't verify that, but it does say that there has been some precedent for splitting homes. What you normally see when people split homes is they split it with a pretty big nicer home, or they knock down a ranch, and they put a pretty big nice home on that ranch. One of those drawings, I think the context if you just look at the plat that he's suggesting or wants to build on, it doesn't consider the lots that are next door or nearby. So I ask a CAD expert to draw that. I wanted to see what my land and my house looks like right next to his, in part to understand the privacy implications, the flooding Packet Pg. 442  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section implications, what we might have to do to put up landscaping. So we're not looking into their yard, et cetera. Part of what we see in that drawing is a place in our yard. We're like the low part of the saucer bowl. Where we have flooding is kind of right up close to where his house is. So, if they raise the land or if water is not dripping through the way that it does today, we risk increased flooding to our piece of land. I know we're going to have to put in landscaping and suffer costs if we need to, add to the privacy that we have today. So those are personal impacts. Most of what I've been thinking about over the last weeks, and as I talked to all the neighbors was the precedent to the neighborhood. One that drawing that has my house, and the two of his, you will see at least from a Square footage of the footprint of the property. Ours is like 22,00 square feet, and the property adjacent to us would be 1,530 square feet. So that's about 70%. That's also 70% of what he has on the property today. So, it's not putting a nice big house in there, like is the precedent that I'm used to seeing on the island. Thank you very much. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much for being here. Excuse me, we have a question. Commissioner Plumlee. Mr. Plumlee: Do you know if there's any private covenant restricting these lots from subdivision or to a one-single family home? Mr. Janikowski: I don't know if I said in my intro, but I'm an IT guy who happens to live next door, and cares about our neighborhood, and I don't know about that. Mr. Plumlee: But with regards to your title when you bought your house, you don't recall there being a covenant saying this is restricted to one dwelling on this one lot? Mr. Janikowski: No, but I mean, our yard so there was commentary about 20,000 square feet that got divided into two pieces and, both being, I guess, just barely above 10,000. We think rules are rules, and if it's 10,000, it's a good enough, if the minimum wasn't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum. Mr. Plumlee: So it's not subdividing, it's just simply the size of the lot. Mr. Janikowski: On our lot, I think you're asking. Mr. Plumlee: With regards to this proposal, I don't want to mistake you. You're saying, you object to it subdividing because of the size of the lot, not because of the actual subdivide, was that fair? Packet Pg. 443  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Mr. Janikowski: We object to the division of the lot because it's not meeting the code. There's no homeowner's association to enforce what is supposed to happen about the look and feel of our neighborhood, except for the zoning laws. He does not meet the frontage requirement. There was commentary that we don't meet the frontage requirement, but that must not have been a requirement when our house was built, so I can't do anything about that. Mr. Plumlee: Understood. Ms. Cuellar: I think we needed this back. There's a little note. Madam Clerk: That was our last speaker, Madam Chairman. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, did you say that was the last speaker? Okay, thank you. I'd like to open this up for discussion. Mr. Bourdon: So just to be clear, there is no, there are no deed restrictions that restrict the division of lots in either of these two original neighborhoods, and these homes that are proposed will meet all setback requirements, and they don't exceed or even get to the height limit. The issue or the concern about, somebody being to look into your backyard that exists everywhere, and there's again, there's nothing non-conforming about these two lots, other than the width at the 30 feet setback, which is caused by the way the road was platted, which is a hardship, and it's unique to this piece of property. These issues sometimes, unfortunately, turn into popularity contests, but land use isn't a popularity contest. The fact that Dr. Ellis is not building a super large house, is then used as an objection. I don't quite get that. He could have built a bigger house, and have more rooms looking across the fence, or whatever the case may be, but the orientation, and the gentleman who spoke his, where he lives was one of the last that was subdivided. I don't believe, and I didn't assert that it didn't meet the lot square footage, nor the lot width from my, from what I understand. It's one on the opposite side of the street from him that that's the case, and didn't have the frontage on the street. There's been a varying interpretation over the years as to whether these streets, the side streets or public streets or not, and that's one of the reasons why there are a whole lot of variances on the island that aren't just shown here, because they, for many years, were not treated as being public streets. So, you're getting variances to split lots that didn't even have frontage on a public street, because the City didn't maintain them because they were way below the required width the street. That's not the case with this application at all, and as is demonstrated this issue that it's somehow going to be, you know, other than privacy, which isn't something that land use doesn't give you the right to restrict, what someone else can do on their property that might look into or be able to see whether they're looking or not, is irrelevant Packet Pg. 444  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section into your backyard. So, staff's recommendation is consistent with the development pattern that has taken place here. The variance is de minimis, and it will have no impact on the location of the dwellings on either lot at all, and again, the lots aren't being overbuilt at all, and there is no CVPA impact at all. Happy to answer any questions Ms. Cuellar: Commissioner Mauch? Mr. Mauch: I just wanted to get clarification on what he had said earlier, and I think y'all have had some time to research. What were the, was what he said, have there been multiple variances in this similar fashion? Ms. Gordon: Yes, there have been. We've looked just within about a 500 foot radius across the street on Broad Bay is the variance we spoke about this morning that has seven foot. There were three lots, and there was a seven foot deficiency, then there are other lots, maybe four more or four applications that encompass multiple lots, that either had no frontage on a public street, they are on private streets, or they constituted a flag lot. Mr. Mauch: Were there any that had multiple variances on multiple lots or variances on multiple lots? Ms. Gordon: Yes, there are some on Hackberry, Bay Road. As Mr. Bourdon mentioned some of these are private streets, so there is no frontage on a public street in those cases, and they cover multiple lots. Mr. Bourdon: I could add, we could have done this, so that one of the lots didn't need a variance and the other one did. I mean, the number, I mean, we tried to keep them so they were as absolutely close to everything as we could. That's why they're so de minimis. But, you know, that's the reason for it. Again, it's because of the strange angle of the road that we have this issue. Ms. Cuellar: Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson: Ms. Gordon, I don't think this matters too much, but I'm just curious. Is Dr. Ellis planning on living in one of these houses and selling the other? Mr. Bourdon: Yeah, yes, he is, yes, and he's in Richmond. He is testifying in a court hearing today. He wanted to be here, but, he hoped it would get settled, but it didn't get settled. But yes, that's correct. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Now we'll open it for discussion. Packet Pg. 445  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Mr. Plumlee: I'll just put my thoughts in real quick. I think when it comes to the architectural character of a neighborhood, you look to the originators of the neighborhood. Typically, when there is an intent to restrict the size of the lots to one home, you'll find a private covenant even going back to the 40’s and 50’s before there was a City of Virginia Beach. Then the city overlays its policy of keeping the architectural character of a neighborhood. I've been through Broad Bay Island many times, and I've seen it, I think what is really unique about it is that it doesn't have a uniform character. There is not monotony in the design, and I don't find it offensive to subdivide this lot, to accommodate these, and make the small variance. There have been plenty of variances, so when we talk about precedence, I ask, what did the people who develop this neighborhood intend? It doesn't appear as though they intended to restrict these from being subdivided or they would have made -- many neighborhoods in Virginia Beach, have private covenants restricting the subdivision. There was a famous case Judge Morgan, who's now deceased, took all the way to the Supreme Court of Virginia trying to subdivide his lot in Bay Colony, but there was a private covenant on the property, and the Supreme Court upheld it, and even a federally appointed lifetime appointment couldn't overcome that straight up law. So, I would support this. Ms. Cuellar: Is there any other discussion? So I just wanted to comment, this is in my district. I find the opposition to be significant. I do think it's important that we respect our current zoning standards. So I'll be opposing this today. So, do we have a motion? Mr. Plumlee: I'll move to approve. Ms. Hippen: Second. Ms. Cuellar: So we have a motion by Commissioner Plumlee, a second by Commissioner Hippen. Is there anyone abstaining today? Madam Clerk? Madam Clerk: The vote is open. By a vote of 8 to 2, item number 10 has been recommended for approval. Packet Pg. 446  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section AYE 8 NAY 2 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar NAY Estaris NAY Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE CONDITIONS 1. The applicant/owner shall submit a subdivision plat to the City of Virginia Beach, subject to the review and approval of the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to the recordation, which shall be in substantial conformance to the submitted exhibit entitled “PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION OF LOT 8 BROAD BAY COLONY,” prepared by Gallup Surveyors & Engineers, dated April 13, 2022, a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Department of Planning & Community Development. 2. The exterior of the proposing residential dwellings shall substantially adhere in appearance, size, colors, and materials to the elevations entitled “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8A”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, “ PROPOSED TWO STORY FRAME SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PREPARED FOR RICK ELLIS LOT 8B”, prepared by Fentress Home Design, dated 7/11/2022, and renderings entitled “ELLIS – LOT 8A – 1-17-2024” and “ELLIS – LOT 8B – 1-17-2024”, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file in the Department of Planning & Community Development. 3. The applicant shall reserve for dedication to the City toward making Broad Bay Road a minimum 50 feet wide. Said reservation for future dedication shall be a minimum of five (5) feet wide along Broad Bay Road that fronts the proposed lots, and the dedication shall be completed prior to the development or redevelopment of any of the proposed lots. Packet Pg. 447 Packet Pg. 448 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 449 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 450 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 451 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 452 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 453 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 454 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 455 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 456 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 457 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 458 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 459 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 460 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 461 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 462 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 463 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 464 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 465 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 466 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 467 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 468 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 469 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 470 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 471 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 472 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 473 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 474 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 475 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 476 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 477 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 478 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 479 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 480 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 481 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Memorandum For Planning Administration and City Council Members: This letter serves as an understanding that as a resident/owner of property on Broad Bay Island who lives within 500 feet of 2620 Broad Bay Road, I strongly oppose any subdivision & variance request of 2620 Broad Bay Road for the following reasons: 1. This variance would inherently change the look & feel of our neighborhood. 2. This variance would set a precedent to our existing zoning laws thus adversely changing the future complexion of our planned neighborhood which has existed for over 60 years. 3. Our existing lot minimums (R-10) were established by neighborhood design. Changing them could lead to City-wide interest in revising current code and/or lot requirements. Homes were purchased (in part) because of existing zoning laws and neighborhood "feel". The fundamental changes would negate the reasons existing owners bought and invested in this neighborhood. 4. This would negatively impact existing nearby home values by introducing lower-cost lots & smaller homes. 5. When homes are built closer together than the original Broad Bay Colony/Broad Bay Island plan, it affects the surrounding neighbors' privacy and views. 6. I f allowed, additional homes in the neighborhood would require additional support infrastructure. Our planned neighborhood was not designed to support the potential increase. There are currently —410 homes on Broad Bay Island. Sincerely, Signature Print Name M G r \ - ; A n G • 0 \ 4 &I) Address ? 4 , 5 2 , c o c a & k , i ( ( d \ Date 3/q/aL Comments Packet Pg. 482  7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Memorandum For Planning Administration and City Council Members: This letter serves as an understanding that as a resident/owner of property on Broad Bay Island who lives within 500 feet of 2620 Broad Bay Road, I strongly oppose any subdivision & variance request of 2620 Broad Bay Road for the following reasons: 1. This variance would inherently change the look & feel of our neighborhood. 2. This variance would set a precedent to our existing zoning laws thus adversely changing the future complexion of our planned neighborhood which has existed for over 60 years. 3. Our existing lot minimums (R-10) were established by neighborhood design. Changing them could lead to City-wide interest in revising current code and/or lot requirements. Homes were purchased (in part) because of existing zoning laws and neighborhood "feel". The fundamental changes would negate the reasons existing owners bought and invested in this neighborhood. 4. This would negatively impact existing nearby home values by introducing lower-cost lots & smaller homes. 5. When homes are built closer together than the original Broad Bay Colony/Broad Bay Island plan, it affects the surrounding neighbors' privacy and views. 6. I f allowed, additional homes in the neighborhood would require additional support infrastructure. Our planned neighborhood was not designed to support the potential increase. There are currently —410 homes on Broad Bay Island. Sincerely, Signature Print Name Son Roy Addre 2va ate /2.2.4 Comments k‘ipt- Packet Pg. 483 Packet Pg. 484 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section Packet Pg. 485 7.L.a Attachment: 02_ARF Package for Carl R. Ellis, Jr. (3832 : PLA - Carl R. Ellis, Jr (Applicant & Property Owner) Subdivision Variance (Section  VIRGINIA BEACH AVA RE, LLC FOR A STREET CLOSURE RE APPROXIMATELY 813 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF AN UNNAMED, UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO 2375 VIRGINIA BEACH BOULEVARD DISTRICT 3 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 486  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: Ordinance Approving Application of Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC for the Closure of Approximately 813 sq. ft. of an Unnamed, Unimproved Right-of-Way Located Adjacent to 2375 Virginia Beach Blvd. MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024 (Referred Back to the Planning Commission on February 20, 2024)  Background: Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company (the “Applicant”), requested the closure of approximately 813 sq. ft. of an unnamed, unimproved right-of-way (the “Right-of-Way”), adjacent to its property located at 2375 Virginia Beach Blvd., for the purpose of incorporating the closed area into its adjoining property. The application of the adjacent property owner for the closure of the remaining 5,751 sq. ft. portion of the unnamed, unimproved right-of-way was approved by City Council on February 20, 2024.  Considerations: This item was on City Council’s agenda on February 20, 2024; however, due to an advertising error, this application was referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration. The Viewers determined that the closure of the Right-of-Way, with conditions set forth below, will not result in any public inconvenience. There was no opposition to the request.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion by a recorded vote of 10-0 to recommend this request to City Council, with the following conditions: 1. The City Attorney’s Office shall make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the “Policy Regarding Purchase of City’s Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures,” approved by City Council. 2. The Applicant, or the Applicant’s successors and assigns, shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the Right-of-Way into the Packet Pg. 487  7.L.a Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Page 2 of 2 Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent adjoining lots. The resubdivision plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to the final street closure approval. 3. The Applicant, or the Applicant’s successors and assigns, shall verify that no other private utilities exist within the Right-of-Way proposed for closure. If other private utilities do exist, an easement satisfactory to the appropriate utility company must be provided. 4. Closure of the Right-of-Way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved for recordation within one year of the City Council vote to close the Right-of- Way this approval shall be considered null and void.  Attachments: Ordinance (w/ Exhibit A) Staff Report and Disclosure Statement Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Location Map Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 488  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent 1 ORDINANCE APPROVING APPLICATION OF VIRGINIA 2 BEACH AVA RE, LLC FOR THE CLOSURE OF 3 APPROXIMATELY 813 SQ. FT. PORTION OF AN 4 UNNAMED, UNIMPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT 5 TO 2375 VIRGINIA BEACH BLVD. 6 7 WHEREAS, Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company (the 8 “Applicant”), applied to the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to have the 9 hereinafter described portion of an unnamed, unimproved right-of-way discontinued, 10 closed, and vacated; and 11 12 WHEREAS, it is the judgment of the Council that said portion of right-of-way be 13 discontinued, closed, and vacated, subject to certain conditions having been met on or 14 before one (1) year from City Council’s adoption of this Ordinance. 15 16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Virginia 17 Beach, Virginia: 18 19 SECTION I 20 21 That the hereinafter described portion of unimproved right-of-way (the “Right-of- 22 Way”) be discontinued, closed and vacated, subject to certain conditions being met on 23 or before one (1) year from City Council’s adoption of this ordinance: 24 25 ALL THAT certain piece or parcel of land situate, lying and 26 being in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, designated and 27 described as “DENOTES AREA OF PROPOSED STREET 28 CLOSURE FOR VIRGINIA BEACH AVA RE, LLC AREA = 29 APPROXIMATELY 813 S.F. OR 0.019 AC.”, and shown as 30 the hatched area on that certain street closure exhibit 31 entitled: “STREET CLOSURE EXHIBIT OF 6,564 S.F. 32 PORTION OF UNNAMED UNIMPROVED 30’ RIGHT-OF- 33 WAY ON PLAN OF LOTS FOR B.F. OWENS (M.B. 6, P. 34 271) VIRGINIA BEACH”, Scale: 1” = 30’, dated December 8, 35 2023, prepared by Gaddy Engineering Services, LLC, a copy 36 of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 37 38 SECTION II 39 40 The following conditions must be met on or before one (1) year from City 41 Council’s adoption of this ordinance: 42 43 No GPIN Assigned (City Right-of-Way) 44 Adjacent GPIN: 1497-95-4001 Packet Pg. 489  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent 45 1. The City Attorney’s Office shall make the final determination regarding 46 ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be 47 determined according to the “Policy Regarding Purchase of City’s Interest in Streets 48 Pursuant to Street Closures,” approved by City Council. 49 50 2. The Applicant, or the Applicant’s successors and assigns, shall 51 resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the Right-of-Way 52 into the adjoining lots. The resubdivision plat must be submitted and approved for 53 recordation prior to the final street closure approval. 54 55 3. The Applicant, or the Applicant’s successors and assigns, shall verify that 56 no other private utilities exist within the Right-of-Way proposed for closure. If other 57 private utilities do exist, an easement satisfactory to the appropriate utility company 58 must be provided. 59 60 4. Closure of the Right-of-Way shall be contingent upon compliance with the 61 above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions 62 noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved for recordation 63 within one year of the City Council vote to close the Right-of-Way this approval shall be 64 considered null and void. 65 66 SECTION III 67 68 1. If the preceding conditions are not fulfilled on or before April 15, 2025, this 69 Ordinance will be deemed null and void without further action by the City Council. 70 71 2. If all conditions are met on or before April 15, 2025, the date of final 72 closure is the date the street closure ordinance is recorded by the City Attorney. 73 74 3. In the event the City of Virginia Beach has any interest in the underlying 75 fee, the City Manager or his designee is authorized to execute whatever documents, if 76 any, that may be requested to convey such interest, provided said documents are 77 approved by the City Attorney’s Office. 78 79 SECTION IV 80 81 A certified copy of this Ordinance shall be filed in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit 82 Court of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, and indexed in the name of the CITY OF 83 VIRGINIA BEACH (as “Grantor”) and VIRGINIA BEACH AVA RE, LLC (as “Grantee”). 84 85 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on this ______ day 86 of _____________. 2024. Packet Pg. 490  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: __________________________ __________________________ Planning Department City Attorney CA16279 \\vbgov.com\dfs1\applications\citylaw\cycom32\wpdocs\d001\p043\00942517.doc R-2 March 28, 2024 Packet Pg. 491  7.L.a Applicant Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 2 Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent City Council District 3 Request Street Closure (Portion of an unnamed 30’ ROW) Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Hoa N. Dao Location Adjacent to 2375 Virginia Beach Boulevard Adjacent GPIN 1497954001 Site Size 813 square feet AICUZ Greater than 75 dB DNL; APZ-1 Watershed Chesapeake Bay Existing Land Use Unimproved right-of-way Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North Virginia Beach Boulevard Retail / B-2 Community Business South Interstate 264 East Undeveloped parcels / B-2 Community Business West Retail / B-2 Community Business Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 1 492  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent • Due to an error in the legal advertisement where one of the two adjacent property addresses was not listed in the advertisement, City Council, on February 20, 2024, reverted this portion of the closure request back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration. The adjacent closure request for the 5,751 square feet portion of this 30-foot right- of-way to be absorbed by the Duff’s properties was approved by City Council on February 20, 2024. • The applicant is seeking to close the remaining 813 square foot portion of the 30-foot wide right-of-way between Virginia Beach Boulevard and Interstate 264. • The applicant intends to incorporate the closure area into the existing parking lot of the motor vehicle dealership. 2 1 Zoning History # Request 3 1 STC Approved 02/20/2024 2 CUP (Tattoo Parlor) Approved 11/23/2004 3 CUP (Motor Vehicle Sales) Approved 10/12/1993 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Evaluation & Recommendation A Viewers’ meeting was held on October 20, 2023, that included City Staff from the Departments of Public Works, Public Utilities, Planning & Community Development, and the Office of the City Attorney, to consider this application. The Viewers determined that the proposed closure will not result in any public inconvenience; therefore, the proposed closure is deemed acceptable. Based on these considerations, Staff recommends approval of the proposed Street Closure subject to the conditions listed below. Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 2 493  7.L.a Recommended Conditions Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent 1. The City Attorney’s Office shall make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the “Policy Regarding Purchase of City’s Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures,” approved by City Council. 2. The applicant, or the applicant’s successors and assigns, shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining lots. The resubdivision plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to the final street closure approval. 3. The applicant, or the applicant’s successors and assigns, shall verify that no other private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If other private utilities do exist, an easement satisfactory to the appropriate utility company must be provided. 4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved for recordation within one year of the City Council vote to close the rights-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts The site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. There do not appear to be significant natural or cultural resources associated with the site. Public Outreach Information Planning Commission • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 12, 2024. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Wednesdays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of www.VirginiaBeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 3 494  7.L.a City Council • As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Tuesdays, April 2, 2024 and April 9, Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on April 1, 2024 • The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city-council on April 12, 2024. Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 495  Proposed Street Closure Exhibit Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 5 496 7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent  Site Photo Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 6 497 7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent  Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 7 498 7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent  Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 8 499 7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent  Disclosure Statement Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 PacketPage Pg. 9 500 7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-5692. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC Agenda Item 2 Page Packet Pg.10 501  Virginia B each Bou 7.L.a le vard Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC B2 oa d B2 dge R n Bri Lond o 264 I1 B2 Site Property Polygons Zoning Building Virginia Beach AVA RE, LC 2375 Virginia Beach Boulevard µ Feet 0 1530 60 90 120 150 180 Packet Pg. 502  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 2 Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Mr. Coston: Thank you. Are there any oppositions to this item being placed on the Consent Agenda? Okay, our next item is item two. Is there a representative? Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record. Mr. Bourdon: Thank you, Mr. Coston. Madam Chair, members of the commission, Eddie Bourdon, Virginia Beach Attorney representing Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC on this street closure that this body unanimously approved on consent back in October, and then it was discovered that it hadn't been properly advertised as the rest of the street closure was, which has been completed, and all the four conditions as recommended in October, and today are the same, and we agree to those, and appreciate being on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Coston: Thank you, sir. Is there any opposition to this item being placed on the consent agenda? Mr. Anderson: Due to an error in the legal advertisement where one of the two adjacent property addresses were not listed in the advertisement, City Council, on February 20th, 2024, reverted to this portion of the closure request back to Planning Commission for reconsideration. The adjacent closure request for a 5,751 square feet portion of this 30-foot right-of-way to be absorbed by Duff’s Properties was approved by City Council on February 20th. The applicant is seeking to close the remaining 813 square feet portion of the 30-foot wide right-of-way between Virginia Beach Boulevard and Interstate 264. The applicant intends to incorporate the closure area into the existing parking lot of the motor vehicle dealership. For that reason, we put it on consent. Mr. Coston: Thank you. Madam Chair, that was the last item on the consent agenda. The Planning Commission places the following applications on the consent agenda. Items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13. Packet Pg. 503  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Commissioner Coston. Mr. Anderson: So moved. Mr. Plumley: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Plumley. Are there any planning commissioners abstaining on these items on the consent agenda? The motion for approval? The vote is open. Madam Clerk: By a vote of 10 to zero items number 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13, have been recommended for approval. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris AYE Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE CONDITIONS 1. The City Attorney’s Office shall make the final determination regarding ownership of the underlying fee. The purchase price to be paid to the City shall be determined according to the “Policy Regarding Purchase of City’s Interest in Streets Pursuant to Street Closures,” approved by City Council. 2. The applicant, or the applicant’s successors and assigns, shall resubdivide the property and vacate internal lot lines to incorporate the closed area into the adjoining lots. The resubdivision plat must be submitted and approved for recordation prior to the final street closure approval. 3. The applicant, or the applicant’s successors and assigns, shall verify that no other private utilities exist within the right-of-way proposed for closure. If other private utilities do exist, an easement satisfactory to the appropriate utility company must be provided. Packet Pg. 504  7.L.a Attachment: 03_ARF Package for Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (3833 : PLA - Virginia Beach AVA RE, LLC (Applicant) Street Closure Adjacent 4. Closure of the right-of-way shall be contingent upon compliance with the above stated conditions within 365 days of approval by City Council. If the conditions noted above are not accomplished and the final plat is not approved for recordation within one year of the City Council vote to close the rights-of-way this approval shall be considered null and void. Packet Pg. 505  BORN PRIMITIVE, LLC / MODERN SAVAGE INVESTMENTS, LLC FOR MODIFICATION OF PROFFERS TO CONDITIONAL CHANGE OF ZONING RE MODIFY THE CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN AND INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AT 1489, 1477 AND 1469 VIRGINIA BEACH BOULEVARD AND TWO (2) PARCELS DIRECTLY EAST OF 1469 VIRGINIA BEACH BOULEVARD DISTRICT 6 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 506  7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: BORN PRIMITIVE, LLC [Applicant] MODERN SAVAGE INVESTMENTS, LLC [Property Owner] Modification of Proffers to a Conditional Rezoning for the property located at 1489, 1477, & 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard & two parcels directly east of 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard (GPINs 2417057714, 2417150755, 2417059705, 2417152724, 2417154801). COUNCIL DISTRICT 6 MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: Request by the applicant to modify the proffers associated with the 2004 Conditional Rezoning of the property from O-2 Office District and R-5D Residential Duplex District to Conditional I-1 Light Industrial and the 2023 Modification of Proffers in order to develop the site with an office warehouse. More specifically, the applicant seeks to amend Proffer 2 and Proffer 3 to modify the conceptual landscape plan and the building elevations associated with the 2023 approval. The applicant intends to increase the height of the building from 26 feet to 35 feet and add additional and larger windows to break up the mass of the exterior façade. Slight changes are also proposed to the company logo and verbiage on the roof. The proffered landscape plan will be modified to enhance the 25-foot Category II Landscape Buffer along the southern and eastern property lines, to soften the building’s appearance from the adjacent residential properties. The buffer will consist of a mixture of large shrubs, understory trees, and canopy trees to provide a contiguous screening of plant material that grows to a height of 12 to 35 feet at maturity. This enhanced landscaping is in addition to the 8-foot tall vinyl privacy fence previously proposed and approved within the buffer area.  Considerations: The proposed office warehouse is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s land use policies for the Suburban Area and is compatible with the Navy flight operations. The property is located within the greater than 75 dB DNL noise zone and APZ-1, which prohibits the development of incompatible uses, including residential uses. In Staff’s opinion, and the Planning Commission concurred, this is a low intensity use that will have minimal impacts on the surrounding community since it will have minimal customer traffic, generally operates with little to no noise, and typically operates between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. To ensure the use on this site remains compatible with Navy flight operations, Proffer 4 has been Packet Pg. 507  7.L.a Born Primitive, LLC Page 2 of 3 Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property offered by the applicant to limit the use of the property to an office warehouse operation only. The Special Area Development Guidelines for the Suburban Area calls for building materials and colors that reflect and complement the character of the surrounding area, with colors that accent rather than define the building. While the exterior of the office space will include the branded colors of the company, it is a relatively small portion of the structure the majority of which does not abut the residential parcels. The accent colors may not be in full keeping with the guidelines for this area, Staff is amendable to the proposed design, as the majority of the building will be neutral in color and more in character with the surrounding properties. The Special Area Design Guidelines also call for the building to be oriented to the street for pedestrian connectivity with parking in the rear of the buildings. The applicant believed that putting the majority of the parking closer to Virginia Beach Boulevard, instead of the rear near the residences, would result in less impact to the adjacent residential properties. Planning Commission had no objections to this proposed layout. Due to the success of the business, the applicant seeks to increase the height of the building from 26 feet to 35 feet to allow for more clear height within the warehouse for storage. With the proposed increase in building height, the intent of the additional understory and canopy trees is to provide a more enhanced visual buffer of the building façade from the adjacent residential properties. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached staff report. There is no known opposition to this request.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of this request by a vote of 10 to 0. Proffer 1: Proffer numbered two (2) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Proffer” numbered 2 to read as follows: When the Property is developed, it shall be landscaped substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled “CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN & SCHEDULE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE WAREHOUSE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA”, dated 12/4/2023, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter “Landscape Plan”) and incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: Proffer numbered three (3) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Proffer” numbered 3 to read as follows: Packet Pg. 508  7.L.a Born Primitive, LLC Page 3 of 3 Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property When the Property is developed, the exterior of the warehouse with ancillary office area shown on the Concept Plan shall be substantially similar in appearance to and shall utilize the external building materials and architectural features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "NEW WAREHOUSE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE, OCEANA COMMERCE CENTER, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA", dated 12/04/23, prepared by Covington, Hendrix, Anderson Architects, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevations") and incorporated herein by this reference.  Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Location Map Proffer Agreement Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 509  7.L.a Applicant Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Property Owner Modern Savage Investments, LLC Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 City Council District 6 Request Modification of Proffers Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Marchelle Coleman Location 1489, 1477, & 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard & two parcels directly east of 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard GPINs 2417057714, 2417150755, 2417059705, 2417152724, 2417154801 Site Size 4.40 acres AICUZ Greater than 75 dB DNL; APZ-1 Watershed Chesapeake Bay Existing Land Use and Zoning District Undeveloped lots / Conditional I-1 Light Industrial Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North Virginia Beach Boulevard Vacant lots, single-family dwellings, duplex, multi-family dwellings / R-5D Residential, A-12 Apartment District South Single-family dwellings / R-5D Residential East Gas station, single-family dwellings/ B-2 Community Business, R-5D Residential West North Oceana Boulevard Religious use, single-family dwelling / R-5D Residential Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 1510  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property • The applicant is requesting a Modification of Proffers to amend proffers associated with a 2004 Conditional Rezoning and 2023 Modification of Proffers on this Conditional I-1 Light Industrial District zoned property located within the greater than 75 dB DNL noise zone and the Accidental Potential Zone 1 (APZ-1) of the Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ). • The applicant is requesting to modify Proffer 2 and Proffer 3 in the 2023 Proffers to implement the following changes to the previously proffered conceptual landscape plan, building elevations and building renderings: o The proffered landscape plan will be modified to enhance the 25-foot Category II Landscape Buffer along the southern and eastern property lines. The buffer will now consist of a mixture of large shrubs, understory trees, and canopy trees to provide a contiguous screening of plant material. Canopy trees will be installed at 1 ½ inches to 2 inches caliper with a 35-foot height or greater a maturity, understory evergreen trees will be installed at 6 feet and grow between 12 to 35 foot in height at maturity, and large shrubs will be installed at 3 to 4 feet in height and grow to 8 feet or greater at maturity. o The building height will increase from 26 feet at the roof peak to 35 feet. o Additional and larger windows have been added to break up the mass of the exterior façade. o The company logo on the front façade of the building, facing Virginia Beach Boulevard, has been slightly modified, as well as the verbiage on the roof, as depicted. • As shown on pages 9 & 10 of this report, the building elevations will be comprised of red, white, and blue metal panels to align with the company’s branding. The side and rear elevations will be clad with gray metal panels and the north elevation, which fronts Virginia Beach Boulevard, will include a gray stone veneer along the base of the structure. • As proffered, the Conceptual Landscape Plan shows the required building foundation, interior parking lot coverage, and street frontage plantings along with the 25-foot-wide buffer with Category II landscape plantings to screen the site from the residentially zoned properties to the south and east. • The proposed hours of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. 2 Zoning History # Request 1 MDP Approved 04/18/2023 CRZ (O-2 & R-5D to Conditional I-1) Approved 1 3 2 02/24/2004 CUP (Church Expansion) Approved 03/28/2000 CUP (Church) Approved 04/23/1991 CUP (Church) Approved 1/19/1976 3 REZ (R-8 to B-2) Approved 02/14/1983 CUP (Gas Station) Approved 02/14/1983 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 2511  7.L.a Evaluation & Recommendation Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property This request to modify the proffers to amend the conceptual landscape plan, building elevations, and renderings to develop the site with an office warehouse is, in Staff’s opinion, acceptable. The office warehouse is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s land use policies for the Suburban Area. A guiding principle for the Suburban Area is to create “great neighborhoods,” which are stable and sustainable. In Staff’s opinion, the proposed office warehouse is a low intensity use that will have minimal customer traffic and generally operates with little to no noise. As stated previously, operating hours are typically between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., which will have minimal impact on the surrounding residential properties. While the Comprehensive Plan would generally recommend a lower building height to better align with the adjacent residential dwellings, as previously mentioned, the applicant intends to install a more substantial landscape buffer adjacent to the residential properties to better screen the proposed building from the adjacent residences. As stated previously, the property is located within the greater than 75 dB DNL noise zone and the APZ-1. The proposed office warehouse use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s land use policies for this area and is compatible with Naval flight operations. As indicated in Proffer 4, the use of the property shall only be developed as an office warehouse operation. Due to the success of the business, the applicant seeks to increase the height of the building from 26 feet to 35 feet to allow for more clear height within the warehouse for storage. With the proposed increase in building height, Staff recommended that the buffering along the southern property line be enhanced to consist of a mixture of large shrubs, understory trees, and canopy trees spaced in a manner to provide a contiguous screening of plant material along the entire property line, as shown on the modified conceptual landscape plan. In response, the applicant has included a variety of large shrubs, understory trees, and canopy trees in the required buffer area. The intent of the understory and canopy trees is to provide a more enhanced visual buffer of the building façade from the adjacent residential properties with species that mature to a height ranging from 12 feet to 35 feet. The applicant was amendable to this and has proffered a revised conceptual landscape plan to implement these recommendations. Based on the considerations provided above, Staff recommends approval of this request with the modified proffers listed below. Proffers The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: Proffer numbered two (2) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Proffer” numbered 2 to read as follows: When the Property is developed, it shall be landscaped substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled “CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN & SCHEDULE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE WAREHOUSE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA”, dated 12/4/2023, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter “Landscape Plan”) and incorporated herein by this reference. Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 3512  7.L.a Proffer 2: Proffer numbered three (3) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property Proffer” numbered 3 to read as follows: When the Property is developed, the exterior of the warehouse with ancillary office area shown on the Concept Plan shall be substantially similar in appearance to and shall utilize the external building materials and architectural features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "NEW WAREHOUSE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE, OCEANA COMMERCE CENTER, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA", dated 12/04/23, prepared by Covington, Hendrix, Anderson Architects, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevations") and incorporated herein by this reference. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Proffers from 2023 Proffer Agreement The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When the Property is developed, it shall be developed substantially as shown on the exhibit entitled, "CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT FOR BORN PRIMITIVE WAREHOUSE VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated 01/03/23, prepared by TRC Engineers, Inc., which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter "Concept Plan"). Proffer 2: When the Property is developed, it shall be landscaped substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled "CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN & SCHEDULE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE WAREHOUSE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA", dated 01/03/2023, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter "Landscape Plan"). Proffer 3: When the Property is developed, the exterior of the warehouse with ancillary office area shown on the Concept Plan shall be substantially similar in appearance to and shall utilize the external building materials and architectural features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "NEW WAREHOUSE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE, OCEANA COMMERCE CENTER, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA", dated 01/03/23, prepared by Covington, Hendrix, Anderson Architects, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevations"). Proffer 4: When the Property is developed as depicted on the Concept Plan, Landscape Plan and Elevations, its use shall be for office/warehouse. Proffer 5: Further conditions may be required by the Grantee during detailed Site Plan review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 4513  7.L.a Comprehensive Plan Recommendations Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property The Comprehensive Plan recognizes this property as being within the “Suburban Area.” Guiding principles have been established in the Comprehensive Plan to guard against possible threats to the stability of the Suburban Area and to provide a framework for neighbors and places that are increasingly vibrant and distinctive. The Plan’s primary guiding principle for the Suburban Area is to create “Great Neighborhoods,” and to support those neighborhoods with complementary non-residential uses in such a way that ensures the stability and sustainability of the Suburban Area now and in the future. Compatible infill development is encouraged, as long as the use is appropriate, and the building is in scale with the surrounding area. Special Area Development Guidelines call for buildings to be oriented to the street and designed to encourage pedestrian movement. Building massing and height should be appropriate to the surrounding area, as well as provide visual and architectural interest through staggered building placement and varied rooflines. Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts The site is located in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. There does not appear to be any significant natural or cultural resources associated with the site. Traffic Impacts Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Virginia Beach Boulevard 20,850 ADT1 25,100 ADT 1 (LOS 4 “D”) Existing Land Use (vacant I-1 zoned parcel) – 0 ADT Existing Zoning 2 – 114 ADT N. Oceana Boulevard No Data Available 9,900 ADT 1 (LOS 4 “D”) Proposed Land Use 3 – 102 ADT 1 Average Daily Trips 2 as defined by 48,000 3 4 as defined by 40,600 square feet LOS = Level of Service square feet of warehouse, of warehouse/office existing approved use Master Transportation Plan (MTP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Virginia Beach Boulevard, in the vicinity of this site, is a four-lane minor arterial urban roadway. Virginia Beach Boulevard has a variable width right-of -way, and the MTP shows a divided roadway with an ultimate right-of-way width of 100 feet. N. Oceana Boulevard is a two-lane local roadway. There are no CIP projects located in the vicinity of this site. Public Utility Impacts Water There are two 12-inch City water mains along Virginia Beach Boulevard and a six-inch and 12-inch water main along N. Oceana Boulevard. Since there are multiple water service connections fronting the site, any unused water services must be abandoned in accordance with Public Utilities Design Standards Manual Section 4.9. Sewer There are two eight-inch City sanitary sewer gravity mains along Virginia Beach Boulevard and an eight-inch along N. Oceana Boulevard. Since there are multiple sewer service connections fronting the site, any unused sanitary sewer laterals must be abandoned in accordance with Public Utilities Design Standards Manual Section 3.9. Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 5514  7.L.a Public Outreach Information Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property Planning Commission • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 12, 2024. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot Beacon on Sundays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of www.VirginiaBeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. City Council • As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Tuesdays, April 2, 2024 and April 9, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on April 1, 2024. • The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city-council on April 12, 2024. Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 6515  Proposed Conceptual Landscape Plan Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 7516 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Proposed Conceptual Landscape Plan Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 8517 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Proposed Building Elevations Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 PacketPage Pg. 9518 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Proposed Building Renderings Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.10519 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  2023 Proffered Conceptual Landscape Plan Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.11520 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  2023 Proffered Building Elevations Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.12521 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  2023 Proffered Building Renderings Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.13522 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Site Photos Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.14523 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Site Photos Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.1524 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Disclosure Statement Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.16525 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Disclosure Statement Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.17526 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  X Disclosure Statement 3/26/2024 Marchelle L. Coleman Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.18527 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Disclosure Statement Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.19528 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Disclosure Statement Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.20529 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  Disclosure Statement Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Packet Page Pg.21530 7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-5692. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Born Primitive, LLC Agenda Item 11 Page Packet Pg.22531  7.L.a R5D R5D R5D A12 R5D R5D B2 Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) rd Virginia Beach Bouleva I1 B2 Oceana Boulevard I1 I1 I1 I1 I1 R5D R5D Hiteshew Place Hiteshew Place R5D R5D Site Property Polygons Zoning Building Born Primitive, LLC 1489, 1477, & 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard & two parcels directly east of 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard µ Feet Packet Pg. 532 0 20 40 80 120 160 200 240  7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 11 Born Primitive, LLC RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Ms. Cuellar: Thank you. Okay, our next item number, number 11. Madam Clerk: Agenda item number 11, Born Primitive LLC is a modification of proffer's request at 1489, 1477, and 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard, and the two parcels directly east of 1469 Virginia Beach Boulevard in District 6. Mr. Bourdon: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all very much. Madam Chair, Eddie Bourdon, Virginia Beach attorney representing the applicant born primitive, and the parent company, same ownership that just owns the land. This is a startup company here in Virginia Beach, their Navy Seal, and some other former well actually is his, I think, significant other, but they started this business in their house. They produce active wear, and compete with the Nikes, but, they have created a very good, a very good following, very good, and have grown exponentially, and all this was in the write up when we did this a year ago, roughly, and unfortunately, I didn't bring all that with me today, but they have, and they've gotten a grant from the Economic Development Authority they're, they're, they have a small office, and they've been working, you know, with their warehouse down off of, I think, Dam Neck Road. So they're building this for their, future and for their growth, which is continuing to expand and expand. When they were doing the final design going through the site plan their architect said, you know, if you just raise this a little bit, you can put a whole another level of storage that you get to with the lifts. Based on the way their business is growing, so greatly that's the reason why we're here, just to have the building be a little bit taller. It's not because there are going to be more people coming to it. It's a warehouse. The office in the front, is no different than it was when it was approved before. It had been approved for a series of flex suites, that late John Waller had gotten this property rezoned, and we just came in, and modified his proffers. He never had developed the property, and made it a better situation, and the building is not at the rear setback at all. It's in the middle of the lot, so there's plenty of room. We had an outreach the first time and one lady, all, everybody got noticed behind it, and they're just two blocks up the street at the First Colonial Road, east of the First Colonial Road entrance. They've got a building there that they're working out of temporarily, and she came, but she had talked to all of her neighbors went back, and took all the plans, all Packet Pg. 533  7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property the neighbors, and got back to say everybody thinks it's great, and so we didn't do that again. I mean, I didn't feel it was necessary to go back, and talk to them, and they didn't. No one at any opposition before, and I don't believe any of anybody does today. Mr. Plumlee: Just the reason why I didn't want to put this through consent as I think we put it through consent in April of last year, something like that, and there hadn't been a word from anyone in my district about this, but then construction hadn't started, and there hadn't been any breaking of the ground or any calling attention to it, so I felt as though we should at least have a hearing today to allow people to have time if they're able, you know, to get out here. I've not heard any objection to it, and I support it, and I appreciate business going in this corridor. We need business in this corridor, but I didn't want to deny the people of my district an opportunity to come forward at least, and have the public hearing. So, thank you. Mr. Bourdon: I appreciate it, and they have, as Marshall told you, they have instantaneously agreed to do all the additional landscaping that that staff requested. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. I can open up the floor for discussion, or I can entertain a motion. Mr. Plumlee: I'll move to approve. Ms. Byler: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Are there any commissioners abstaining? We have a motion by Commissioner Plumlee, a second by Commissioner Byler. Madam Clerk: The vote is now open. By a vote of 10 to 0, agenda item number 11 has been recommended for approval. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris AYE Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE Packet Pg. 534  7.L.a Attachment: 04_ARF Package for Born Primitive, LLC (3834 : PLA - Born Primitive, LLC (Applicant) Modern Savage Investments, LLC (Property PROFFERS The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: Proffer numbered two (2) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Proffer” numbered 2 to read as follows: When the Property is developed, it shall be landscaped substantially as depicted on the exhibit entitled “CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLAN & SCHEDULE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE WAREHOUSE, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA”, dated 12/4/2023, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter “Landscape Plan”) and incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: Proffer numbered three (3) set forth in the 2023 Proffers is hereby deleted and replaced with the following “New Proffer” numbered 3 to read as follows: When the Property is developed, the exterior of the warehouse with ancillary office area shown on the Concept Plan shall be substantially similar in appearance to and shall utilize the external building materials and architectural features as depicted on the exhibit entitled "NEW WAREHOUSE FOR BORN PRIMITIVE, OCEANA COMMERCE CENTER, VIRGINIA BEACH, VA", dated 12/04/23, prepared by Covington, Hendrix, Anderson Architects, which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council and is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning & Community Development (hereinafter referred to as the "Elevations") and incorporated herein by this reference. Packet Pg. 535  VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY DBA DOMINION ENERGY VIRGINIA / USA ENTERTAINMENT, LC FOR A CONDITIONAL CHANGE OF ZONING FROM CONDITIONAL B-2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT TO CONDITIONAL I-1 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT RE CONSTRUCT AN OFFICE / WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RE BULK STORAGE YARD AT 1585 DAM NECK ROAD DISTRICT 5 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 536  7.L.a Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY DBA DOMINION ENERGY VIRGINIA [Applicant] USA ENTERTAINMENT, LC [Property Owner] Conditional Rezoning (Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional I-1 Light Industrial District) & Conditional Use Permit (Bulk Storage Yard) for the property located at 1585 Dam Neck Road (GPIN 2405848720) COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: The applicant, Dominion Energy, seeks to rezone 13.8 acres from Conditional B-2 Community Business District to Conditional I-1 Light Industrial District to construct an office/warehouse building. In conjunction with the rezoning request, the applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit request for a Bulk Storage Yard to store equipment used to support transmission operations in the area. The property is located on Dam Neck Rd, adjacent to the Corporate Landing Business Park and is located within the greater than 75 dB DNL noise zone of AICUZ. The property was previously rezoned in 1996 from AG-1 Agricultural District to Conditional B-2 along with a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate an Indoor Recreation Facility; however, the facility was never constructed and the site remains wooded today. Temporary access to the site is proposed from Dam Neck Road; however, upon completion of Twin Mills Road to the west, the Dam Neck Road access will be closed and permanent access will be established on Twin Mills Road. The proposed 72 parking spaces exceed the parking requirement by 7 spaces. Equipment such as steel transmission poles and related hardware, pallets, and approximately 12-24 gas cylinders for inert gas (sulfur hexafluoride) are proposed to be stored on site. The outdoor storage area will be screened by a six-foot tall opaque fence with Category VI landscaping. Some of the existing vegetation on site will be retained and be used toward meeting the screening requirements. Preliminary review of the conceptual stormwater management strategy, which includes a BMP, indicates the project can successfully comply with the stormwater requirements. Packet Pg. 537  7.L.a Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia Page 2 of 4 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Considerations: While this portion of Dam Neck Road is access controlled, the proposed temporary access point on Dam Neck Road has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Traffic Engineering staff. The adjacent property, to be developed with an e-commerce facility, will include the construction of a new public road, Twin Mills Road, that is estimated to be completed in 2025. At such time, the access point on Dam Neck Road will be closed, a one-foot no ingress/egress easement will be dedicated along the entire frontage of Dam Neck Road, and a new access point for this parcel will be established on Twin Mills Road. Additionally, the proposed use generates significantly less traffic volume compared to what could be developed under the current Conditional B-2 zoning designation. The proposed office and bulk storage yard are compatible uses within AICUZ. The Navy reviewed these requests and did not raise any objection. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff Report. There is no known opposition to this request.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of these items on the Consent Agenda, by a recorded vote of 10-0. Proffers for CRZ: Proffer 1: When developed, the Property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the conceptual site plan entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (the “Concept Plan”), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 2: The quality of architectural design and materials of the office building constructed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformity with the exhibit entitled “DOMINION ENERGY-VIRGINIA BEACH, CONCEPT SKETCH”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Baskervill (the “Elevations”), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 3: Landscaping installed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformity with that shown on the exhibit entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., (the “Landscape Plan”), a copy of which is on Packet Pg. 538  7.L.a Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia Page 3 of 4 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. Proffer 4: Freestanding signage located on the Property shall be monument-style, no larger than eight feet (8’) in height, and shall be constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 5: Any dumpster located on the Property will be screened from adjacent public streets by an enclosure constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 6: The final stormwater management plan submitted to the Development Services Center (DSC) during the site plan review process for the development of the Property shall comply with applicable City Stormwater Management ordinance(s). A preliminary stormwater analysis in connection with the proposed development of the Property has been submitted to the City Planning Department. Proffer 7: Vehicular access along the Property’s Dam Neck Road frontage may be provided substantially as depicted on the Concept Plan; however, such access shall be closed and removed once alternative access to and from the Property is available by means of a completed and dedicated public road adjoining the western boundary of the Property. Once alternative access is completed and operational, a continuous 1’ no ingress-egress easement will be dedicated along the Property’s frontage on Dam Neck Road. Proffer 8: Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Conditions for CUP: 1. Upon closure of the temporary access point on Dam Neck Road, the area shall be restored and revegetated with a 30-foot wide landscape buffer in a manner consistent with (at maturity) the proposed 30-foot landscape buffer along Dam Neck Road. 2. Prior to final site plan approval, the following shall be provided: Packet Pg. 539  7.L.a Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia Page 4 of 4 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power a. A Wetland Delineation along with an approval/confirmation letter from the applicable state or federal agency(ies) having jurisdiction shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development. b. A Lighting Plan in accordance with Sections 252 and 254 of the Zoning Ordinance, or as amended, shall be approved by the Department of Planning and Community Development. c. A Site Plan depicting onsite amenities, which shall be subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Planning and Community Development.  Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Location Map Proffer Agreement Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 540  7.L.a Applicant Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Agenda Items Dominion Energy Virginia Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Property Owner USA Entertainment, LC 3&4 Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 City Council District 5 Requests #3 - Conditional Rezoning (Conditional B-2 to Conditional I-1) #4 - Conditional Use Permit (Bulk Storage Yard) Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Hoa N. Dao Location 1585 Dam Neck Road GPIN 2405848720 Site Size 13.83 acres AICUZ Greater than 75 dB DNL Watershed Southern Rivers Existing Land Use and Zoning District Wooded parcel / B-2 Community Business Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North Dam Neck Road Wooded parcel / AG-1 Agricultural South Office, wooded parcel / I-1 Light Industrial, AG-1 Agricultural East Wooded parcels / H-1 Hotel, O-1 Office West Warehousing (future) / I-1 Light Industrial Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 1541  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power • In 1996, City Council approved a rezoning of this 13.83 acre parcel from AG-1 Agricultural District to Conditional B-2 Community Business District along with a Conditional Use Permit request to construct and operate an Indoor Recreation Facility. The recreational facility was never constructed. • The applicant now seeks to rezone the property to Conditional I-1 and construct a 21,216 square foot office building for approximately 50 employees. The applicant also seeks a Conditional Use Permit request for a Bulk Storage Yard to store equipment used to support transmission operations in the area. Equipment such as, steel transmission poles and related hardware, pallets, and approximately 12-24 gas cylinders (inert gas - sulfur hexafluoride) are proposed to be stored on site. Each gas cylinder is approximately 58 inches tall and 30 inches in circumference. • The property is located within the greater than 75 dB noise zone of the AICUZ. The proposed office and bulk storage yard are compatible uses within this noise zone. The Navy reviewed these requests and did not raise any objection. • The site will utilize temporary access from Dam Neck Road until the future road, Twin Mills Road, is constructed on the western side of this parcel. At such time, the access point on Dam Neck Road will be closed. • The proffered plan depicts a pond on the western side of the parcel for stormwater management. • 72 parking spaces are provided, exceeding the parking requirement of 65 parking spaces for this site. • The outdoor storage area will be screened by a six-foot tall opaque fence with Category VI landscaping. Existing vegetation onsite will be preserved to meet screening requirements for the proposed uses. • The office building is proffered to consist of gray metal panels and masonry brick with a slanted roof. The proposed building design and materials will be compatible with the surrounding area. 2 Zoning History # Request 1 MDP Approved 06/07/2022 CRZ (AG-1 & AG-2 to Conditional I-1) Approved 08/04/2015 CUP (Bulk Storage Yard) Approved 08/04/2015 5 2 CRZ (AG-1 & AG-2 to Conditional I-1) Approved 01/04/2022 1 4 3 CRZ (AG-1 & AG-2 to Conditional I-1) Approved 09/07/2021 MDP Approved 12/07/2021 MDP Approved 06/25/1996 4 CRZ (AG-1 to Conditional H-1 & O-1) Approved 04/22/2003 5 CRZ (AG-1 to Conditional B-2) Approved 10/29/1996 3 CUP (Indoor Recreation Facility) Approved 10/29/1996 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 2542  7.L.a Evaluation & Recommendation Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Staff finds the proposed development, acceptable. The proposed rezoning of the property to Conditional I-1 Light Industrial District and Conditional Use Permit for a bulk storage yard would complement the research/business park development in this vicinity. The property is adjacent to the Corporate Landing Business Park and the future Amazon’s warehouse that is currently under construction. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the Special Economic Growth Area 3 (SEGA) – South Oceana area that calls for high quality employment, corporate parks and light industrial uses. The proposed use generates significantly less traffic volume compared to what could be developed under the current Conditional B-2 zoning designation. While this portion of Dam Neck Road is access controlled, the proposed temporary access point on Dam Neck Road has been reviewed and determined acceptable by Traffic Engineering staff. The adjacent property, to be developed with an e-commerce facility, will include the construction of a new public road, Twin Mills Road, that is estimated to be completed in 2025. At such time, the access point on Dam Neck Road will be closed, a one- foot no ingress/egress easement will be dedicated along Dam Neck Road, and a new access point for this parcel will be established on Twin Mills Road. As the property is located within the greater than 75 dB DNL noise zone, the proposed use and list of materials to be stored on site has been vetted through the Navy and no objections were raised. The materials will be stored inside an area that is enclosed by a six-foot tall privacy fence and a Category VI landscape buffer, meeting the bulk storage yard screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The parcel will be cleared in the areas of the proposed building, parking, BMP, and storage area, and the remaining existing vegetation on site will be used to toward meeting the screening requirements. Staff is recommending a condition to require the applicant install on site amenities such as outdoor picnic tables and pedestrian trail for the employees. The types of amenities proposed will be determined during site plan review. As the site drains into the Southern Rivers Watershed, a conceptual stormwater management strategy was submitted and reviewed by Staff. Staff agrees the project can successfully comply with the stormwater requirements. Final design and detailed updates will be made during site plan submittal to ensure conformance with all requirements set forth in the Public Works Design Standards Manual and Stormwater Management Ordinance. Based on these considerations, Staff is recommending approval of these requests, subject to the proffers and conditions listed below. Proffers The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When developed, the Property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the conceptual site plan entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (the “Concept Plan”), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 3543  7.L.a Proffer 2: The quality of architectural design and materials of the office building constructed on the Property, when developed, Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power shall be in substantial conformity with the exhibit entitled “DOMINION ENERGY-VIRGINIA BEACH, CONCEPT SKETCH”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Baskervill (the “Elevations”), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 3: Landscaping installed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformity with that shown on the exhibit entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., (the “Landscape Plan”), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. Proffer 4: Freestanding signage located on the Property shall be monument-style, no larger than eight feet (8’) in height, and shall be constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 5: Any dumpster located on the Property will be screened from adjacent public streets by an enclosure constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 6: The final stormwater management plan submitted to the Development Services Center (DSC) during the site plan review process for the development of the Property shall comply with applicable City Stormwater Management ordinance(s). A preliminary stormwater analysis in connection with the proposed development of the Property has been submitted to the City Planning Department. Proffer 7: Vehicular access along the Property’s Dam Neck Road frontage may be provided substantially as depicted on the Concept Plan; however, such access shall be closed and removed once alternative access to and from the Property is available by means of a completed and dedicated public road adjoining the western boundary of the Property. Once alternative access is completed and operational, a continuous 1’ no ingress-egress easement will be dedicated along the Property’s frontage on Dam Neck Road. Proffer 8: Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. Staff Comments: Staff has reviewed the Proffers listed above and finds them acceptable. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed the agreement and found it to be legally sufficient and in acceptable legal form. Recommended Conditions 1. Upon closure of the temporary access point on Dam Neck Road, the area shall be restored and revegetated with a 30-foot wide landscape buffer in a manner consistent with (at maturity) the proposed 30-foot landscape buffer along Dam Neck Road. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 4544  7.L.a 2. Prior to final site plan approval, the following shall be provided: a. A Wetland Delineation along with an approval/confirmation letter from the applicable state or federal Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power agency(ies) having jurisdiction shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development. b. A Lighting Plan in accordance with Sections 252 and 254 of the Zoning Ordinance, or as amended, shall be approved by the Department of Planning and Community Development. c. A Site Plan depicting onsite amenities, which shall be subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Planning and Community Development. Comprehensive Plan Recommendations The Comprehensive Plan designates this area of the city as being within the Special Economic Growth Area 3 (SEGA) – South Oceana. This site is also impacted by high noise zones. The SEGAs are located adjacent to NAS Oceana and have significant economic value and growth potential, targeting land uses compatible with military uses. The City supports development of the SEGAs consistent with AICUZ provisions and the City’s economic growth strategy. The Comprehensive Plan designates the SEGA as an area where high quality employment, corporate parks and light industrial uses are recommended. The Comprehensive Plan recommends that measures to mitigate negative impacts on adjoining stable residential areas be part of development proposals in this area. Mitigation measures should include adequate screening, and light and noise attenuation in building and site design. Natural & Cultural Resources Impacts The property is within the Southern Rivers Watershed. Drainage in the Southern Rivers watershed is highly impacted by the presence of high ground water, poorly draining soils, and high‐water surface elevations in downstream receiving waters. There are no known cultural resources on the site. Traffic Impacts Street Name Present Volume Present Capacity Generated Traffic Existing Land Use 2a – 0 ADT 1 1 4 Dam Neck Road 24,400 ADT 39,700 ADT (LOS “D”) Existing Zoning 2b – 7,150 ADT Proposed Land Use 3 – 300 ADT 1 Average Daily Trips 2aas defined by a undeveloped 3 4 as defined by a 21,216 square LOS = Level of Service parcel feet office building 2bas defined by a 13.83-acre parcel zoned B-2 Master Transportation Plan (MTP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) This portion of Dam Neck Road is a four-lane divided, access-controlled, major suburban arterial, with one-hundred- sixty-five-foot (165’) right-of-way width. The MTP designates it as a six-lane roadway. There are no CIP projects planned for this portion of Dam Neck Road. There is a private development project under construction to the west of this site that will build a three lane public collector roadway from Dam Neck Road to London Bridge Road. This road, which is proposed to be named Twin Mills Road, will have a traffic signal and turn lanes at the Dam Neck Road intersection. Construction of Twin Mill Road is estimated to be completed in 2025. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 545  7.L.a Stormwater Impacts Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Project Stormwater Design Staff Summary This project consists of a new building, parking lot, and access drives for Dominion Energy at 1585 Dam Neck Road, located east of Twin Mills Road. This project will include a stormwater management facility to support the proposed improvements. Stormwater runoff from a majority of the site currently drains north towards the Dam Neck Road right-of-way, which ultimately outfalls to West Neck Creek. A small portion of the eastern perimeter of the site currently drains east towards the existing public storm system along Perimeter Parkway, which ultimately outfalls to Redwing Lake. The onsite improvements will be directed into a proposed wet pond that will be designed to treat for both water quality and water quantity before discharging into the existing public drainage system along Dam Neck Road. Based on the information provided by Kimley Horn in the Preliminary Drainage Study, the DSC agrees that the proposed conceptual stormwater management strategy can successfully comply with the stormwater requirements. Final design and detailed updates will be made during site plan submittal to ensure conformance with all requirements set forth in the Public Works Design Standards Manual and Stormwater Management Ordinance. More detailed project stormwater information is listed below. Project Information Total project area: 13.83 acres Pre-Development impervious area: 0 acres Post-Development impervious area: 7.41 acres Stormwater Management Facility Design Information Type of facility proposed: Wet Pond Description of outfall: Stormwater runoff from the site will be treated by a proposed wet pond that will discharge into the public drainage system along the Dam Neck Road right-of-way. Downstream conveyance path: Runoff leaving the site will be directed towards the Dam Neck Road right-of-way, which is part of the Upper West Neck Creek Drainage Basin. West Neck Creek leads into the North Landing River, and ultimately into Back Bay. Back Bay drains through the Currituck Sound and into the Atlantic Ocean. Public Utility Impacts Water The site must connect to City water. There is a 12-inch City water main with 8-inch stub along Perimeter Parkway and a 20-inch City water transmission main along Dam Neck Road. Sewer The site must connect to City sanitary sewer. There is a 10-inch City sanitary sewer gravity main along Perimeter Parkway, a 42-in HRSD sanitary sewer force main along Dam Neck Road, and a 6-inch City sanitary sewer force main located within a public utility easement on the adjacent western property. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 6546  7.L.a Public Outreach Information Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Planning Commission • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 12, 2024. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Wednesdays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of https://virginiabeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. City Council • As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Tuesdays, April 2, 2024 and April 9, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on April 1, 2024 • The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city-council on April 12, 2024. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 7547  7.L.a Proposed Site/Landscape Plan Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 PacketPage Pg. 8548  Proposed Elevation Plan Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a PacketPage Pg. 9549 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Proposed Elevation Plan Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.10550 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Proposed Elevation Plan Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.11551 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Proposed Elevation Plan Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.12552 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Site Photo Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.13553 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.14554 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.1555 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.16556 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.17557 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.18558 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.19559 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.20560 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  Disclosure Statement Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 7.L.a Page Packet Pg.21561 Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-5692. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Virginia Electric and Power Company d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia Agenda Items 3 & 4 Page Packet Pg.22562  AG1 7.L.a am N ec k R oad D Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia H1 AG1 B2 B2 I1 O1 I1 I1 AG1 Site Virginia Electric & Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia Property Polygons Zoning Building 1585 Dam Neck Road µ Feet Packet Pg. 563 0 45 90 180 270 360 450 540  7.L.a Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 3 & 4 Virginia Electric Power Company RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Mr. Coston: Thank you. Items 3 and 4, Virginia Electric Power Company. Doing business as Dominion Energy for Conditional Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit. Is there a representative? Mr. Beaman: Mr. Coston, Madam Chair, members of the commission, for the record, my name is Rob Beaman. I'm a local land use attorney with the Troutman Pepper Law Firm, here today on behalf of the applicant Dominion Energy. We've had a chance to review the conditions. They're acceptable, and we certainly appreciate being on the Consent Agenda. Thank you very much. Mr. Coston: Is there any opposition to this item being placed on the Consent Agenda? We've asked Commissioner Byler, if she will read this item into the record. Ms. Byler: This is a conditional rezoning, and a conditional use permit application. The property is located at 1585 Dam Neck Road. The applicant now seeks to rezone the property to conditional I-1, and construct a 21,216 square foot office building for approximately 50 employees. The applicant also seeks a conditional use permit request for a bulk storage yard to store equipment used to support transmission operations in the area. The property is located within the greater 75 db noise zone of AICUZ, which is air installation compatibility use zone. Oceana Naval Air Station has no objection, and the staff has recommended this for approval. The conditions are acceptable to the applicant, and it is appropriate to be on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Coston: Thank you. Madam Chair, that was the last item on the consent agenda. The Planning Commission places the following applications on the consent agenda. Items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Commissioner Coston. Mr. Anderson: So moved. Packet Pg. 564  7.L.a Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Mr. Plumley: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Plumley. Are there any planning commissioners abstaining on these items on the consent agenda? The motion for approval? The vote is open. Madam Clerk: By a vote of 10 to zero items number 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13, have been recommended for approval. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris AYE Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE PROFFERS: The following are proffers submitted by the applicant as part of a Conditional Zoning Agreement (CZA). The applicant, consistent with Section 107(h) of the City Zoning Ordinance, has voluntarily submitted these proffers in an attempt to “offset identified problems to the extent that the proposed rezoning is acceptable,” (§107(h)(1)). Should this application be approved, the proffers will be recorded at the Circuit Court and serve as conditions restricting the use of the property as proposed with this change of zoning. Proffer 1: When developed, the Property shall be developed in substantial conformity with the conceptual site plan entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (the “Concept Plan”), a copy of which has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, is on file with the Virginia Beach Department of Planning, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Packet Pg. 565  7.L.a Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Proffer 2: The quality of architectural design and materials of the office building constructed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformity with the exhibit entitled “DOMINION ENERGY-VIRGINIA BEACH, CONCEPT SKETCH”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Baskervill (the “Elevations”), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. Proffer 3: Landscaping installed on the Property, when developed, shall be in substantial conformity with that shown on the exhibit entitled “VIRGINIA BEACH EAST, PREPARED FOR DOMINION ENERGY, VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN”, dated December 22, 2023, and prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., (the “Landscape Plan”), a copy of which is on file with the Department of Planning, has been exhibited to the Virginia Beach City Council, and is incorporated herein by this reference. The exact species of the various types of landscaping shall be determined at final site plan review. Proffer 4: Freestanding signage located on the Property shall be monument-style, no larger than eight feet (8’) in height, and shall be constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 5: Any dumpster located on the Property will be screened from adjacent public streets by an enclosure constructed of materials compatible with those used for the buildings located on the Property. Proffer 6: The final stormwater management plan submitted to the Development Services Center (DSC) during the site plan review process for the development of the Property shall comply with applicable City Stormwater Management ordinance(s). A preliminary stormwater analysis in connection with the proposed development of the Property has been submitted to the City Planning Department. Proffer 7: Vehicular access along the Property’s Dam Neck Road frontage may be provided substantially as depicted on the Concept Plan; however, such access shall be closed and removed once alternative access to and from the Property is available by means of a completed and dedicated public road adjoining the western boundary of the Property. Once alternative access is completed and operational, a continuous 1’ no ingress-egress easement will be dedicated along the Property’s frontage on Dam Neck Road. Packet Pg. 566  7.L.a Attachment: 05_ARF Package for Virginia Electric and Power Company dba Dominion Energy Virginia (3835 : PLA - Virginia Electric & Power Proffer 8: Further conditions lawfully imposed by applicable development ordinances may be required by the Grantee during detailed site plan and/or subdivision review and administration of applicable City Codes by all cognizant City agencies and departments to meet all applicable City Code requirements. CONDITIONS: 1. Upon closure of the temporary access point on Dam Neck Road, the area shall be restored and revegetated with a 30-foot wide landscape buffer in a manner consistent with (at maturity) the proposed 30-foot landscape buffer along Dam Neck Road. 2. Prior to final site plan approval, the following shall be provided: a. A Wetland Delineation along with an approval/confirmation letter from the applicable state or federal agency(ies) having jurisdiction shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development. b. A Lighting Plan in accordance with Sections 252 and 254 of the Zoning Ordinance, or as amended, shall be approved by the Department of Planning and Community Development. c. A Site Plan depicting onsite amenities, which shall be subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Planning and Community Development. Packet Pg. 567  TERRY MOORE MIFFLETON / CHARLES & TERRY MIFFLETON FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RE SHORT TERM RENTAL AT 303 ATLANTIC AVENUE, UNIT 403 DISTRICT 5 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 568  7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: TERRY MOORE MIFFLETON [Applicant] CHARLES & TERRY MIFFLETON [Property Owners] Conditional Use Permit (Short Term Rental) for the property located at 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403 (GPIN 24273224031620) COUNCIL DISTRICT 5 MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Short Term Rental in a two-bedroom, 941 square-foot unit within the Dolphin Run Condominiums. There are no current or past zoning violations associated with the subject property. This condominium has not previously been advertised or rented as a Short Term Rental  Considerations: Short Term Rentals are prevalent in this portion of the City with a total of ±60 previously approved Conditional Use Permits for Short Term Rentals within a half mile radius. Dolphin Run Condominiums was granted a historical exception to the Short Term Rental parking requirements of one space per bedroom; therefore, only one parking space is required for the entire unit, which is provided within the condominium’s parking lot. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff Report. There is no known opposition to this request.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of this item on the Consent Agenda, by a recorded vote of 10-0. 1. The following conditions shall only apply to the dwelling unit addressed as 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403, and the Short Term Rental use shall only occur in the principal structure. 2. An annual (yearly) STR Zoning Permit must be obtained from the Department of Planning and Community Development (Zoning Administration) before using the dwelling for Short-Term Rental purposes. Packet Pg. 569  7.L.a Terry Moore Miffleton Page 2 of 4 Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property 3. Off-street parking shall be provided as required by Section 241.2 and 2303(b)(a)(i)(ii) of the City Zoning Ordinance or as approved by City Council. 4. For properties located within the boundaries of the Residential Parking Permit Program (RPPP), while the Short Term Rental use is active, parking passes issued for the subject dwelling unit(s) through the RPPP shall be limited to two (2) resident passes only. Guest and temporary passes through the RPPP shall not be permitted. 5. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of approval. The renewal process of this Conditional Use Permit may be administrative and performed by the Planning Department; however, the Planning Department shall notify the City Council in writing prior to the renewal of any Conditional Use Permit for a Short Term Rental where the Short Term Rental has been the subject of neighborhood complaints, violations of its conditions or violations of any building, housing, zoning, fire or other similar codes. 6. No events associated with the Short Term Rental shall be permitted with more than the allowed number of people who may stay overnight (number of bedrooms times two (2)) on the property where the Short Term Rental is located. This Short Term Rental may not request or obtain a Special Event Permit under City Code Section 4-1. 7. The owner or operator must provide the name and telephone number of a responsible person, who may be the owner, operator or an agent of the owner or operator, who is available to be contacted and to address conditions occurring at the Short Term Rental within thirty (30) minutes and to be physical present at the Short Term Rental within one (1) hour. 8. If, or when, the ownership of the property changes, it is the seller’s responsibility to notify the new property owner of requirements ‘a’ through ‘c’ below. This information must be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. This shall be done within six (6) months of the property real estate transaction closing date. a) A completed Department of Planning and Community Development Short Term Rental Zoning Permit; and b) Copies of the Commissioner of Revenue’s Office receipt of registration; and c) Proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity of at least one million dollars. 9. To the extent permitted by state law, each Short Term Rental must maintain registration with the Commissioner of Revenue's Office and pay all applicable taxes. Packet Pg. 570  7.L.a Terry Moore Miffleton Page 3 of 4 Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property 10. There shall be posted in a conspicuous place within the dwelling a summary provided by the Zoning Administrator of City Code Sections 23-69 through 23- 71 (noise), 31-26, 31-27 and 31-28 (solid waste collection), 12-5 (fires on the beach), 12-43.2 (fireworks), and a copy of any approved parking plan. 11. All refuse shall be placed in automated refuse receptacles, where provided, and comply with the requirements of City Code sections 31-26, 31-27 and 31- 28. 12. Accessory structures shall not be used or occupied as Short Term Rentals. 13. No signage shall be on-site, except that each short term rental shall have one (1) four-square foot sign posted on the building, or other permanent structure or location approved by the Zoning Administrator, that identifies the property as a short term rental and provides the telephone numbers for the Short Term Rental Hotlines in text large enough to be read from the public street. 14. The Short Term Rental shall have no more than one (1) rental contract for every seven (7) consecutive days. 15. The owner or operator shall provide proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity at registration and renewal of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) underwritten by insurers acceptable to the City. 16. There shall be no outdoor amplified sound after 10:00 p.m. or before 10:00 a.m. 17. The maximum number of persons on the property after 11:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. ("Overnight Lodgers") shall be two (2) individuals per bedroom, which number shall not include minors under the age of 16, provided that in no case may the total number of persons staying overnight at the property exceed the number of approved bedrooms multiplied by three (3). 18. The property owner, or their representative, shall provide to the City Planning Department permission to inspect the Short Term Rental property annually. Such inspection shall include: 1) At least one fire extinguisher has been installed inside the unit (in the kitchen) and in plain sight 2) Smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with the building code in affect at the of construction and interconnected. Units constructed prior to interconnection requirements must have a minimum of one smoke alarm installed on every floor of the structure and in the areas adjacent to all sleeping rooms, and when activated, be audible in all sleeping rooms, and 3) All smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors have been inspected within the last twelve months and are in good working order. Properties managed by Short Term Rental Companies certified by the Department of Planning shall only be required to be inspected every three years. The inspection for compliance with the requirements above shall be Packet Pg. 571  7.L.a Terry Moore Miffleton Page 4 of 4 Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property performed by the short term rental management company and be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permitting process. Properties may be inspected annually for compliance with the requirements above by certified Short Term Rental Management Companies or Certified Home Inspectors. The compliance inspection shall be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permit process. 19. A structural safety inspection report shall be provided to the city every three (3) years indicating all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies have been inspected by a licensed design professional qualified to perform such inspection (engineer or architect) and are safe for use. The report must indicate the maximum number of occupants permitted on each level of these structures and placards indicating the maximum number of occupants of all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies must be posted on each level of these structures.  Attachments: Staff Report and Disclosure Statements Location Map STR Vicinity Map Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 572  7.L.a Applicant : Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item Property Owners: Charles & Terry Miffleton 13 Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Planning Commission Public Hearing: March 13, 2024 City Council District 5 Request Conditional Use Permit (Short Term Rental) Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Michaela McKinney Location 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403 GPIN 24273224031620 Site Size 1.03 acres (Private Unit: 941 square feet) Existing Land Use and Zoning District Multi-Family Dwelling / OR Oceanfront Resort Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Districts North 4th Street (Connector Park) Multi-Family Dwellings / OR Oceanfront Resort South 3rd Street (Connector Park) Hotel / OR Oceanfront Resort East Boardwalk Atlantic Ocean, Beach West Atlantic Avenue Civic Use, Public Use Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 1 573  7.L.a Background & Summary of Proposal Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Site Conditions and History • This 45,000 square foot parcel contains the Dolphin Run Condominiums and is zoned OR Oceanfront Resort District. According to City Records, this multi-family condominium was constructed in 1975. • On-street parking is permitted 24-hours per day, therefore any overflow parking beyond the minimum parking spaces required could occur within the public street. • There are no current or past zoning violations on this site. This condominium has not previously been advertised or rented as a Short Term Rental. The current applicant purchased the property in October 2023 and was made aware of the need for a Conditional Use Permit when filing for the STR Permit with the Zoning Division in November 2023. • Since this property was not registered nor paying transient occupancy taxes to the Commissioner of the Revenue prior to July 1, 2018, the property would not be considered a grandfathered Short Term Rental and thus would require a Conditional Use Permit prior to operating. • Known Short Term Rental activity as of January 29, 2024 is shown in the chart below: REGISTERED WITH THE CURRENTLY ADVERTISED LAST KNOWN RENTAL COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE No N/A No Short Term Rentals in the Vicinity Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 2 574  7.L.a Summary of Proposal The applicant submitted a Conditional Use Permit request to operate a Short Term Rental on the subject site. The Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property regulations for Short Term Rental use are identified in Section 241.2 of the City Zoning Ordinance. Specific details pertaining to this application are listed below. • Number of bedrooms in the Short Term Rental: 2 • Maximum number of guests permitted on the property after 11:00 pm: 4 • Number of parking spaces required (1 space per bedroom required; historical exemption made): 1 • Number of off-street parking spaces provided: 1 2 Zoning History # Request 1 STR Approved 07/11/2023 STR Approved 06/20/2023 1 STR Approved 05/16/2023 STR Approved 04/18/2023 STR Approved 11/09/2022 STR Approved 09/14/2022 STR Approved 08/16/2022 STR Approved 07/13/2021 2 COA (Colocation of Antennas) Approved 02/20/2017 Application Types CUP – Conditional Use Permit MDC – Modification of Conditions STC – Street Closure SVR – Subdivision Variance REZ – Rezoning MDP – Modification of Proffers FVR – Floodplain Variance LUP – Land Use Plan CRZ – Conditional Rezoning NON – Nonconforming Use ALT – Alternative Compliance STR – Short Term Rental Evaluation & Recommendation The applicant is requesting to operate a two-bedroom, 941 square-foot Short Term Rental within the Dolphin Run Condominium building. Since the site is located in the Oceanfront Resort (OR) Short Term Rental Overlay District, Short Term Rental use is expected. The parcel is bounded by the Boardwalk, Beach, and Atlantic Ocean to the east, the 4th Street Connector Park to the north, the 3rd Street Connector Park to the south, and Atlantic Avenue to the west. The surrounding area is a mixture of multi-family dwellings, commercial retail, resort hotels, mixed-use buildings, and other resort-oriented uses. There is one assigned parking space associated with this unit in the condominium’s parking lot. According to the City of Virginia Beach Zoning Ordinance, Appendix A, Article 23, Section 2303, (b), a., ii., “There are certain condominium properties that have historically operated as short term lodging units and have not experienced any inconvenience to guests or the surrounding area without the required one (1) parking space per bedroom. Further, such properties are unable to provide the required parking on-site. For these condominium properties, the Zoning Administrator may, at his Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 3 575  7.L.a discretion, require one (1) parking space per dwelling unit similar to the requirement for lodging uses in the Oceanfront Resort District Form Based Code (ORDFBC). Such properties must provide written evidence of their past use and the Zoning Administrator shall find that there is no public inconvenience with the current parking design.” Dolphin Run Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Condominiums is one such property granted a historical exception to the Short Term Rental parking requirements of one space per bedroom; therefore, only one parking space is required for the entire unit. All other requirements of Section 241.2 and Section 2303 of the Zoning Ordinance regulating Short Term Rentals can be reasonably met with this application. The subject property lies along the Atlantic Avenue Corridor, which includes the most prominent frontage of resort- oriented uses at the Oceanfront Resort. According to the Resort Area Strategic Action Plan (RASAP) 2030, residential and mixed-use development in the Resort Area is necessary to achieve the goal of a year-round destination, affording a more walkable, vibrant, engaging community at the Oceanfront Resort. The use of the dwelling as a Short Term rental helps achieve this goal by providing diverse lodging opportunities for visitors seeking unique travel experiences. Based on the considerations above, Staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions listed below. Recommended Conditions 1. The following conditions shall only apply to the dwelling unit addressed as 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403, and the Short Term Rental use shall only occur in the principal structure. 2. An annual (yearly) STR Zoning Permit must be obtained from the Department of Planning and Community Development (Zoning Administration) before using the dwelling for Short-Term Rental purposes. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided as required by Section 241.2 and 2303(b)(a)(i)(ii) of the City Zoning Ordinance or as approved by City Council. 4. For properties located within the boundaries of the Residential Parking Permit Program (RPPP), while the Short Term Rental use is active, parking passes issued for the subject dwelling unit(s) through the RPPP shall be limited to two (2) resident passes only. Guest and temporary passes through the RPPP shall not be permitted. 5. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of approval. The renewal process of this Conditional Use Permit may be administrative and performed by the Planning Department; however, the Planning Department shall notify the City Council in writing prior to the renewal of any Conditional Use Permit for a Short Term Rental where the Short Term Rental has been the subject of neighborhood complaints, violations of its conditions or violations of any building, housing, zoning, fire or other similar codes. 6. No events associated with the Short Term Rental shall be permitted with more than the allowed number of people who may stay overnight (number of bedrooms times two (2)) on the property where the Short Term Rental is located. This Short Term Rental may not request or obtain a Special Event Permit under City Code Section 4-1. 7. The owner or operator must provide the name and telephone number of a responsible person, who may be the owner, operator or an agent of the owner or operator, who is available to be contacted and to address conditions occurring at the Short Term Rental within thirty (30) minutes and to be physical present at the Short Term Rental within one (1) hour. 8. If, or when, the ownership of the property changes, it is the seller’s responsibility to notify the new property owner of requirements ‘a’ through ‘c’ below. This information must be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. This shall be done within six (6) months of the property real estate transaction closing date. a) A completed Department of Planning and Community Development Short Term Rental Zoning Permit; and Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 4 576  7.L.a b) Copies of the Commissioner of Revenue’s Office receipt of registration; and c) Proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity of at least one million dollars. Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property 9. To the extent permitted by state law, each Short Term Rental must maintain registration with the Commissioner of Revenue's Office and pay all applicable taxes. 10. There shall be posted in a conspicuous place within the dwelling a summary provided by the Zoning Administrator of City Code Sections 23-69 through 23-71 (noise), 31-26, 31-27 and 31-28 (solid waste collection), 12-5 (fires on the beach), 12-43.2 (fireworks), and a copy of any approved parking plan. 11. All refuse shall be placed in automated refuse receptacles, where provided, and comply with the requirements of City Code sections 31-26, 31-27 and 31-28. 12. Accessory structures shall not be used or occupied as Short Term Rentals. 13. No signage shall be on-site, except that each short term rental shall have one (1) four-square foot sign posted on the building, or other permanent structure or location approved by the Zoning Administrator, that identifies the property as a short term rental and provides the telephone numbers for the Short Term Rental Hotlines in text large enough to be read from the public street. 14. The Short Term Rental shall have no more than one (1) rental contract for every seven (7) consecutive days. 15. The owner or operator shall provide proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity at registration and renewal of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) underwritten by insurers acceptable to the City. 16. There shall be no outdoor amplified sound after 10:00 p.m. or before 10:00 a.m. 17. The maximum number of persons on the property after 11:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. ("Overnight Lodgers") shall be two (2) individuals per bedroom, which number shall not include minors under the age of 16, provided that in no case may the total number of persons staying overnight at the property exceed the number of approved bedrooms multiplied by three (3). 18. The property owner, or their representative, shall provide to the City Planning Department permission to inspect the Short Term Rental property annually. Such inspection shall include: 1) At least one fire extinguisher has been installed inside the unit (in the kitchen) and in plain sight 2) Smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with the building code in affect at the of construction and interconnected. Units constructed prior to interconnection requirements must have a minimum of one smoke alarm installed on every floor of the structure and in the areas adjacent to all sleeping rooms, and when activated, be audible in all sleeping rooms, and 3) All smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors have been inspected within the last twelve months and are in good working order. Properties managed by Short Term Rental Companies certified by the Department of Planning shall only be required to be inspected every three years. The inspection for compliance with the requirements above shall be performed by the short term rental management company and be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permitting process. Properties may be inspected annually for compliance with the requirements above by certified Short Term Rental Management Companies or Certified Home Inspectors. The compliance inspection shall be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permit process. 19. A structural safety inspection report shall be provided to the city every three (3) years indicating all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies have been inspected by a licensed design professional qualified to perform Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 577  7.L.a such inspection (engineer or architect) and are safe for use. The report must indicate the maximum number of occupants permitted on each level of these structures and placards indicating the maximum number of occupants of all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies must be posted on each level of these structures. Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Public Outreach Information Planning Commission • As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the public notice sign(s) was placed on the property on February 26, 2024. • As required by State Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Wednesdays, February 28, 2024 and March 6, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding the request and the date of the Planning Commission public hearing on February 26, 2024. • This Staff report, as well as all reports for this Planning Commission’s meeting, was posted on the Commission’s webpage of www.virginiabeach.gov/pc on March 7, 2024. City Council • As required by City Code, this item was advertised in the Virginian-Pilot on Tuesdays, March 19, 2024 and March 26, 2024. • As required by City Code, the adjacent property owners were notified regarding both the request and the date of the City Council’s public hearing on March 18, 2024 • The City Clerk’s Office posted the materials associated with the application on the City Council website of https://clerk.virginiabeach.gov/city-council on March 29, 2024. Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 6 578  Site Layout & Parking Plan Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 7 579 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  Site Photos Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 8 580 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  Disclosure Statement Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 PacketPage Pg. 9 581 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  Disclosure Statement Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 Page Packet Pg.10 582 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  X Disclosure Statement 03/27/2024 Garek Hall Hannigan Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 Page Packet Pg.11 583 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  7.L.a Next Steps Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property • Upon receiving a recommendation from Planning Commission, this request will be scheduled for a City Council public hearing. Staff will inform the applicant and/or their representative of the date of the hearing in the upcoming days. • Following City Council’s decision, the applicant will receive a decision letter from Staff. • Once the conditions of approval are in place and/or completed, the applicant must contact the Zoning Division of the Planning Department to obtain verification that the conditions have been met. Contact the Zoning Division at 757-385-8074. • If the request requires land disturbance and/or a subdivision of property, please contact the Development Services Center (DSC) to discuss next steps for site plan/plat review. Contact the DSC at 757-385-4621 or the Development Liaison Team at 757-385-5692. • Please note that further conditions may be required during the administration of applicable City Ordinances and Standards. Any site plan submitted with this application may require revision during detailed site plan review to meet all applicable City Codes and Standards. All applicable permits required by the City Code, including those administered by the Department of Planning / Development Services Center and Department of Planning / Permits and Inspections Division, and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, are required before any approvals allowed by this application are valid. • The applicant is encouraged to contact and work with the Crime Prevention Office within the Police Department for crime prevention techniques and Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) concepts and strategies as they pertain to this site. Terry Moore Miffleton Agenda Item 13 Page Packet Pg.12 584  OR OR tree t 4t h S tr eet 4t hS if ic Ave nue OR OR c Pa n ue ve e OR n t ic A la OR At ic A ve St r eet RT3 nu 3rd St r eet A t lant 3rd OR OR Site Property Polygons Terry Moore Miffleton Packet Pg. 585 Zoning Building 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403 µ 7.L.a Feet Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property 0 20 40 80 120 160 200 240  STR VICINITY MAP TERRY MOORE MIFFLETON Packet Pg. 586 7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property  7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Virginia Beach Planning Commission March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 13 Terry Moore Miffleton RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Mr. Coston: Thank you. The next item on our agenda is item 13, it's a short-term rental at 303 Atlantic Avenue. Is there anyone here to represent this item today? Please state your name for the record. Mr. Miffleton: Yes, Brian Aubrey Miffleton, on behalf of a mother, Terry Moore Miffleton regarding the Conditional Use Permit for the short-term rental. Mr. Coston: Are all of the are the conditions acceptable to you? Mr. Miffleton: Yes, sir. Mr. Coston: Thank you. You may be seated. We've asked Commissioner Parks, if he would read this item into the record. Mr. Parks: Thank you. The applicant is requesting to operate a two-bedroom, 941 square-foot short-term rental within the Dolphin Run Condominium building. Since the site is located in the Oceanfront Resort short-term rental overlay district, short-term rental use is accepted. The space, or the unit is equipped with one parking spot, meeting the parking, and hearing no oppositions, is why this was placed on the Consent Agenda. Thank you. Mr. Coston: Thank you. Madam Chair, that was the last item on the consent agenda. The Planning Commission places the following applications on the consent agenda. Items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Commissioner Coston. Mr. Anderson: So moved. Mr. Plumley: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Plumley. Are there any planning commissioners abstaining on these items on the consent agenda? The motion for approval? The vote is open. Packet Pg. 587  7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property Madam Clerk: By a vote of 10 to zero items number 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13, have been recommended for approval. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 1 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris AYE Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE CONDITIONS 1. The following conditions shall only apply to the dwelling unit addressed as 303 Atlantic Avenue, Unit 403, and the Short Term Rental use shall only occur in the principal structure. 2. An annual (yearly) STR Zoning Permit must be obtained from the Department of Planning and Community Development (Zoning Administration) before using the dwelling for Short- Term Rental purposes. 3. Off-street parking shall be provided as required by Section 241.2 and 2303(b)(a)(i)(ii) of the City Zoning Ordinance or as approved by City Council. 4. For properties located within the boundaries of the Residential Parking Permit Program (RPPP), while the Short Term Rental use is active, parking passes issued for the subject dwelling unit(s) through the RPPP shall be limited to two (2) resident passes only. Guest and temporary passes through the RPPP shall not be permitted. 5. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire five (5) years from the date of approval. The renewal process of this Conditional Use Permit may be administrative and performed by the Planning Department; however, the Planning Department shall notify the City Council in writing prior to the renewal of any Conditional Use Permit for a Short Term Rental where the Short Term Rental has been the subject of neighborhood complaints, violations of its conditions or violations of any building, housing, zoning, fire or other similar codes. 6. No events associated with the Short Term Rental shall be permitted with more than the allowed number of people who may stay overnight (number of bedrooms times two (2)) on the property where the Short Term Rental is located. This Short Term Rental may not request or obtain a Special Event Permit under City Code Section 4-1. 7. The owner or operator must provide the name and telephone number of a responsible person, who may be the owner, operator or an agent of the owner or operator, who is available to be contacted and to address conditions occurring at the Short Term Rental within thirty (30) minutes and to be physical present at the Short Term Rental within one (1) hour. 8. If, or when, the ownership of the property changes, it is the seller’s responsibility to notify the new property owner of requirements ‘a’ through ‘c’ below. This information must be Packet Pg. 588  7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. This shall be done within six (6) months of the property real estate transaction closing date. a) A completed Department of Planning and Community Development Short Term Rental Zoning Permit; and b) Copies of the Commissioner of Revenue’s Office receipt of registration; and c) Proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity of at least one million dollars. 9. To the extent permitted by state law, each Short Term Rental must maintain registration with the Commissioner of Revenue's Office and pay all applicable taxes. 10. There shall be posted in a conspicuous place within the dwelling a summary provided by the Zoning Administrator of City Code Sections 23-69 through 23-71 (noise), 31-26, 31-27 and 31-28 (solid waste collection), 12-5 (fires on the beach), 12-43.2 (fireworks), and a copy of any approved parking plan. 11. All refuse shall be placed in automated refuse receptacles, where provided, and comply with the requirements of City Code sections 31-26, 31-27 and 31-28. 12. Accessory structures shall not be used or occupied as Short Term Rentals. 13. No signage shall be on-site, except that each short term rental shall have one (1) four- square foot sign posted on the building, or other permanent structure or location approved by the Zoning Administrator, that identifies the property as a short term rental and provides the telephone numbers for the Short Term Rental Hotlines in text large enough to be read from the public street. 14. The Short Term Rental shall have no more than one (1) rental contract for every seven (7) consecutive days. 15. The owner or operator shall provide proof of liability insurance applicable to the rental activity at registration and renewal of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) underwritten by insurers acceptable to the City. 16. There shall be no outdoor amplified sound after 10:00 p.m. or before 10:00 a.m. 17. The maximum number of persons on the property after 11:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. ("Overnight Lodgers") shall be two (2) individuals per bedroom, which number shall not include minors under the age of 16, provided that in no case may the total number of persons staying overnight at the property exceed the number of approved bedrooms multiplied by three (3). 18. The property owner, or their representative, shall provide to the City Planning Department permission to inspect the Short Term Rental property annually. Such inspection shall include: 1) At least one fire extinguisher has been installed inside the unit (in the kitchen) and in plain sight 2) Smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors are installed in accordance with the building code in affect at the of construction and interconnected. Units constructed prior to interconnection requirements must have a minimum of one smoke alarm installed on every floor of the structure and in the areas adjacent to all sleeping rooms, and when activated, be audible in all sleeping rooms, and 3) All smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors have been inspected within the last twelve months and are in good working order. Properties managed by Short Term Rental Companies certified by the Department of Planning shall only be required to be inspected every three years. The inspection for compliance with the requirements above shall be performed by the short term rental management company and be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permitting process. Properties may be inspected annually for compliance with the requirements above by certified Short Term Rental Management Companies or Certified Home Inspectors. The compliance inspection shall be documented on a form prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be provided during the yearly permit process. Packet Pg. 589  7.L.a Attachment: 06_ARF Package for Terry Moore Miffleton (3836 : PLA - Terry Moore Miffleton (Applicant) Charles & Terry Miffleton (Property 19. A structural safety inspection report shall be provided to the city every three (3) years indicating all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies have been inspected by a licensed design professional qualified to perform such inspection (engineer or architect) and are safe for use. The report must indicate the maximum number of occupants permitted on each level of these structures and placards indicating the maximum number of occupants of all exterior stairways, decks, porches, and balconies must be posted on each level of these structures. Packet Pg. 590  ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 111 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE (CZO) RE DEFINITION OF DWELLING UNIT, HOME SHARING, KITCHEN AND PORCH Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia on the day of . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: City Manager City Attorney’s Office Packet Pg. 591  7.L.a Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH AGENDA ITEM ITEM: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 111 OF THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE DEFINITIONS OF DWELLING UNIT, HOME SHARING, KITCHEN, AND PORCH. MEETING DATE: April 16, 2024  Background: The purpose of this general housekeeping amendment is to clarify and create consistency amongst the definitions of Home Sharing, Dwelling Unit, and Kitchen, as well as to add a definition of Porch to the Ordinance.  Considerations: During the enforcement process for the Short Term Rental Ordinance, staff has realized that there is too much ambiguity in what is meant by term “dwelling.” The Zoning Ordinance identifies several types of “dwellings,” including single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings. Currently, the definition of “home sharing” references “dwelling” and is vague in nature. The intention of the “home sharing” definition was to reference a “dwelling unit,” a term specifically defined in the Zoning Ordinance, rather than the more over-arching term “dwelling. This led Staff to examine the definitions of “dwelling unit” and “kitchen” as well to create consistency amongst this set of definitions as they relate and are referenced by one another. The definition of “dwelling unit” explicitly mentions the term “housekeeping unit”. Staff finds this definition to be problematic because the Zoning Ordinance does not define a “housekeeping unit.” To provide clarity to this definition, the text amendment would change “housekeeping unit” to “residence,” which accurately reflects the intention of the term “dwelling unit.” Like the definition of “dwelling unit,” the definition of “kitchen” contains the term “housekeeping unit.” To provide clarity and consistency with the definition of a “dwelling unit,” staff has initiated this text amendment that changes “housekeeping unit” to “dwelling unit” and specifies that a kitchen requires “permanent provisions for cooking.” Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance does not specifically define a “porch.” A “porch” is only defined in the Oceanfront Resort Form Based Code. The Form Based Code defines “porch” as “a one, two, or three-story structure attached to a building to shelter an entrance or to serve as covered but unenclosed space.” The definition of “porch” is particularly important regarding setbacks and permitted encroachments. This text amendment adds the definition of porch from the Form Packet Pg. 592  7.L.a City of Virginia Beach Page 2 of 2 Based Code into Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance. This provides clarity and Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to consistency between all zoning codes. Further details pertaining to the application, as well as Staff’s evaluation, are provided in the attached Staff Report. There is no known opposition to this request.  Recommendation: On March 13, 2024, the Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of this item on the Consent Agenda, by a recorded vote of 10-0.  Attachments: Staff Report Ordinance Minutes of Planning Commission Hearing Recommended Action: Staff recommends Approval. Planning Commission recommends Approval. Submitting Department/Agency: Planning Department City Manager: Packet Pg. 593  7.L.a Applicant City of Virginia Beach Agenda Item Planning Commission Public Hearing March 13, 2024 1 Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to Dwelling Unit, Home Sharing, Kitchen, and Porch Definitions Request An Ordinance to amend Section 111 of the City Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the definitions of Dwelling Unit, Home Sharing, Kitchen, and Porch. Summary of Request The purpose of this general housekeeping amendment is to clarify and create consistency amongst the definitions of Home Sharing, Dwelling Unit, and Kitchen, as well as to add a definition of Porch to the ordinance. 1. Home Sharing: The current definition of “Home Sharing” is “a dwelling in which a room or rooms are offered for rental compensation for a period of less than thirty (30) consecutive days by an owner who utilizes the dwelling as his principal residence and occupies the dwelling during any such period.” During the enforcement process for the Short Term Rental Ordinance, staff has realized that there is too much ambiguity in what is meant by term “dwelling.” The Zoning Ordinance identifies several types of “dwellings,” including single-family, duplex, and multi-family dwellings. The intention of the “home sharing” definition was to reference a “dwelling unit,” a term specifically defined in the Zoning Ordinance, rather than the more over-arching term “dwelling.” Therefore, staff has initiated this text amendment to replace “dwelling” with “dwelling unit” in the “home sharing” definition. 2. Dwelling Unit: The definition of “dwelling unit” is “a room or rooms connected together, constituting an independent housekeeping unit for a family and including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.” Staff finds this definition to be problematic because the Zoning Ordinance does not define a “housekeeping unit.” To provide clarity to this definition, the text amendment would change “housekeeping unit” to “residence,” which accurately reflects the intention of the term “dwelling unit.” 3. Kitchen: Similar to the definition of “dwelling unit,” the definition of “kitchen” contains the term “housekeeping unit.” The current definition of “kitchen” is “an area with a housekeeping unit which contains a cooking facility.” To provide clarity and consistency with the definition of a “dwelling unit,” staff has initiated this text amendment that changes “housekeeping unit” to “dwelling unit” and specifies that a kitchen requires “permanent provisions for cooking.” 4. Porch Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance does not specifically define a “porch.” A “porch” is only defined in the Oceanfront Resort Form Based Code. The Form Base Code defines “porch” as “a one, two, or three-story structure attached to a building to shelter an entrance or to serve as covered but unenclosed space.” The definition of “porch” is particularly important regarding setbacks and permitted encroachments. This text amendment adds the definition of porch from the Form Based Code into Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance. This provides clarity and consistency between all zoning codes. City of Virginia Beach Agenda Item 1 PacketPage Pg. 1 594  7.L.a Recommendation Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance as these amendments aim to provide clearer guidelines for zoning regulations pertaining to residential properties and accommodations. City of Virginia Beach Agenda Item 1 PacketPage Pg. 2 595  7.L.a Virginia Beach Planning Commission Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to March 13, 2024, Public Meeting Agenda Item # 1 City of Virginia Beach RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL Mr. Coston: Thank you, Madam Chair. There will be five items on the Consent Agenda. These are applications that are recommended for approval by staff and the Planning Commission concurred, and there are no speakers signed up in opposition. Item one, on the Consent Agenda, it is City of Virginia Beach, an Ordinance to Amend Section 111 of the City's Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the definition of dwelling unit. At this time, we're going to ask our Zoning Administrator, Mr. Kevin Kemp, if he would come and read this into the record. Mr. Kemp: Thank you, and Good Afternoon, members of the commission. This item is a text amendment, it's really a housekeeping text amendment that was initiated by staff. Staff worked with the four terms that I will go over with you. So, as we work through enforcement, we realized that there were some issues that we would like to sinch up and tighten up with this text amendment. So four terms were modified. The first is the definition of home sharing, and in this we replaced the dwelling in the definition with dwelling unit. What staff found was that there was some ambiguity in what was meant by dwelling. The ordinance specifies several types of dwelling, single family, multifamily, and duplex. What the ordinance really intended, what that it is a single dwelling unit, not the entire building. So, by adding unit, it clarifies the intention of the ordinance. The second is modifying the definition of dwelling unit. This replaces the word housekeeping with residents in the definition. So, currently uses housekeeping unit in the definition. Well, this is a term that is not defined in the ordinance, and it is really not a common term. What's really intended is that a dwelling unit is an independent residence for a family. So, we are replacing it with that word. The third is amending the definition of kitchen, the same as previously with dwelling unit, it's replacing housekeeping unit with the words dwelling unit, and it also specifies in the definition that to be a kitchen, it requires a permanent provision for cooking, and this is therefore consistent with the definition of the dwelling unit. The last one is to add a definition of porch. Currently, our zoning ordinance does not have a definition of porch. There Packet Pg. 596  7.L.a is one in the ocean front resort form-based code. What this does is it takes Attachment: 07_ARF_ZOA Dwelling unit, Home sharing, Kitchen, Porch Definitions (3837 : PLA - City of Virginia Beach – An ordinance to that definition, adds it to the city zoning ordinance, and therefore there is consistency across the board in all city codes, and staff has recommended approval of this. Thank you. Mr. Coston: Thank you. Are there any oppositions to this item being placed on the Consent Agenda? Okay, our next item is item two. Is there a representative? Yes, sir. Please state your name for the record. Mr. Coston: Thank you. Madam Chair, that was the last item on the consent agenda. The Planning Commission places the following applications on the consent agenda. Items 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13. Ms. Cuellar: Thank you very much. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda as read by Commissioner Coston. Mr. Anderson: So moved. Mr. Plumley: Second. Ms. Cuellar: Moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Plumley. Are there any planning commissioners abstaining on these items on the consent agenda? The motion for approval? The vote is open. Madam Clerk: By a vote of 10 to zero items number 1, 2, 3, 4, and 13, have been recommended for approval. AYE 10 NAY 0 ABS 0 ABSENT 1 Alcaraz ABSENT Anderson AYE Byler AYE Cromwell AYE Coston AYE Cuellar AYE Estaris AYE Hippen AYE Mauch AYE Parks AYE Plumlee AYE Packet Pg. 597