suffolk planning commission agenda for march 18

Transcription

SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA FOR
MARCH 18, 2014
PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SCOTT MILLS, AICP, DIRECTOR
THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD AT 2:00 P.M. IN
THE SUFFOLK CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE
SUFFOLK MUNICIPAL BUILDING
IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND OR NEED SPECIAL ACCOMODATIONS AT THE
MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT (757) 514-4060
PRIOR TO 12:00 NOON ON FRIDAY, MARCH 14, 2014.
HOWARD C. BENTON
CHAIRMAN
AGENDA
MARCH 18, 2014
2:00 P.M.
1.
Call to Order
A.
Invocation
B.
Roll Call
2.
Approval of minutes from previous meeting
3.
Preliminary Subdivision Plat:
A.
4.
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT, PS01-14, submitted by David Andrea of VHB,
Inc., applicant, on the behalf of City of Suffolk, Economic Development Authority c/o Kevin
Hughes, property owner, to subdivide the existing right-of-way of Bright Lane and to create
one (1) commercial parcel of land on Progress Road Industrial Park. The affected properties
are located on 2514 Bright Lane and are further identified as Zoning Map 27, Parcel 63C*1
and 63J, Cypress Voting Borough, zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial Zoning District. The 2026
Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban
Development Area (Suburban).
Public Hearings:
A.
REZONING REQUEST RZ06-13, Bennett’s Creek Commons, submitted by James R.
Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek Office Park, LLC c/o
Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs Treehouse,
LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions, and John & Lisa Iuliano,
property owners, to request a change in zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional District, to B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial District. The affected properties are located at 3345 Bridge Road
and 3345 Bridge Road, Units 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 and are further identified as
Zoning Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and
34C*9G, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as
a part Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Inner-Ring Suburban).
B.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST C20-13, Bennett’s Creek Commons,
submitted by James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek
Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC,
Jeebs Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions and John &
Lisa Iuliano, property owners, to permit a 144 unit multi-family garden apartment complex in
accordance with Section 31-306 and 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The
affected properties are located at 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road, Units 900, 904,
Page 1
908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 and are further identified as Zoning Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A,
34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough,
zoned OI, Office-Institutional District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as
a part Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area(Inner-Ring Suburban).
C.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C03-14, submitted by Jason Fawcett,
applicant, on the behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey and Jason Fawcett, property owners, to
permit an Accessory Dwelling Unit in accordance with Sections 31-306, 31-406 and 31-701,
of the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected property is located at 4235 Sleepy Hole
Road and is further identified as Zoning Map 19, Parcel 2C, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough,
zoned RL, Residential Low Density Zoning District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan
designates this area as a part of the Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Suburban).
D.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C06-14, Suffolk Pawn & Gun, LLC,
submitted by Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant, on behalf of
Mountain View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek, LLC, property
owners, to permit a Pawn Shop, in accordance with Section 31-306 and 31-406 of the Unified
Development Ordinance. The affected area is located at 3215 Bridge Road Suite 1 and also
identified as Zoning Map 12, Parcel 12I, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough, zoned B-2, General
Commercial Zoning District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of
the Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Suburban).
E.
ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT OA1-14, initiated by the Suffolk Planning
Commission for an amendment to the Code of the City of Suffolk, Chapter 31, Unified
Development Ordinance, by amending Article 7, Supplemental Use Regulations, Section 31714, Sign Regulations, subsection (b)(12) Menu Boards; to amend the number, size and height
of allowable menu and preview boards for drive through uses.
5.
Old Business
6.
New Business
A.
7.
Status Report – City Council Meeting, February 19, 2014
Adjournment
Page 2
MINUTES
February 18, 2014
2:00 P.M.
The meeting of the Suffolk Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February 18,
2014 at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 441 Market
Street, Suffolk, Virginia, with the following persons present:
MEMBERS:
STAFF:
Howard Benton, Chairman
Arthur Singleton, Vice-Chairman
Johnnie Edwards
Thomas Savage
James R. Rountree
William S. Perry
James Vacalis
William Goodman
Helivi Holland, City Attorney
Scott Mills, AICP, Director of Planning
Bob Goumas, AICP, Asst. Dir. of Planning
Brian Alperin, Principal Planner
Thomas Jordan, Planner II
David Parks, Planner II
Catina Myrick, Executive Secretary
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Benton and Commissioner Savage
opened with a prayer. The roll was called by Mr. Mills and the Chairman was
informed that a quorum was present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as written.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
REZONING REQUEST, RZ13-13, (Conditional) Bennett’s Creek Square,
submitted by Charles Bodnar, agent, on behalf John Napolitano of Napolitano
1
Homes, applicant, on the behalf of Bennett’s Creek Square, Incorporated, property
owner, to amend the approved proffered conditions. The purpose of the this request is
to modify the approved Conceptual Plan in order to reduce the minimum lot size for
the area designated for single family development from 6,000 square feet to 4,000
square feet, to increase the number of single family lots from 51 lots to 74 lots, to
modify design of the amenities to be built in the areas designated for Civic Use and
Town Square; and to add a cash proffer to advance middle school and high school
capacity. The affected areas are located at 5550 Shoulder’s Hill Road, 311 Childress
Street and 835 Bennett’s Meadows Lane, and are further identified as Zoning Map 12,
Parcel 57 and Zoning Map 12V, Parcels TC and CIV, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough,
zoned TND, Traditional Neighborhood Development District. The 2026
Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Northern Suburban/ Urban
Growth Area (Inner-Ring Suburban).
The first item of business was introduced by the Chairman followed by a staff report
presented by Brian Alperin, Principal Planner. Mr. Alperin stated that the applicants
requested to increase the number of single-family detached dwellings in the residential
portion of the development from 51 units to 74 units. As a result, the lots sizes will be
reduced from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet to accommodate the additional
units. The requested increase in the number of single family detached dwelling units
will continue to meet the recommended densities in the TND for residential dwelling
units. With regard to water levels of service, it is anticipated that adequate pressure
and flows will be available to serve the additional dwelling units proposed. In
addition, the updated Public Facilities Report indicated that the Regional Pump
Station serving this area of the City has adequate capacity to handle the additional
dwelling units proposed. With regard to stormwater management, the impervious area
2
will slightly increase as a result of the additional dwelling units proposed. Should this
rezoning request be approved, a plan amendment will be submitted that includes water
quality and quantity calculations. Public Schools continue to be problematic for
increased residential development in the northern portion of the City. A review of the
elementary, middle and high schools in the attendance zone for the development found
the middle and high schools to be over capacity. Staff determined what impacts the
additional 23 single-family detached dwelling units will have on current school
capacity. Based on this analysis, the applicant proffered to advance capacity of the
high school and middle school attendance zones by making a monetary contribution in
the amount of $245,566.40 or $3,318.46 per dwelling unit for each of the 74 dwelling
units located in phase 2 of the development. A second aspect of this request involves
a change in the proffer regarding the recreational amenities of the development. The
approved proffers specified that Bennetts Creek Square will include a visual and
performing arts center as a civic use within the town square. The applicant requested
to amend the proffer by replacing this amenity with a gazebo and trellis that can serve
as a gathering place within the development. This amenity will be constructed in
accordance with the conceptual drawings that were submitted. Staff found that the
proposed amendments to the proffers associated with Bennett’s Creek Square are
compatible with the 2026 Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the proposed revisions do
3
not affect the overall Bennett’s Creek Square project and the requirements of the TND
zoning district. Staff recommended approval of this application with the proffers.
The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was John
Napolitano. He asked for the Commission’s approval of this application.
Also, speaking in favor of this application was Ray Eure, Hoggard & Eure
Associates.
Speaking in opposition was Cathy Little. She stated that she was concerned about
the increased traffic in that area.
Speaking in rebuttal was John Napalitano. He stated that they will be making road
improvements to Shoulders Hill Road.
Speaking in favor of this application as Stuart Resor, architect. This is an
extremely outstanding project and they look forward being a tenant in one of those
buildings.
There being no more speakers, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rountree stated that he is concerned about the increased traffic in the area.
This is a good project and a good concept; therefore, he made a motion to approve this
application with the proffers, seconded by Commissioner Singleton and passed by a
recorded vote of 6 to 2.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C32-13, Riverbend Church,
4
submitted by Dr. Bobby Hill, applicant, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek Square
Professional Center, LLC, property owner, to permit a Place of Worship, large, at least
6,000 square feet in main sanctuary, in accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406,
of the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected property is located at 230
Meadow View Boulevard and is further identified as Zoning Map 12V Parcel E,
Sleepy Hole Voting Borough, zoned TND, Traditional Neighborhood Development
District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Northern
Suburban/ Urban Growth Area (Inner-Ring Suburban).
The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman followed by a staff report
presented by Brian Alperin, Principal Planner. Mr. Alperin stated that this application
is to allow a place of worship. The place of worship will occupy the entire area of the
other building which is 6,624 square foot. The building layout submitted with the
application indicated that the proposed sanctuary, with a seating capacity for 190
persons, will occupy approximately half of the building. The remainder of the
building will consist of classrooms, a nursery, pastor’s office, kitchen and restroom
facilities. According to the applicant, Sunday morning services will be held from 9:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m. while smaller groups of 20-30 people may gather during some
weekdays and weekends. No child day care services will be provided as an accessory
use to a religious assembly. With regard to impacts to public facilities in the area, it is
anticipated that water levels of service will be adequate to serve the proposed use. In
addition, the regional pump station serving Bennetts Creek Square has adequate sewer
capacity to serve the proposed large religious assembly use. With regard to traffic
5
impacts, the project has safe and efficient access to the existing street network within
the TND as well as Shoulders Hill Road. No additional street improvements are
necessary to accommodate the proposed development. Staff felt that this request
meets the Conditional Use Permit approval criteria as outlined in the UDO. The
proposed place of worship will not have any negative impact on the continued
development of Bennett’s Creek Square and; therefore, staff recommended approval
of this application with the conditions noted in the staff report.
The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was Donald
Mills, 2122 Arizona Avenue, Suffolk, VA. He asked for the Commission’s approval of
this application.
Also, speaking in favor of this application was Dr. Bobby Hill, pastor. He stated that
they believe they can make a positive impact and contribution to the community. He
asked for the Commission’s approval of this application.
Also, speaking in favor of this application as Stuart Resor, architect.
There being no speakers in opposition, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Perry made a motion to approve this application with the conditions,
seconded by Commissioner Savage and passed by a recorded vote of 8 to 0.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C01-14, Cherry Grove Plantation,
submitted by Whitney G. Saunders, agent, on behalf of Richard and Janet Goldbach,
applicants and property owners, to permit a Guest Ranch, in accordance with Sections
6
31-306 and 31-406, of the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected properties
are located at 1548, 1552 and 1554 Cherry Grove Road North and are further
identified as Zoning Map 4, Parcels 2, 2*2*A, 2*2*B, Chuckatuck Voting Borough,
zoned RE, Rural Estate District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as
a part of the Rural Agricultural Conservation Area.
presented by Thomas Jordan, Planner II. Mr. Jordan stated that the applicant
requested a conditional use permit to operate a guest ranch on the property. The
property owners intend to rent the historic farm house, barn, and surrounding grounds
as a weekly residential vacation rental to groups seeking rural tranquility. Renters
additionally will have the opportunity to conduct special events on the property such
as weddings, family reunions, and similar events. The farm house and barn will be
fully furnished with utilities; however, no food will be provided, except by the guest.
The property owners stated that the property will only be offered to individual renters
and will not be divided for rental to separate parties. The renovated farmhouse has
five (5) bedrooms with bathrooms in addition to a country kitchen, dining room, and
living areas. The adjacent barn, offers one (1) bedroom, a recreational room, and spa
room. A total of fourteen (14) persons can be accommodated by the farm house and
barn. The property includes extensive outdoor recreation space and access to the
Chuckatuck Creek. The UDO does not provide any supplemental standards for the
guest ranch use. Water and sewer service is currently provided by an on-site private
7
well and septic system. The property owners are currently seeking authorization from
the Suffolk Health Department to install a new septic field to serve the historic
farmhouse and barn. The house is accessed by a private driveway off of Cherry Grove
Road North. Traffic Engineering stated the addition of the guest ranch use should not
significantly increase the amount of traffic along the roadway. Eleven (11) permanent
parking spaces are offered to serve guests utilizing the vacation rental home.
Additional, overflow parking is available for up to seventy (70) vehicles. It was
staff’s opinion that the site in question is appropriate for the proposed use given the
size of the existing lots, and with specific conditions that will serve to mitigate
potential adverse impacts. Therefore, staff recommended approval of this application
with the conditions noted in the staff report.
The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was Whitney
Saunders, 705 W. Washington Street, Suffolk, VA. He stated that his family use to own
this property; this is the first of such facility in the City that will attract tourist groups to
the area. Events cannot be held by the general public, only citizens who rent the property
to stay there can hold an event. He asked for the Commission’s approval of this
application.
Speaking in opposition was Cathy Little. She stated that she was not opposed to the
project, but just wanted to know a little more about the project. She feared that there
8
might be trees cut down or hunting parties on-site.
Also, speaking in opposition was Jackie Cherry, 1833 Cotton Farm Lane, Suffolk, VA.
She stated that she is not opposed, but has concerns. She advised that there have been a
noise factor during previous events at the house. She also wondered if the application
will be reviewed regularly by the City and will the conditional use permit be transferred
when the property is sold.
Speaking in rebuttal was Whitney Saunders. Mr. Saunders read a couple of letters from
adjacent property owners in support of this application. He also stated that they will not
be cutting down any trees and there will be no hunting on the property. The Goldbach’s
did have an event in which they invited all the neighbors to visit the property.
Commissioner Rountree stated that this will be a good asset to the City of Suffolk, but
would like to give the applicant an additional thirty (30) days so that they could talk with
the neighbors to discuss the project.
Commissioner Vacalis stated that this is a magnificent building and it’s a beautiful site;
therefore, he made a motion to approve this application with the conditions, seconded by
Commissioner Goodman and passed by a recorded vote of 5 to 3.
EXCEPTION REQUEST EX04-13, submitted by Lloyd David Marshall, applicant
and property owner, to permit an accessory structure (storage shed) within the 100foot Resource Protection Area buffer. The affected property is located at 2605 South
9
Nansemond Drive and is further identified as Zoning Map 11A, Parcel 83, Sleepy
Hole Voting Borough, zoned RL, Residential Low Density Zoning District. The 2026
Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Northern Suburban/ Urban
Growth Area (Suburban).
presented by David Parks, Planner II. Mr. Parks stated that the applicant requested to
locate a 160 square foot storage shed within the landward portion of the 100-foot RPA
buffer. The applicant installed the storage shed over three years ago when he moved
into the property; however, the shed was not properly permitted at the time of
installation. Currently, the shed is located along the side of the house. The applicant
will be required to move the shed so that it is located behind the house to comply with
the 5-foot side yard setback requirement for accessory structures as stated in the UDO.
No other location will be suitable as the proposed structure could not adhere to
building setback requirements if placed any further toward the front of the house. In
that regard, there does not appear to be an alternative location for the shed outside of
the RPA buffer. The proposed location of the shed will not require the removal of any
existing vegetation. The 100-foot buffer on this lot contains a few trees and shrubs,
but mainly the entire rear portion of the yard is grass down to the bank of the
Nansemond River. The applicant proposed to install six large shrubs within a mulch
bed around the storage shed to compensate for the increase in impervious area. The
calculations used for landscaping are consistent with the regulations contained within
10
the Riparian Buffers Modification and Mitigation Manual. Staff found that the
applicant’s request does satisfy the criteria as outlined in the UDO to grant an
Exception to the requirements of the CBPA Overlay District. The applicant provided a
mitigation planting plan consistent with buffer landscaping requirements. In that
regard, staff recommended approval of this application with the conditions noted in
the staff report.
The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of this application was Lloyd
Marshall, property owner. He asked for the Commission’s approval of this application.
Speaking in opposition was Ms. Kirsten Snyder, adjacent property owner.
Commissioner Rountree made a motion to approve this application with the conditions,
seconded by Commissioner Singleton and passed by a recorded vote of 7 to 1.
STATUS REPORT:
Mr. Mills gave the results of the January 15, 2014 City Council meeting.
NEW BUSINESS:
Commissioner Singleton made a motion to initiate a text amendment to the UDO in
reference to Menu Boards, seconded by Commission Perry and passed by a voice vote
of 8 to 0.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT:
11
Helivi Holland, City Attorney, showed a video to the Commission on FOIA and
COIA.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Chairman Benton advised that as part of the review and update of the 2026
Comprehensive Plan, three Open House meetings have been scheduled. They will be
held on February 25, 2014 at Kings Fork Middle School, February 26, 2014 at East
Suffolk Recreation Center and February 27, 2014 at Creekside Elementary School.
Commissioner Goodman inquired about training for new board members.
Mr. Mills advised that he will research and will report back to the Commission.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
12
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
Benton, Howard C.
Goodman, William H.
MT: Perry
MT: Vacalis
MT: Rountree
2ND: Singleton
2ND: Savage
2ND: Goodman
2ND: Singleton
TO: Approve
w/conditions
TO: Approve
w/conditions
TO: Approve
w/proffers
February 18, 2014
PRESENT
MT: Rountree
ABSENT
TO: Approve
w/conditions
VOTE: 6-2
VOTE: 8-0
VOTE: 5-3
VOTE: 7-1
RZ13-13
C32-13
C1-14
EX4-13
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Edwards, Johnnie
X
X
Perry, William S.
X
X
X
Rountree, Ronnie
X
X
X
X
X
Savage, Thomas
X
X
X
X
X
Singleton, Arthur
X
X
X
X
Vacalis, James
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NO
X
X
X
X
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING
MT: Singleton
MT:
MT:
MT:
2ND: Perry
2ND:
2ND:
2ND:
TO:
TO:
VOTE:
VOTE:
TO: Initiate text
amendment for Menu
Boards
February 18, 2014
VOTE: 8-0
PRESENT
ABSENT
YES
X
X
X
X
Edwards, Johnnie
X
X
Perry, William S.
X
X
Rountree, Ronnie
X
X
Savage, Thomas
X
X
Singleton, Arthur
X
X
Vacalis, James
X
X
Benton, Howard C.
Goodman, William H.
TO:
VOTE:
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STAFF REPORT
DESCRIPTION
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT, PS01-14: Preliminary Subdivision Plat PS01-14, for
the purpose of publically dedicating a portion of the Bright Lane right-of-way and vacating
property lines to create one (1) commercial parcel of land within Wilroy Industrial Park.
APPLICANT: David Andrea of VHB, Inc., applicant, on behalf of City of Suffolk, Economic
Development Authority c/o Kevin Hughes, property owner.
LOCATION: The affected property is located at 2514 Bright Lane and is further identified as
Zoning Map 27, Parcels 63C*1 and 63J.
PRESENT ZONING: The property is currently zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial Zoning District.
EXISTING LAND USE: Bright Lane serves as a right-of-way and the two existing parcels are
vacant.
PROPOSED LAND USE: The property is proposed for commercial development. A portion
of the Bright Lane right-of-way will be publically dedicated. The remaining residue section shall
be vacated and incorporated into an existing adjacent parcel within the Wilroy Road Industrial
Park.
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North – M-2 district and RLM, Woodlake Subdivision;
South – M-2 district, various industrial buildings/uses;
East – M-2 district, single-family dwelling and various industrial buildings/uses;
West – M-2 district, various industrial buildings/uses.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City’s 2026 Comprehensive Plan identifies this property as
being located within the Central Suburban/Urban Growth Area (Suburban). The proposed
subdivision is consistent with this designation.
CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA DESIGNATION: The property is located
within the City’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District and is designated as an
Intensely Developed Area (IDA).
CASE HISTORY: No recent case history was identified.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The subdivision plat proposes the public dedication of the improved portion of Bright Lane. The
remaining residue portion of the proposed Bright Lane will be vacated and incorporated into an
existing adjacent parcel. The plat would result in one (1) new parcel for commercial
development from two (2) existing parcels. By eliminating one (1) parcel the proposed
subdivision would create a single lot suited for development with frontage on Progress Road and
Bright Lane. The proposal is considered a major subdivision, since public right-of-way is being
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 2
dedicated. Approval of a Preliminary Subdivision Plat by the Planning Commission is required.
CONSIDERATIONS
1.
DESIGN ISSUES
No new parcels are being created, this proposal will eliminate one (1) parcel and
publically dedicate the improved portion of the Bright Lane right-of-way. The
unimproved portion of proposed Bright Lane will be combined with (2) existing parcels,
resulting in a lot which is in conformity with the dimensional standards required for the
M-2 zoning district. The proposed parcel contains adequate area, lot frontage, and lot
width for this district. No structures are currently located on the proposed parcel.
2.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Public sewer and water are available to the site. No changes to utilities are proposed.
3
STREETS/TRAFFIC IMPACTS
The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the subdivision plat and does not have any
concerns at this time.
4.
ENVIRONMENTAL/STORMWATER
The parcel is located within the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area and is designated as
an Intensely Developed Area (IDA). Future improvements on the property will be
evaluated to determine the need to develop an on-site stormwater BMP to treat
stormwater.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposed preliminary plat is in compliance with the minimum design standards of the
Unified Development Ordinance and is consistent with the 2026 Comprehensive Plan, which
identifies the property as being within the Central Suburban/Urban Growth Area with a suburban
district designation. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision plat.
Attachments
Proposed Resolution
Exhibit A – Preliminary Plat Showing Property Line Vacation and Right of Way Dedication
of a Portion of a Residue (Known as Bright Lane)
General Location Map
(p
vt)
B RO
HO L
HO L B R
ST KIN
R G
EE
T
O K AR CH
R EG
OO K
E
NE
H
TE
RR
N A
N S E M O N D
AC
D
AN E
L
CK AC
RO ER R
T
KE
LA
D
HILLSIDE
WO O
OO
DL AK
W
AVENUE
E
TE RR
AC E
R
L A OD
N NE
E
(p Y
vt
)
WILROY
ROAD
DA R
C E
LA
EN C
Y DR IV
E
CH
B L E R RY
OS
SO
M
DR
IV E
LA
R
C
IN
T
A
PO
R
R IV E
NG
E
PL
MA AF
LE ENT
C
ES
CR
AY
KW
AR
D P
ON
EM
X
NS
NO
NA
UI
E Q D IN G
N
LA
¹
LO
KE
OD L
AN
D TRA IL
O
EL
L
TI
C
NE
N
LA
AY
IV E
HT
WI
L
L A S ON
N
(pv E
t)
O
RO
AD
BR
IG
M
E
AN
S
S
TL
R
E
RT
M
IL
L
LA
TU
P RT
CO O N LE
UR D
T
AD
B
RO
IL
KE
OLDE MILL
CREEK
DRIVE
M
58
NS
W AY
WO O D
NA
M IL L
EM
ON
D
PA
R
KW
DR
G
GH
QV
C
R
O
BR
I
P
VI E
W
WO
L W O OD WA Y
U
T
R NE
T
S
MI
L L
C
E K
R E
PS1-14
PS1-14
RESOLUTION NO. 14-03-01
CITY OF SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
PLAT, PS01-14, BRIGHT LANE
WHEREAS, David Andrea of VHB, Inc., applicant, on the behalf of City of Suffolk,
Economic Development Authority c/o Kevin Hughes, property owner, has submitted a
preliminary plat for review pursuant to the provisions of the City of Suffolk’s Unified
Development Ordinance, which plat is entitled “Preliminary Subdivision Showing Property Line
Vacation and Right Dedication of a Portion of the Residue (Known as Bright Lane)” dated
January 21, 2014, prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein and hereafter referred to as the Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the requirements for consideration of the Preliminary Plat by the Planning
Commission have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Suffolk, Virginia, that:
Section 1.
The Preliminary plat be, and it is hereby, approved, subject to the comments, if any,
contained on the attached Exhibit A.
Section 2.
The approval of the preliminary plat shall not constitute approval of the final plat, but the
preliminary plat shall serve as a guide in the preparation of the final subdivision plat.
READ AND ADOPTED:___________________________
TESTE:_______________________
PS1-14 Zoning/Land Use Map
27*63Q
27C*32 27C*33
27C*25
27C*26 W OO DL AN D TR A IL
27C*28
27*65
27C*27
27*63Q*1
27C*29
27C*30
27C*31
RLM
BZA1-01
4/10/2001
27*63
BZA5-05
9/13/2005
27*64
M-2
27*63J
27*62
BR
27
*6 3
C*
1
IGH
B
27*63C*63G
27*63K
PRO G
27*63L
27*63L*B
27B*1
27B*1
Aerial Imagery courtes y of ESRI http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery
RE SS
ROA
D
27*63N
R
IG
H
27*63T
27*63M
T
L
A
N
E
27*63U
27*63X
¯
27
*63
X*
1
27*63P
1 inch = 200 feet
27*63B*1
27*63B*1
T L
AN
E
27*63W
EXHIBIT A
PS1-14
EXHIBIT A
PS1-14
EXHIBIT A
PS1-14
EXHIBIT A
PS1-14
STAFF REPORT
DESCRIPTION
REZONING REQUEST: Rezoning Request RZ06-13, Bennett’s Creek Commons, submitted by
James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek Office Park, LLC c/o
Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs Treehouse, LLC, James
and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions, and John & Lisa Iuliano, property owners, to request a
change in zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional District, to B-1, Neighborhood Commercial District.
The affected properties are located at 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road, Units 900, 904, 908,
912, 916, 920 & 924 and are further identified as Zoning Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B,
34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough.
APPLICANT: James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek Office
Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant
LOCATION: 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road, Units 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924,
Zoning Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G.
PRESENT ZONING: OI, Office-Institutional District with Special Corridor Overlay District (SCOD)
Zoning.
EXISTING LAND USE: partially developed with flex-office; additional infrastructure installed.
SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES:
West: O-I, Office-Institutional; developed as single-family residential
East: RL, Residential Low; developed as single-family residential
North (across Bridge Road): O-I, Office-Institutional; developed as single-family residential
South: RL, Residential Low & RR, Rural Residential; developed as single-family residential
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City’s 2026 Comprehensive Plan map designates this property as
Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Inner-Ring Suburban).
CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION AREA DESIGNATION: The property is located within
the City’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District and contains Resource Protection Areas
and Resource Management Areas.
PUBLIC NOTICE: This request has been duly advertised in accordance with the public notice
requirements set forth in Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and with the applicable
provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
CASE HISTORY:
A site plan was approved in 2009 (SP2007-31) for this site for the construction of 49,688 square feet of
two-story office space and 70,552 square feet of flex-office space with associated parking and site
improvements. In addition, an exception request, EX2009-03 was also granted for Resource Protection
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 2
Area (RPA) buffer intrusion. Construction was undertaken and Building No.9, a single-story flex office
building, was constructed as were significant site utilities.
STAFF ANALYSIS
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting to rezone 15.1 acres of a property totaling 18.0 acres in area from
O-I, Office-Intuitional to B-1, Neighborhood Commercial. The remaining 2.9 acre portion of the
property, which has been partially developed for flex office space, will remain in the O-I Zoning
District. While the subject property includes a variety of tax parcels, the subject site has not been
subdivided. The tax parcels were created as the office units have been sold as condominium units. The
boundaries of the property requested for rezoning is included as an exhibit to the proposed ordinance. As
this request is not a conditional rezoning, specific proffers are not included with this rezoning.
The property is oriented along Bridge Road, east of the Nansemond River. A tidal creek feeding
Bennetts Creek, which flows into the Nansemond River, establishes the back of the property. To the
west, only one parcel, zoned O-I, separates the subject site from the Bennetts Creek.
CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
In accordance with Appendix B, Section B-4 of the Unified Development Ordinance, rezoning
applications must include a statement of the reasons for seeking an amendment to the zoning
maps of the City of Suffolk. Supplemental information provided by the applicant indicates that
the reason for this rezoning request is that the property is not properly zoned for the market
conditions. The applicant contends that a different zoning would allow the property to be
developed at its highest and best use. However, a market analysis was not submitted in support
of this request.
1.
Comprehensive Plan
This site is located in the Inner-Ring Suburban Development District of the Northern
Suburban/Urban Growth Area. The City’s 2026 Comprehensive Plan addresses the proposed
development character of this area noting that as development moves further from the Mixed Use
Core development district, the Inner-Ring Suburban development district is the first district
where exclusively residential neighborhoods should be located. The plan further notes that when
residential development is located in this area, it should be developed with high density single
family homes on small lots in mixed use developments such as traditional neighborhood
developments. Uses such as single family, traditional neighborhood developments, light
manufacturing, neighborhood retail, and civic buildings are all envisioned as typical uses within
the inner-ring suburban district. Residential densities of three (3) to five (5) units per acre are
recommended in this district
In regard to commercial retail development, the 2026 Comprehensive Plan notes that
neighborhood level retail nodes should be located within walking distance from their intended
markets. Sub-regional scale centers such as large grocery stores, can be accommodated at
special locations.
The 2026 Comprehensive Plan outlines policy and action items relevant to the proposed
rezoning.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 3
Policy Statement 3-4: Balance residential and non-residential land uses. This site has frontage
directly on Bridge Road, US Route 17, which is identified as a Principal Arterial. A Principal
Arterial is intended to carry substantial traffic volumes at high speeds. As such, this site is
suitable for office development and is currently zoned for office development.
Policy Statement 3-5: Facilitate the expansion of office, R&D and manufacturing activity in
Suffolk. Specifically, Action statement 3-5A states, Ensure that there are adequate amounts of
land zoned to support the growing high technology corridor in the northern suburban/urban
growth area. This site is ideally positioned for office uses within this region of the City.
Action 6-5E: Discourage strip retail commercial development along major arterial corridors.
By focusing retail commercial development at appropriate crossroad locations and managing
access to such developments, the City will preserve arterial roadway capacity while
accommodating fiscally responsible growth. Moreover, focusing retail development provides
increased opportunities for the use of non-auto trip methods – including pedestrian, bicycle and
transit modes. This site is not appropriate for neighborhood commercial uses as it does not
provide linkages to a neighborhood nor is it located at a crossroad location.
2.
Unified Development Ordinance Requirements
The Unified Development Ordinance identifies specific criteria for rezoning to B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial in Section 31-408(f). Specifically, B-1 districts shall be limited to
the
intersection
of
Arterial/collector,
collector/collector,
subcollector/collector,
subcollector/local or collector/local street intersections, except where an existing center has
been established prior to the adoption of this Ordinance; or the interior of a block along an
arterial or collector street which lies parallel to an existing town center. This provision of the
Unified Development Ordinance helps to implement Policy Statement 3-4 and 3-5 and Action 65E. By concentrating neighborhood retail opportunities at nodes such as crossroads, strip retail
development is precluded and the area can be preserved for office, R&D and manufacturing
activity. In addition, by providing neighborhood retail opportunities at crossroads, there are
greater prospects to connect these uses to residential areas by means other than by automobile.
This site is located on a Principal Arterial, Bridge Road with no other intersecting roadway. The
site is not located near an existing town center. As such, this site does not meet the required
criteria for rezoning.
In addition, the specific criteria for development within the B-1 zone identified in Section 31408(f) of the Unified Development Ordinance requires minimization of vehicular and pedestrian
conflicts by providing connectivity within the development and to surrounding neighborhoods.
The proposed site is isolated from civic, neighborhood and retail uses. Even the smallest trip or
errand would need to be accomplished by automobile. The lack of site connectivity makes this
area less attractive for residential or neighborhood commercial development. The classification
of Bridge Road as a Major Arterial reinforces the isolation of the site.
3.
Adequate Public Facilities
The purpose and intent of the adequate public facilities ordinance is to ensure that public
facilities are available to support new development and associated impacts and that each public
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 4
facility meets or exceeds the Level of Service standards established by the 2026 Comprehensive
Plan and the Unified Development Ordinance. No rezoning request should be approved which
would cause a reduction in the levels of service standards for any public facility impacted. The
public facilities impacted by the proposed development are discussed individually below:
Sewer –This site will be served by sanitary sewer which flows to City PS #149/Rt.17 Office
Park. Additional information relative to sewer modeling will be requested during the design
phase any future project.
Water –A 12” water main is located along Bridge Road which is proposed to provide domestic
and fire protection service to the development. Additional information relative to water
modeling will be requested during the design phase of any future project.
Stormwater – Compliance with the applicable provisions of the City and state regulations for
stormwater controls must be demonstrated at the time of Site Plan approval. The applicant has
been advised that a Construction General Permit must be issued prior to July 1, 2014 or the site
will be subject to Stormwater Technical Criteria IIB.
Transportation and Parking- The request for this rezoning included a traffic analysis which has
been reviewed and approved by the City of Suffolk Traffic Engineering Division. The traffic
report concluded that a three-phase traffic signal with protected/permitted westbound left turns
on Bridge Road is warranted for the development of the property. In addition, there may be a
need for additional widening along Bridge Road which could necessitate the need for additional
right-of-way.
Schools – This site is located in the attendance zones for Northern Shores Elementary, John
Yeates Middle School, and Nansemond River High School. The elementary school zone serving
this property has additional student capacity. However, the middle and high schools do not. The
2014-2023 Capital Improvement Plan established the cost and capacity of a future high school
and a future middle school. By dividing the cost of facility by the capacity, a cost per student
can be established. The proposed middle school servicing this zone has a cost of $28,333.33 per
student and the high school is budgeted to cost $38,298.95 per student. Because residential uses
may be located in the proposed B-1, Neighborhood Commercial zoning district, the adequacy of
capacity at the public school system should be considered when evaluating the potential impact
of this request.
4.
Proffered Conditions
The rezoning request is not a conditional rezoning, therefore, the applicant has not offered any
proffered conditions in support of this application. Therefore, any uses allowable in the B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial district would be allowed on the site. Additionally, the lack of
proffers does not allow the applicant to address issues related to impacts on public facilities, such
as schools, roads and utilities based on a more specific proffered plan of development.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION
In summary, Staff finds that the proposal is:
 Not consistent with provisions of the 2026 Comprehensive Plan
 Not consistent with the Unified Development Ordinance
 Does not mitigate impacts to public facilities
Based on the guidance provided by the above cited provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance
and the analysis and findings-of-fact set forth in the preceding staff report, staff recommends denial of
Rezoning Request RZ06-13.
Attachments
 Proposed Ordinance
 Exhibit A - Planning Commission Recommendation
 Exhibit B - Zoning/Land Use Map
D
ECK R O A
KN OT TS N
D
CO R
C ON
E
V
I
DR
)
NU E (p vt
INE AV E
EB E RW
TS
N ET
N
E
K
B
E
CRE E
N
A
L
E
LE
R
FA
M
L
(p
E
AN
AR B O R
YE AT ES D
RIV E (pvt)
RO A
D
E
CRE
TTS
O
N
K
E
LAN
FE RR
vt)
VINE YAR D
LAN E
¹
A
Y RO
K
D
IE R
F RA Z E
U
N
A VE
BR IDG E R
O AD
R E
E K
E Y
LL WA
BE N
VE
HA T
EA
TR IVE
RE DR
BRIDGE ROAD
CREEKFRONT LANE
CIDER LN
IVY
LAN E
AL
D
PL E R
AC
E
E
A
N
BR A
NC
E S
H
SA GE
LAN E
IVY
LAN
E
KE MPTO N
PARK
RO AD
SILV ER
CH AR M
CIRCLE
RR
BU K
OA C E
A
PL
D
NE W ING
TO N
PLA C E
ER
ED
FR
K
IC
ST
E
RE
T
NE
LA
W
I
G LL
CI LE OW
R NN
CL
E
RIC H
BE N A R D
N
PA R E T T
K WA
Y
H
IA C T
RB E
ROA RR Y
D
NE
IG
LE
ELD
E
JUN IP
TU LA ER
NE
LI
CI P T
R C RE
LE E
Y
E RR
E RB D
D
L
E
ROA
O
LA
E
BR
GA RD EN
CH ER R
Y
HILL LA
NE
HIA
D
R T
HA E T Y
C
RI N N WA
BE RK
PA
FO RS Y T
CT
CH
HI ER
LL RY
LN
YC
LA
CK
AD
IL L R O
E RS H
R EE
RA INT E
L
C
IR
C
ST BLU
EM E
CT
T
ULD
T
N E
E N
SH O
B
C
S
BENNETTS
CREEK
PARK ROAD
KELSO
ST REET
A
H
C
LE E
P N
E LA
E
S
E
RZ6-13
T
S
ORDINANCE NO. ________________________
AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE AND AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY
OF SUFFOLK, TO CHANGE ZONING FROM OI, OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL, TO B-1,
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 3345
BRIDGE ROAD AND 3345 BRIDGE ROAD, UNITS 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 AND
ARE FURTHER IDENTIFIED AS ZONING MAP 12, PARCELS 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B,
34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F AND 34C*9G; RZ06-13
WHEREAS, James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek
Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs
Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions, and John & Lisa Iuliano,
property owners, has requested a change in zoning from OI, Office-Institutional, to B-1, Neighborhood
Commercial District for properties located at 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road, units 900, 904,
908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 and are further identified as Tax Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B,
34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G, which land is depicted on Exhibit “B”; and
WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning and amendment to the official zoning map have been
advertised and reviewed by the Planning Commission in compliance with the requirements of state law;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a recommendation as stated in Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing before City Council was duly advertised as required by law and
held on the 16th day of April, 2014, at which public hearing the public was presented with the
opportunity to comment on the proposed rezoning.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, that:
Section 1.
Exhibits.
Exhibit “A”, "Planning Commission Recommendation" and Exhibit "B",
“Zoning/Land Use Map” and “Exhibit for Bennett’s Creek Commons”, which are
attached hereto, are hereby incorporated as part of this ordinance.
Section 2.
A.
Findings.
Council finds that the proposed rezoning is reasonable and warranted due to
changes in circumstances affecting the property, and has considered the following
factors and finds that the proposed rezoning does not conflict with:
1.
the existing use and character of property within the City;
2.
the Comprehensive Plan;
3.
the suitability of the property for various uses;
4.
the trends of growth or change;
Section 3.
5.
the current or future requirements of the community as to land for various
purposes as determined by the population and economic studies and other
studies;
6.
the transportation requirements of the community;
7.
the requirements for airports, housing, schools, parks, playgrounds,
recreation areas and other public services;
8.
the conservation of natural resources;
9.
the preservation of flood plains;
10.
the preservation of agricultural and forestal land;
11.
the conservation of properties and their values;
12.
the encouragement of the most appropriate use of land throughout the
City; and,
13.
the expressed purpose of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance as set
out in Section 31-102 of the Unified Development Ordinance, 1998, as
amended, and Section 15.2-2283 of the Code of Virginia, (1950), as
amended.
Rezoning.
1.
Section 4.
The property be, and is hereby, rezoned and the official zoning map be,
and is hereby, amended as shown on the attached Exhibit “B”, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
Recordation.
A certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded, by the applicant, in the name
of the property owner as grantor in the office of the Clerk of Circuit Court.
This ordinance shall be effective upon passage and shall not be published or codified.
READ AND PASSED:___________________________
TESTE:___________________________
Erika S. Dawley, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
________________________________________
Helivi L. Holland, City Attorney
EXHIBIT A
A RESOLUTION TO PRESENT A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
TO CITY COUNCIL RELATING TO REZONING REQUEST
RZ06-13
TO CHANGE ZONING FROM O-I, OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL, TO B-1, NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 3345 BRIDGE ROAD AND
3345 BRIDGE ROAD, UNITS 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 AND ARE FURTHER
IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP 12, PARCELS 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E,
34C*9F AND 34C*9G
WHEREAS, James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s Creek
Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs
Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions, and John & Lisa Iuliano,
property owners, to request a change in zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional District, to B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial District for properties located at 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road,
units 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924 and are further identified as Tax Map 12, Parcels 34C,
34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G as shown on the attached exhibit;
and
WHEREAS, the procedural requirements for the consideration of this request by the Planning
Commission have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Suffolk,
Virginia, that:
Section 1.
A.
Findings.
The Suffolk Planning Commission finds that the proposed rezoning is reasonable, and
warranted due to change in circumstances affecting the property, and has considered the
following factors and finds that the proposed rezoning does not conflict with:
1.
the existing use and character of property within the City;
2.
the Comprehensive Plan;
3.
the suitability of the property for various uses;
4.
the trends of growth or change;
5.
the current or future requirements of the community as to land for various
purposes as determined by the population and economic studies and other studies;
6.
the transportation requirements of the community;
7.
the requirements for airports, housing, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation
areas and other public services;
8.
the conservation of natural resources;
9.
the preservation of flood plains;
10.
the preservation of agricultural and forestal land;
11.
the conservation of properties and their values;
12.
the encouragement of the most appropriate use of land throughout the City;
13.
the expressed purpose of the City’s Unified Development Ordinance as set out in
Section 31-102 of the Code of the City of Suffolk (1998), as amended, and
Section 15.2-2283 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended (“Va. Code”).
Section 2.
Recommendation to Council.
The Planning Commission recommends to City Council that the request, RZ06-13, be:
a. Granted as submitted, and that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance without
modification.
___b. Denied, and that Council not adopt the proposed Ordinance.
___c. Granted with the modifications set forth on the attached listing of specific
recommendations, and that Council adopt the proposed Ordinance with such
modifications.
READ AND ADOPTED:________________________________
TESTE:________________________________
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT B
RZ6-13 Zoning/Land Use Map
12*34
BR IDG E
O-I
BR IDG E
ROAD
ROAD
RL
4 C*1
12*3
C16-0
10/19/200
C24-13
9/18/2013
EX17-02
1/7/2003
RZ5-0
9/18/200
C14-0
1/20/201
12*55E
RZ12-0
2/20/200
12*34A
12*34C
12*34C*CA
C27-0
2/20/200
12*34E*1
BZA16-04
8/10/2004
12R*205
12R*204
0033
R**22
1122R
202
12 R*
200
12R*
12 R*19 9
2R*198
12R*198
RR17-89
8/2/1989
RR
RZ7-03
11/19/2003
RU
12R*206
Aerial Imagery Sources: VGIN/VITA VMBP 2013 Orthophotography and/or ESRI http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery
¯
1 inch = 2 00 feet
12*32
EXHIBIT B
Proposed
Area
Proposed Area
to
be REZONED
REZONED
to be
from O-I
O-I to
to B-1
B-1
from
RZ6-13
EXHIBIT B
RZ6-13
EXHIBIT B
RZ6-13
STAFF REPORT
DESCRIPTION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Conditional Use Permit Request C20-13 to permit a 144 unit
multi-family garden apartment complex.
APPLICANT: James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s
Creek Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant.
LOCATION: 3345 Bridge Road and 3345 Bridge Road, Units 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 &
924, Zoning Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and
34C*9G.
PRESENT ZONING: OI, Office-Institutional District with Special Corridor Overlay District
(SCOD) Zoning. An application for rezoning, RZ06-13, for a portion of the property to B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial District has been submitted simultaneously with this application.
EXISTING LAND USE:
installed.
Partially developed with flex-office; additional infrastructure
PROPOSED LAND USE: To establish a 144 unit multi-family garden apartment complex.
SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES:
West: O-I, Office-Institutional; developed as single-family residential
East: RL, Residential Low; developed as single-family residential
North (across Bridge Road): O-I, Office-Institutional; developed as single-family residential
South: RL, Residential Low & RR, Rural Residential; developed as single-family residential
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The City’s 2026 Comprehensive Plan map designates this
property as Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Inner-Ring Suburban).
within the City’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District and contains Resource
Protection Areas and Resource Management Areas.
requirements set forth in Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and with the
applicable provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance.
CASE HISTORY:
A site plan was approved in 2009 (SP2007-31) for this site for the construction of 49,688 square
feet of two-story office space and 70,552 square feet of flex-office space with associated parking
and site improvements. In addition, an exception request, EX2009-03 was also granted for
Resource Protection Area (RPA) buffer intrusion. Construction was undertaken and Building
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 2 of 8
No.9, a single-story flex office building, was constructed as were significant site utilities.
STAFF ANALYSIS
ISSUE:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit for the construction of 144 multi-family
garden apartment units. A Garden Apartment is defined by the Unified Development Ordinance
as a two-story or three-story multi-family dwelling with not less than eight (8) or more than
twenty (20) dwelling units in each building, accessed from a common hall or individual
entrances, and with the dwelling units located back to back, adjacent or on top of each other.
Because the construction of the proposed 144 unit garden apartment complex is not a permitted
use within the existing OI, Office-Institutional zoning district, the approval of this request for a
conditional use permit is contingent upon the prior approval of a separate request to rezone a
portion of the subject property from the existing OI, Office-Institutional zoning district to B-1,
Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. The noted request to rezone the property is being
forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration concurrently with this request for a
Conditional Use Permit. (See RZ06-13).
As presently envisioned by the applicant, the existing uses of flex-office are proposed to remain
and be eventually expanded on this site. In addition, the applicant envisions some retail uses also
occurring on the subject parcel. However, to clarify this application for a Conditional Use
Permit is for the expressed approval of 144 Garden Apartments on a portion of the subject site.
While the subject property includes a variety of tax parcels, the subject site has not been
subdivided. The tax parcels were created as the office units have been sold as condominium
units. The boundaries of the lands requested for the subject conditional use permit is included as
an exhibit to the proposed ordinance.
1.
Comprehensive Plan
This site is located in the Inner-Ring Suburban development area of the designated
Northern Suburban/Urban Growth Area. The City’s 2026 Comprehensive Plan addresses
the proposed development character of this area. Primary among the characteristics is
that residential development in this area should be developed with high density single
family homes on small lots in mixed use developments such as traditional neighborhood
developments. Uses such as single family, traditional neighborhood developments, light
manufacturing, neighborhood retail, and civic buildings that are appropriately located, are
all envisioned as typical uses within the inner-ring suburban district.
Residential densities of three (3) to five (5) units per acre are recommended in this
district. The applicant proposed to utilize 13.6 acres of the available site for the
development of the Garden Apartments. However, a significant proportion of the site is
encumbered by critical area associated with adjacent wetlands and floodplains. As such,
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 3 of 8
the gross density of this project would be approximately eleven (11) units per acre and
the net density, discounting the critical areas of the site, would be even greater. It is
evident that regardless of the measure of density, the proposed densities greatly exceed
the target density established by the 2026 Comprehensive Plan.
In addition to the more tangible issues of use and density, the 2026 Comprehensive Plan
outlines other policy and action items relevant to the proposed use. Under the theme
Balanced Growth, Action 3-1G notes the extensive amount of vacant land already zoned
for residential development. Consequently, the plan emphasizes the City should deny
request for additional residential development that is contrary and inconsistent with the
Focused Growth Framework and does not demonstrate the need and demand for the
proposed additional residential development.
Policy Statement 3-4 of the comprehensive plan goes on and emphasizes the need to
Balance residential and non-residential land uses. This site has frontage directly on
Bridge Road, US Route 17, which is identified as a Principal Arterial. A Principal
Arterial is intended to carry substantial traffic volumes at high speeds. As such, this site
is more suitable for non-residential development. It is important that properties suitable
for non-residential uses be preserved as such. In addition, the preservation of the
property for non-residential uses also supports Policy 3-5 to Facilitate the expansion of
office, R&D and manufacturing activity in Suffolk. Specifically, Action statement 3-5A
states, Ensure that there are adequate amounts of land zoned to support the growing high
technology corridor in the northern suburban/urban growth area. This site is ideally
positioned for office uses within this region of the City.
Action statement 4-1A Encourage(s) development of a balanced housing stock with high
end, moderate and affordable housing goal to accommodate demand. The City currently
has 440 apartment units under construction within the Northern Development area of the
City in addition to the existing multi-family units in the area. There are other properties
within this region of the City which have been suitably zoned for multi-family housing.
This site is not suitable for multi-family development. The goals of the City include
having a balanced housing stock.
Finally, Policy 6-1 obliges that the City Provide opportunities for residents to adopt a
lifestyle that is less dependent on auto travel. The proposed site is not connected to civic,
neighborhood and retail uses. The lack of site connectivity makes this area less attractive
for residential development than other sites within the City. The classification of Bridge
Road as a Major Arterial further compounds difficulty with making viable nonautomobile connections to the community.
2.
Unified Development Ordinance Requirements
The Unified Development Ordinance allows the construction of Garden Apartments with
a conditional use permit in the B-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. Should City
Council not act favorably upon the associated request for rezoning; then Garden
Apartments would not be allowed. Garden Apartments are not a permitted use or a
conditional use in the O-I, Office Institutional District.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 4 of 8
However, should City Council act favorably upon the request for rezoning, then the
provision of the Unified Development Ordinance as they apply to B-1, Neighborhood
Commercial should be considered.
Garden Apartments are one of the few residential uses permitted via the conditional use
permit process in the B-1, Neighborhood Commercial District. As such, the dimensional
criteria which have been established by the Unified Development Ordinance provide a
different gauge for evaluation of suitability. No residential densities are established for
the B-1 zone by the Unified Development Ordinance; however, we can still look to the
target densities within the area as designated by the Comprehensive Plan. As previously
noted, as proposed, the gross density of the request translates to approximately eleven
(11) units per acre and the net density, discounting the critical areas of the site, would be
even greater. The Comprehensive Plan currently calls out the targeted residential
densities for this area as being three (3) to five (5) units per acre.
In regard to the Unified Development Ordinance, mass density in the B-1, Neighborhood
Commercial District is established by a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.5. The
FAR is defined as the ratio of the building gross floor area (sum of all the floors) to the
gross area of the site. This site would need to show compliance at the time of site plan
approval with regard to the FAR standard. What this ratio does not establish, however, is
the number of allowable units nor the size of individual units. Therefore, there is not a
direct correlation between residential density and floor area ratio.
Specific criteria for development within the B-1 zone are identified in Section 31-408(f)
of the Unified Development Ordinance. This provision emphasizes the importance and
requires minimization of vehicular and pedestrian conflicts by providing connectivity
within the development and to surrounding neighborhoods. While sidewalks are shown
on the schematic plan for this site; the relative isolation of the development makes it
difficult to have connections to other portions of the community. No sidewalk
connectivity from within the development is shown to the existing sidewalk along Bridge
Road.
Design standards for multi-family developments are established by Section 31-602(c)(2)
of the Unified Development Ordinance. Building must have a minimum separation of 15
feet. It appears that not all building achieve the required separation, but could with minor
modifications. In addition, 200 square feet of usable common open space must be
provided for each unit. This would require approximately 28,800 square feet of space be
provided within this development. The applicant has shown a recreational area of 14,500
square feet on the conceptual plan, therefore, additional space must be provided to satisfy
this requirement.
3.
Public Facilities
Sewer –This site will be served by sanitary sewer which flows to City PS #149/Rt.17
Office Park. Additional information relative to sewer modeling will be requested during
the design phase of the project.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 5 of 8
Water –A 12” water main is located along Bridge Road which is proposed to provide
domestic and fire protection service to the development. Additional information relative
to water modeling will be requested during the design phase of the project.
Stormwater – Compliance with the applicable provisions of the City and state regulations
for stormwater controls must be demonstrated at the time of Site Plan approval. The
applicant has been advised that a Construction General Permit must be issued prior to
July 1, 2014 or the site will be subject to Stormwater Technical Criteria IIB which may
require significant redesign of the site layout.
Transportation and Parking- The request for this conditional use permit included a traffic
analysis which has been reviewed and approved by the City of Suffolk Traffic
Engineering Division. The traffic report concluded that a three-phase traffic signal with
protected/permitted westbound left turns on Bridge Road should be installed with the
development of Bennett’s Creek Commons. In addition, there may be a need for
additional widening along Bridge Road which could necessitate the need for additional
right-of-way.
Schools – This site is located in the attendance zones for school zone 2 elementary
schools, zone 1 middle schools, and zone 2 high schools. Since the Conditional Use
requests residential units, then these units would create additional demand for school
enrollment. The applicant has requested 144 multi-family units. Using the student
generation rates established by Adequate Public Facility standards of Section 31-601 of
the Unified Development ordinance, the construction of this facility would generate an
additional 37.4 elementary students, 18.7 middle school students, and 17.3 high school
students. The elementary school zone serving this development area has adequate
student capacity available. However, the middle and high schools do not.
The 2014-2023 Capital Improvement Plan established the cost and capacity of a future
high school and a future middle school. By dividing the cost of facility by the total
capacity a cost per student can be established. Per the approved Capital Improvement
Plan the proposed middle school serving this area has a per student cost of $28,333.33.
The proposed high school that will serve this area has a per student cost of $38,298.95.
The applicant has acknowledged this deficiency in school capacity and has advised that
they are willing to make a cash contribution to the City of Suffolk for the expansion of
classroom space in impacted schools, including, but not limited to, land acquisition for
the expansion of public school facilities and construction of new schools and additions.
The amount of the voluntary cash contribution as proposed by the applicant is $1,000 per
residential dwelling unit which would be paid prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy.
In contrast, as calculated based on the student generation rates, construction costs and
methodology established by the adopted Capital Improvement Plan and the Unified
Development Ordinance, the total costs to advance the needed school capacity and
mitigate the adverse impact of the proposed development is $8,280.50 per residential
unit. This total includes $3,679.40 per unit in support of the needed capacity at the
middle school level and $4,601.20 per unit in support of the needed capacity at the high
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 6 of 8
school level.
A fiscal impact study was submitted as part of the application for this project. The study
concluded that a net fiscal loss could be anticipated from this project due primarily to
school impacts. However, the applicant did also include an analysis based upon a
different student generation rate which had been established by the National Association
of Home Builders (NABH), which is not consistent with the Unified Development
Ordinance. This alternative showed a net positive impact. Regardless of the generation
rate utilized, deficiencies exist due to committed development at both the middle and
high school levels. The associated rezoning case, RZ6-13, did not contain any proffers
which advanced capacity for this need.
4.
Additional Approvals
This project will need to obtain additional approvals prior to starting construction. A Site
Plan application must be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of any building
permits. A subdivision plat will need to be reviewed and approved through the
subdivision process for any new proposed parcels.
5.
Conditional Use Permit Approval Criteria
Pursuant to Section 31-306 of the UDO, a Conditional Use Permit recognizes uses that,
because of their unique characteristics or potential impacts on adjacent land uses, are not
generally permitted in certain zoning districts as a matter of right. Rather, such uses are
permitted through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by City Council when the
right set of circumstances and conditions are found acceptable.
A Conditional Use Permit is issued only after demonstrating that the application is in
compliance with the following criteria.
a.
The proposed conditional use shall be in compliance with all regulations of the
applicable zoning district, the provisions of Article 6, and any applicable
supplemental use standards as set forth in Article 7 of the UDO.
While there are no supplemental standards established for the use of Garden
Apartment, the application as submitted does not conform with all applicable
provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance and clearly exceeds target
densities established by the 2026 Comprehensive Plan.
b.
The proposed conditional use shall conform to the character of the neighborhood
within the same zoning district in which it is located. The proposal as submitted
or modified shall have no more adverse effects on health, safety or comfort of
persons living or working in or driving through the neighborhood, or shall be no
more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, than would any
other use generally permitted in the same district.
As presented, the proposed project represents a significant increase in density in
the surrounding area. This density is out of character in this portion of the City.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 7 of 8
c.
Adequate measure shall be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to
minimize traffic hazards and to minimize traffic congestion on the public roads.
This project would require the installation of a three-phase traffic signal with
protected/permitted westbound left turns on Bridge Road. Approval of this
project without provisions for the needed traffic signal would not provide
adequate safety for users of the facility.
d.
The proposed use shall not be noxious or offensive by reason of vibration, noise,
odor, dust, smoke or gas.
This use would not be more offensive than similar multi-family developments of
this type.
e.
The proposed use shall not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the property
in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted nor substantially
diminish or impair the property values within the neighborhood.
As presented, the proposed project represents a significant increase in density in
the surrounding area. Impacts would be limited to those typically associated with
multi-family development.
f.
The establishment of the proposed use shall not impede the orderly development
and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted within the zoning
district.
The location of this property along an arterial roadway is better suited for more
intense commercial uses. The development of this property for residential use
eliminates opportunity for the expansion of office, R&D and manufacturing
activity within the City as outlined in Policy 3-5 of the 2026 Comprehensive Plan.
g.
The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the proposed use shall not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, or general
welfare.
The proposed project should not endanger or be detrimental to the community
h.
The public interest and welfare supporting the proposed conditional use shall be
sufficient to outweigh the individual interests which are adversely affected by the
establishment of the proposed use.
It is staff’s opinion that impacts to the public interest outweigh the potential
benefits of the proposed use.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 8 of 8
RECOMMENDATION
In summary, staff finds the proposal is:



Not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
Not consisted with the Unified Development Ordinance
Does not mitigate impacts to public facilities
Based on the guidance provided by the above cited provision of the Unified Development
Ordinance and 2026 Comprehensive Plan as well as the analysis and findings-of-fact set forth in
the preceding staff report, staff recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit request C20-13.
Attachments
 Exhibit A – Planning Commission Recommendation
 Exhibit B – Zoning/Land Use Map
 Exhibit C – Proposed Development Plans
D
ECK R O A
KN OT TS N
D
CO R
C ON
E
V
I
DR
)
NU E (p vt
INE AV E
EB E RW
TS
N ET
N
E
K
B
E
CRE E
N
A
L
E
LE
R
FA
M
L
(p
E
AN
AR B O R
YE AT ES D
RIV E (pvt)
RO A
D
E
CRE
TTS
O
N
K
E
LAN
FE RR
vt)
VINE YAR D
LAN E
¹
A
Y RO
K
D
IE R
F RA Z E
U
N
A VE
BR IDG E R
O AD
R E
E K
E Y
LL WA
BE N
VE
HA T
EA
TR IVE
RE DR
BRIDGE ROAD
CREEKFRONT LANE
CIDER LN
IVY
LAN E
AL
D
PL E R
AC
E
E
A
N
BR A
NC
E S
H
SA GE
LAN E
IVY
LAN
E
KE MPTO N
PARK
RO AD
SILV ER
CH AR M
CIRCLE
RR
BU K
OA C E
A
PL
D
NE W ING
TO N
PLA C E
ER
ED
FR
K
IC
ST
E
RE
T
NE
LA
W
I
G LL
CI LE OW
R NN
CL
E
RIC H
BE N A R D
N
PA R E T T
K WA
Y
H
IA C T
RB E
ROA RR Y
D
NE
IG
LE
ELD
E
JUN IP
TU LA ER
NE
LI
CI P T
R C RE
LE E
Y
E RR
E RB D
D
L
E
ROA
O
LA
E
BR
GA RD EN
CH ER R
Y
HILL LA
NE
HIA
D
R T
HA E T Y
C
RI N N WA
BE RK
PA
FO RS Y T
CT
CH
HI ER
LL RY
LN
YC
LA
CK
AD
IL L R O
E RS H
R EE
RA INT E
L
C
IR
C
ST BLU
EM E
CT
T
ULD
T
N E
E N
SH O
B
C
S
BENNETTS
CREEK
PARK ROAD
KELSO
ST REET
A
H
C
LE E
P N
E LA
E
S
E
C20-13
T
S
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 144 UNIT
MULTI-FAMILY GARDEN APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 3345 BRIDGE
ROAD AND 3345 BRIDGE ROAD, UNITS 900, 904, 908, 912, 916, 920 & 924, ZONING
MAP 12, PARCELS 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F AND
34C*9G; C20-13
WHEREAS, James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s
Creek Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises,
LLC, Jeebs Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions and John &
Lisa Iuliano, property owners, has requested a conditional use permit for a 144 unit multi-family
garden apartment complex for a portion of a certain tract of land situated in the City of Suffolk,
Virginia, which land is designated on the Zoning Map of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, as Zoning
Map 12, Parcels 34C, 34C*9A, 34C*9B, 34C*9C, 34C*9D, 34C*9E, 34C*9F and 34C*9G
which land is depicted on Exhibit "B"; and
WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Article 3, Section 31-306 of the Code of the
City of Suffolk, Virginia, 1998 (as amended), have been followed; and
WHEREAS, in acting upon this request, the Planning Commission and City Council have
considered the matters enunciated in Section 15.2-2284 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, and Article 1, Section 31-102 and Article 3, Section 31-306(c)(1 through 8) of the
Code of the City of Suffolk, 1998 (as amended), with respect to the purposes stated in the Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended, Sections 15.2-2200 and 15.2-2283; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made a recommendation as stated in Exhibit
"A".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Suffolk,
Virginia, that:
Section 1. Exhibits.
Exhibit "A", "Planning Commission Recommendation", Exhibit "B", "Zoning/Land Use
Map ", and Exhibit “C”, “Proposed Development Plans”, which are attached hereto, are
hereby incorporated as part of this ordinance.
Section 2.
Findings.
Council finds that the proposal for a conditional use permit, as submitted or modified
with conditions herein, the expressed purpose of which is to permit a 144 unit multifamily garden apartment complex is in conformity with the standards of the Unified
Development Ordinance of the City of Suffolk and that it will have no more adverse
effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons living or working in or driving through
the neighborhood, and will be no more injurious to property or improvements in the
neighborhood than would any other use generally permitted in the same district, taking
into consideration the location, type and height of buildings or structures, the type and
extent of landscaping and screening on site and whether the use is consistent with any
theme, action, policy or map of the Comprehensive Plan which encourages mixed uses
and/or densities with the conditions set forth below.
These findings are based upon the consideration for the existing use and character of
property, the Comprehensive Plan, the suitability of property for various uses, the trends
of growth or change, the current and future requirements of the community as to land for
various purposes as determined by population and economic studies and other studies, the
transportation requirements of the community, the requirements for airports, housing,
schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation areas and other public services, the conservation
of natural resources, the preservation of flood plains, the preservation of agricultural and
forestal land, the conservation of properties and their values, and the encouragement of
the most appropriate use of land throughout the City.
These findings are based upon a determination that the most reasonable and limited way
of avoiding the adverse impacts of the 144 unit multi-family garden apartment complex is
by the imposition of the conditions provided herein.
Section 3.
Permit Granted.
The conditional use permit for the Property be, and it is hereby, approved for the
Property, subject to the following conditions and the general conditions set forth in
Section 4 hereof. The conditional use permit specifically allows a 144 unit multi-family
garden apartment complex use in compliance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406 of the
Code of the City of Suffolk.
Conditions
1. This permit is granted for that portion of the subject property as specified on Exhibit B, in
order to allow the establishment of a multi-family garden apartment complex, as defined
by the Unified Development Ordinance, consisting of a maximum of 144 units.
2. The development of that portion of the subject property for which this conditional use
permit is granted shall be in substantial conformity with that as shown on Exhibit C.
3. The developer shall contribute a total of $529,833.60 toward the construction of a middle
school. Monetary contributions shall be paid pro rata after final inspection and prior to
certificate of occupancy being issued for each of the 144 apartment units at a cost of
$3,679.40 per unit.
4. The developer shall contribute a total of $662,572.80 toward the construction of a high
$4,601.20 per unit.
5. The developer shall be responsible for installation of a traffic signal on Bridge Road at
the eastern entrance to the development in accordance with all applicable City of Suffolk
design standards. This signal shall be interconnected to the nearest existing traffic signal
to the east and west along Bridge Road.
Section 4.
General Conditions.
(a)
The conditional use permit may be revoked by City Council upon failure to
comply with any of the conditions contained herein, after ten days written notice
to Bennett’s Creek Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property
owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary
Backus, First Class Property Solutions and John & Lisa Iuliano, property owners,
or their successors in interest, and a hearing at which such persons shall have the
opportunity to be heard.
(b)
To the extent applicable, the requirements set forth in Section 31-306 of the Code
of the City of Suffolk, Virginia shall be met.
(c)
The commencement of the use described in Section 3 of this ordinance shall be
deemed acceptance by Bennett’s Creek Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy,
applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises, LLC, Jeebs Treehouse, LLC,
James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions and John & Lisa Iuliano,
property owners, or any party undertaking or maintaining such use, of the
conditions to which the conditional use permit herein granted is subject.
Section 5. Severability.
It is the intention of the City Council that the provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences,
clauses and phrases of this ordinance are severable; and if any phrase, clause, sentence,
paragraph, section and provision of this ordinance hereby adopted shall be declared
unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by the valid judgment or decree of a court of
competent jurisdiction, such unconstitutionality or invalidity shall not affect any of the
remaining phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, sections and provisions of this
ordinance, to the extent that they can be enforced notwithstanding such determination.
Section 6. Recordation.
A certified copy of this ordinance shall be recorded, by the applicant, in the name of the
property owner as grantor in the office of the Clerk of Circuit Court.
Section 7. Effective Date.
The conditional use authorized by this permit shall be implemented within two (2) years
from the date of approval by the City Council and shall terminate if not initiated within
that time period.
READ AND PASSED: __________________________
TESTE:__________________________
Erika Dawley, City Clerk
_______________________________________
EXHIBIT A
TO CITY COUNCIL RELATING TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
C20-13
WHEREAS, James R. Bradford, Hassell and Folkes, P.C., agent, on behalf of Bennett’s
Creek Office Park, LLC c/o Scott Gandy, applicant and property owner and DDK Enterprises,
LLC, Jeebs Treehouse, LLC, James and Mary Backus, First Class Property Solutions and John &
Lisa Iuliano, property owners, has requested a conditional use permit for a 144 unit multi-family
garden apartment complex for a portion of a certain tract of land situated in the City of Suffolk,
Virginia, which land is described and depicted on the proposed Ordinance attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the specific request is to permit a 144 unit multi-family garden apartment
complex in accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Section 1.
Findings.
The Suffolk Planning Commission finds that the proposal for a conditional use permit, as
submitted or modified herein:
____a.
Will have no more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons
living or working in or driving through the neighborhood,
____b.
Will have more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons living
or working in or driving through the neighborhood,
____c.
Will be no more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, or
____d.
Will be more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood than
would any other use generally permitted in the same district, taking into
consideration the location, type and height of buildings or structures, the type
and extent of landscaping and screening on site and whether the use is
consistent with any theme, action, policy or map of the Comprehensive Plan
which encourages mixed uses and/or densities.
Section 2.
The Planning Commission recommends to City Council that the request, C20-13, be:
____a.
Granted as submitted, and that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance
without modification.
____b.
Denied, and that Council not adopt the proposed Ordinance.
____c.
Granted with the modifications set forth on the attached listing of specific
modifications.
READ AND ADOPTED:________________________________
TESTE:________________________________
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
C20-13
CONDITIONS
1. This permit is granted for that portion of the subject property as specified on Exhibit B, in
order to allow the establishment of a multi-family garden apartment complex, as defined
by the Unified Development Ordinance, consisting of a maximum of 144 units.
2. The development of that portion of the subject property for which this conditional use
permit is granted shall be in substantial conformity with that as shown on Exhibit C.
3. The developer shall contribute a total of $529,833.60 toward the construction of a middle
$3,679.40 per unit.
4. The developer shall contribute a total of $662,572.80 toward the construction of a high
$4,601.20 per unit.
5. The developer shall be responsible for installation of a traffic signal on Bridge Road at
the eastern entrance to the development in accordance with all applicable City of Suffolk
design standards. This signal shall be interconnected to the nearest existing traffic signal
to the east and west along Bridge Road.
EXHIBIT B
C20-13 Zoning/Land Use Map
12*34
BR IDG E
O-I
ROA D
BR IDG E
ROAD
RL
RZ5-0
9/18/200
C14-0
1/20/201
12*34A
C *1
12*3 4
C16-0
10/19/200
EX17-02
1/7/2003
C24-13
9/18/2013
RZ12-0
2/20/200
12*55E
12*34C
C27-0
2/20/200
12*34C*CA
12*34E*1
12R*205
02
12R* 2
12R*204
RZ7-03
11/19/2003
2R*198
12R*198
0033
R**22
1122R
200
12 R*
99
12R *1
RU
RR
12*32
RR17-89
8/2/1989
BZA16-04
8/10/2004
12R*206
Aerial Imagery Sources: VGIN/VITA VMBP 2013 Orthophotography and/or ESRI http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery
¯
1 inch = 2 00 feet
EXHIBIT C
This Area Not
included in CUP
PROPOSED AREA
For Conditional Use Permit
C20-13
EXHIBIT C
C20-13
EXHIBIT C
ZONED O&I
BRIDGE ROAD - U.S. ROUTE 17
N 84°17'09" W 729.19' (O.A.)
360.80'
54.48'
L=3.34'
2" E
°5
S10
N 89°37'3
20' SCOD SIDE SETBACK
30' SCOD FRONT SETBACK
30' SCOD FRONT SETBACK
R=34.50'
313.91'
1'46
8
16
C
N2
8°3
10
FUTURE
18
STORE
5,550 S.F.
EXISTING SITE ZONING: O-I
C2
11
6
14
8
14
12
16
13
18
16
IC
E/
10
,55
0
FL
EX
71'
819.
S.F
.
TO
RE
MA
IN
PROPOSED SITE ZONING: B-1
PROPOSED USE: GARDEN APARTMENTS
TOTAL SITE AREA: 13.6 ACRES
FLOOR AREA RATIO PERMITTED: 50% OR 296,208 SQ. FT.
NET TO GROSS FACTOR: 25% OR 222,156 SQ. FT.
ESTIMATED MAX. YIELD:
222,156 SQ. FT. / 1,100 SQ. FT. / APARTMENT = 202 UNITS
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 3 STORY
MAXIMUM UNITS PER BUILDING: 20
MINIMUM PARKING: 1 SPACE / UNIT
MAXIMUM PARKING: 1.9 SPACES / UNIT
UNITS SHOWN: 144 UNITS @ 18 UNITS PER BUILDING
PARKING SHOWN: 203 SPACES OR 1.4 SPACES / UNIT
57'
154.
F
8
SITE DATA: ( PARCEL A )
E
08"
°07'
.O
FF
AIN
EM
OR
XT
FLE
E/
FFIC
T. O
.F.
EXIS
50 S
10,9
"W
°22'01
N 08
EX
IST
PARCEL C
2.9 AC.
13
H
10
G
30
4
2
L18
D
L1
7
9
L1
SE
TB
AC
K
SITE DATA: ( PARCEL B )
PARCEL A
13.6 AC.
L12
L11
41
°5
60 8'0
.40 9"
' W
14
2.0
0'
44
°1
2'2
L1
55
64
.72
'
3°5
7'2
9"
W
57.38'
S
'
.43
63
9'0
°5
7"
SITE DATA: ( PARCEL C )
141.
60'
EXISTING SITE ZONING TO REMAIN: O-I
EXISTING USE TO REMAIN: OFFICE / FLEX SPACE
EXISTING LAND USE: OFFICE / FLEX SPACE
TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA: 21,500 SQ. FT.
TOTAL AREA OFFICE: 57% OR 12,255 SQ. FT.
OFFICE PARKING REQUIRED: 49 SPACES
TOTAL AREA FLEX SPACE: 43% OR 9,245 SQ. FT.
FLEX PARKING REQUIRED: 9 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 58 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 88 SPACES
S 25
45
°2
"W
S
2'
6.1
16
S
11 4 4
.06 °1
' 7'20
W
4"
1'5
2"
W
7'0
°2
29
L5
N5
PROPOSED SITE ZONING: B-1
PROPOSED USE: GENERAL RETAIL
FLOOR AREA SHOWN: 5,500 SQ. FT.
PARKING REQUIRED: MIN. 33; MAX. 55
PARKING SHOWN: 36 SPACES
°22'
45"
W
N
0'
1.9
25
11
4.3
9'
L7
S
L8
L3
8"
W
16
9.1
1'
L1
0
L9
EE
K
.1
5'
1"
W
83
'5
°4
6
48
3"
E
72.42'
6' W
.5 "
60 '22
8
°3
BE
NN
43
°5
4'0
30' SCOD REAR SETBACK
L2
S
CR
W
5"
3'
58.7
35
ET
T'
S
8'0
2°0
L6
E
S7
N
71'
819.
N
8"
3'4
°3
52
S 85°34'57" E
S
S
ZONED O&I
"W
°22'01
N 08
P:\Projects\BRIDGE ROAD APARTMENTS\bridge-road apartments WITH WAWA-FEBRUARY 17 - 2014.dwg, 3/5/2014 3:58:36 PM
L13
L2
2
L14
L2
1
5
L1
UP
PE
RL
CB
IMI
PA
TS
WE
OF
TL
AN
DS
UP
CB PE
PA R L
W IMIT
ET
S
LA
O
ND F
S
L2
0
E
L1
6
RE
AR
3"
4'2 '
°0 .72
35 55
A
RP
S
1
'
00
6
'S
CO
E
3"
9'5
°0 1'
25 54.1
6
S
8
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
INNER RING SUBURBAN DISTRICT
(TYPICAL USE : NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL COMMERCIAL)
L25
L41
16
EXISTING EVERGREEN
SCREEN & BERM
9
3 STORY BLDG
(TYPICAL)
E
C1
12
D
P.S.
SITE
0.1 AC.
S 14
RECREATION AREA
14,500 SQ. FT.
ZONED RL
L24
16
(NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL & OFFICE - INSTITUTIONAL )
'
0.36
E 23
L23
14
PROPOSED SITE ZONING: B-1 & O-I
31"
°16'
ZONED O&I
16
SITE DATA:
S 12
12
PARCEL B
1.5 AC.
FUTURE
GAS PUMP CANOPY
2'
163
.8
1'44
"E
6
B
A
4'
89.1
" E
4
227'
2
115.43'
W
'06" W
S 86°32
REZONING EXHIBIT AND
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
60
0
30
60
120
BENNETT'S CREEK
COMMONS
240
ROUTE 17 - BRIDGE ROAD
325 VOLVO PARKWAY
CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA 23320
PHONE: (757) 547-9531 FAX: (757) 547-9481
www.hfpc-online.com
SLEEPY HOLE BOROUGH
SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA
DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2014
C20-13
STAFF REPORT
DESCRIPTION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Conditional Use Permit Request C03-14, submitted by Jason
Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey and Jason Fawcett, property owners, to
permit an accessory dwelling unit in accordance with Sections 31-306, 31-406, and 31-701 of the
Unified Development Ordinance.
APPLICANT: Submitted by Jason Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey
and Jason Fawcett, property owners.
LOCATION: The affected property is located at 4235 Sleepy Hole Road and is further
identified as Zoning Map 19, Parcel 2C.
PRESENT ZONING: RL, Residential Low Density District
EXISTING LAND USE: 2.25 acre site that contains a single family home with a detached two
story garage.
PROPOSED LAND USE: Proposing to utilize the second floor living space within the detached
garage for an accessory dwelling unit for the purpose of housing members of the immediate
family and allow for the caring of aging parents.
North – Single Family home, zoned RL
South – Single Family home, zoned RL
East – Vacant, Forested land, zoned RR
West – Vacant land, zoned RL
being located within the Northern Suburban/Urban Development Area and classified as
Suburban.
within the City’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District and is designated as a
Resource Management Area (RMA).
STAFF ANALYSIS
ISSUE
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling unit to utilize an
existing living space within the detached garage for the purposes of housing members of the
immediate family and allow for the caring of aging parents. Currently, the living space within
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 2 of 5
the garage is 828 square feet. The two story garage was constructed in 2005. The proposed
accessory dwelling unit is approximately 25-30 feet from the primary dwelling unit. The health
department has confirmed that the existing septic system can accommodate the additional flows
received from the proposed accessory dwelling unit at the living space within the detached
garage.
1.
Section 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires that a conditional
use permit be obtained for an accessory dwelling unit within the RL, Residential Low
Density Zoning District.
2.
Supplemental use standards are established in the UDO for detached accessory dwelling
units as follows:
a) The detached accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the minimum yard and
intensity of use regulations as set forth in Section 31-407 of this ordinance.
The accessory dwelling unit complies with the required setbacks for the RL
district. (35’-front, 15’-side, and 30’-rear)
b) The detached accessory dwelling unit shall be connected to the primary
structure’s central sewer or septic system provided, however, that a separate
septic system may be utilized where:
a. The lot contains not less than four (4) acres of land area; and
b. The detached accessory dwelling unit is separated from the principal
structure by not less than one hundred (100) feet.
This proposed accessory dwelling unit will utilize the same septic system as the
primary house. The lot is a total of 2.25 acres and the accessory dwelling unit is
located approximately 25-30 feet away from the primary structure. The Virginia
Department of Health has certified that the existing septic system can
accommodate and treat the additional flows generated by the proposed accessory
dwelling unit.
c) Only one (1) accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted per lot, unless the lot is
at least ten (10) acres in which case two (2) accessory units may be permitted.
The applicant is only proposing one accessory dwelling unit.
d) Required parking for the detached accessory dwelling unit shall be located on
the property of the principal structure. One (1) additional off-street parking
space shall be required in addition to that required for the principal dwelling
unit. For lots of less than five (5) acres, the parking shall be located to the rear
of the principle dwelling unit.
There is sufficient room on the property to provide additional parking for the
proposed accessory dwelling unit.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 3 of 5
e) The apartment shall not be offered to the general public for rental purposes.
The applicants have stated in their application that this dwelling unit will not be
offered for rental to the general public.
f) The conditional use permit shall be reviewed for compliance by the Zoning
Administrator on an annual basis.
The Zoning Administrator will review this site on an annual basis for
compliance.
3.
The property is located off of Sleepy Hole Road and is currently connected to City water.
Sewer service is currently provided by a private septic system. This existing septic
system will also service the accessory dwelling unit. The Virginia Department of Health
has certified that the septic system can accommodate and treat the additional flows which
will be generated by the accessory dwelling unit.
4.
The primary house fronts along Sleepy Hole Road. The accessory dwelling is currently
located along the side of the house unit and should not significantly increase the amount
of traffic along Sleepy Hole Road. This unit will not be utilized by the general public and
will only be used by the property owners.
5.
The applicants will be required to address any issues regarding occupancy of the dwelling
unit pertaining to the Building Code with the Division of Community Development.
6.
Pursuant to Section 31-306 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), a Conditional
Use Permit recognizes uses that, because of their unique characteristics or potential
impacts on adjacent land uses, are not generally permitted in certain zoning districts as a
matter of right. Rather, such uses are permitted through the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit by City Council when the right set of circumstances and conditions are found
acceptable.
Conditional Use Permit Approval Criteria (31-306(c)) - As may be specified within each
zoning district, uses permitted subject to conditional use review criteria shall be permitted
only after review by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council and only
if the applicant demonstrates that:
a) The proposed conditional use shall be in compliance with all regulations of the
applicable zoning district, the provisions of Article 6 of the ordinance and any
applicable supplemental use standards as set forth in Article 7 of the Ordinance.
The proposed use of an accessory dwelling unit is a listed conditional use in the RL
zoning district per the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. Supplemental use
standards are established in the UDO in section 31-703 and have been met by this
application.
b) The proposed conditional use shall conform to the character of the neighborhood
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 4 of 5
within the same zoning district in which it is located. The proposal as submitted or
modified shall have no more adverse effects on health, safety or comfort of persons
living or working in or driving through the neighborhood, or shall be no more
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, than would any other use
generally permitted in the same district. In making such a determination,
consideration should be given to the location, type and height of buildings or
structures, the type and extent of landscaping and screening on the site and whether
the proposed use is consistent with any theme, action, policy or map of the
Comprehensive Plan which encourages mixed uses and/or densities.
The proposed accessory dwelling unit will conform to the character of the
neighborhood as required by the supplemental use standards that are established by
the UDO. The lot has adequate size to accommodate one additional living unit. This
accessory dwelling unit will only be used to house immediate family members and
will not be allowed to be rented out to the general public. This use will not be adverse
to persons living or working in or driving through the neighborhood.
c) Adequate measures shall be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to
The request for the accessory dwelling unit has been reviewed by the City’s Traffic
Engineering Department who expressed no concerns regarding parking or traffic for
the proposed use and location. The accessory dwelling unit shall not cause any
additional traffic congestion off of Sleepy Hole Road.
d) The proposed use shall not be noxious or offensive by reason of vibration, noise,
The proposed use is for an accessory dwelling unit and should not produce excess
vibration, noise, odor, dust, smoke or gas. It is not anticipated that there will be any
use attached with their activity which would impact the surrounding community.
e) The proposed use shall not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted nor substantially diminish
or impair the property values within the neighborhood.
The property is located within a residential suburban area of the City. The
surrounding properties are located within a similar residential zoning district and
contain single family homes. The use of the existing accessory structure as an
accessory dwelling unit should not diminish or impair the property values within this
neighborhood.
f) The establishment of the proposed use shall not impede the orderly development and
improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted within the zoning district.
The use of this property for the purposes of housing members of the family within an
existing accessory dwelling unit should not impede the orderly development and
improvement of surrounding properties.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 5 of 5
g) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the proposed use shall not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general
welfare.
The use of an accessory dwelling unit should not be a detriment or endangerment to
the public.
h) The public interest and welfare supporting the proposed conditional use shall be
The public interest and welfare should not be compromised by the proposed use of
this accessory dwelling unit.
RECOMMENDATION
It is staff’s opinion that the site in question is appropriate for the proposed use and given the size
of the existing lot and the size of the dwelling unit, the use will not adversely impact the
surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit
request C03-14 with the following conditions.
1. This permit grants the establishment of a detached accessory dwelling unit as defined in
the Unified Development Ordinance, the location of which is as shown on Exhibit B and
Exhibit C.
2. This conditional use permit shall be reviewed for compliance by the Zoning
3. The accessory dwelling unit shall be connected to the primary structure’s septic system,
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
4. The applicant will be required to address any issues regarding occupancy of the space
pertaining to the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code with the Division of
Community Development.
Attachments
 Exhibit A – Planning Commission recommendation
 Exhibit B – Zoning/Land Use Map
 Exhibit C – Site Plan
ROAD (pv t)
TW
AY
FF
LI
C NT
ER C E
I V ES W
R R
C
HO
EP Y
RIVER
BREE ZE
RO AD
AN
IC H
L
C
PE EA
R
DA RD EN
)
LAN E (p vt
GRIF FIN
LANE (p vt)
LE R
O
NANS EMOND
POINTE
DRIV E
AD
PO I N
SLEEPY
HOLE PARK
ROAD
S LE
N
R
Y
EP
A
M
R
E
E
SL
N
S
E
O
N
D
IV
PLAN TE RS CLUB
¹
DAVIS
LANE
(pvt)
LIGHTHOUSE
DRIVE
KI N
GS H
IG H
W AY
EE
SL
PY
LE
HO
AD
MO
N D R IV E R
SE
RO
N
NA
C3-14
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AN
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4235 SLEEPY HOLE
ROAD, ZONING MAP 19, PARCEL 2C, C03-14
WHEREAS, Jason Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey and Jason
Fawcett, property owners, has requested a conditional use permit for an accessory dwelling unit
on a certain tract of land situated in the City of Suffolk, Virginia, which land is designated on the
Zoning Map of the City of Suffolk, Virginia, as Zoning Map 19, Parcel 2C, which land is
depicted on Exhibit "B"; and
"A".
Virginia, that:
Map", and Exhibit “C”, “Site Plan”, which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated as
part of this ordinance.
Section 2.
Findings.
with conditions herein, the expressed purpose of which is to permit an accessory dwelling
unit is in conformity with the standards of the Unified Development Ordinance of the
City of Suffolk and that it will have no more adverse effects on the health, safety or
comfort of persons living or working in or driving through the neighborhood, and will be
no more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood than would any other
use generally permitted in the same district, taking into consideration the location, type
and height of buildings or structures, the type and extent of landscaping and screening on
site and whether the use is consistent with any theme, action, policy or map of the
Comprehensive Plan which encourages mixed uses and/or densities with the conditions
set forth below.
forestall land, the conservation of properties and their values, and the encouragement of
of avoiding the adverse impacts of an accessory dwelling unit is by the imposition of the
conditions provided herein.
Section 3.
Permit Granted.
Property, subject to the following conditions and the general conditions set forth in
Section 4 hereof. The conditional use permit specifically permits an accessory dwelling
unit in compliance with Exhibit “C” (the “Site Plan”), and Sections 31-306, 31-406, and
31-701of the Code of the City of Suffolk.
Conditions
Exhibit C.
Section 4.
General Conditions.
(a)
to Jason Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey and Jason
Fawcett, property owners, or their successors in interest, and a hearing at which
such persons shall have the opportunity to be heard.
(b)
(c)
deemed acceptance by Jason Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy,
Lindsey and Jason Fawcett, property owners, or any party undertaking or
maintaining such use, of the conditions to which the conditional use permit herein
granted is subject.
that time period.
READ AND PASSED: __________________________
TESTE:__________________________
_______________________________________
Exhibit A
TO CITY COUNCIL TO ESTABLISH AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4235 SLEEPY HOLE ROAD, ZONING MAP 19, PARCEL
2C, RELATING TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
C03-14
WHEREAS, Jason Fawcett, applicant, on behalf of Roger, Dorothy, Lindsey and Jason
Fawcett, property owners, has requested the issuance of a conditional use permit for a certain
tract of land situated in the City of Suffolk, Virginia, which land is described and depicted on the
proposed Ordinance attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the specific request is to permit an accessory dwelling unit in accordance
with Sections 31-306, 31-406, and 31-701of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Section 1.
Findings.
a. Will have no more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons
b. Will have more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons living
c. Will be no more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, or
d.
consideration the location, type and height of buildings or structures, the type and
extent of landscaping and screening on site and whether the use is consistent with
any theme, action, policy or map of the Comprehensive Plan which encourages
mixed uses and/or densities.
Section 2.
a. Granted as submitted, and that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance
modifications.
READ AND ADOPTED:________________________________
TESTE:________________________________
C03-14
CONDITIONS
Exhibit C.
19J*10
19J*11
19J*12
19J*13
19*4E
19J*14
19J*9
EXHIBIT B
EX6-03
8/13/2003
19*4B
19*4B*1
19*2D
19*4
RL
19*2B
HO L E
ROAD
SLEEPY
19*2*5
19*2A
19*2C
DAV I S L A
N E ( p vt)
19*2J
19H*10
19*2A*A
19*2E
19*2G
KIN
GS
19*2A
*D
19*52
19*2*1
19*2A
*D*1
19*2*3
A
RR
19*49
19*2*7
19*2*2
19*4A
19*4D
HIG
HW
AY
19*2A*B
19*2A*F
¯
1 inch = 200 feet
EXHIBIT C
C3-14
EXHIBIT C
C3-14
Tel: (757) 538-5456
Fax: (757) 538-0186
EXHIBIT C
32'
3,757
SF
= 22.04%
PRIMARY
RESIDENCE
1ST FLOOR
(2,103 SF)
51'
5'
2'-4"
VIRGINIA
MAIN
RESIDENCE
SF
828 SF
SUFFOLK
ACCESSORY
APT
SF
3909 Nansemond Parkway
Suffolk, Virginia 23435
CALCULATIONS
FAWCETT
RESIDENCE
4235 SLEEPY HOLE RD
51'
PRIMARY
RESIDENCE
2ND FLOOR
(1,632 SF
OPEN
LIVING SPACE)
TOTAL PRIMARY RESIDENCE SF = 3,735
EXISTING GARAGE
FIRST FLOOR 1,439 SF,
2ND FLOOR ACCESSORY
APARTMENT 828 SF
16'-4"
MASTER PLAN
41'
50'-3"
EXISTING
GARAGE
50'-6"
2ND FLOOR
ACCESSORY
APARTMENT
(828 SF)
28'-6"
41'
EXISTING
RESIDENCE
51'
EXISTING RESIDENCE
FIRST FLOOR 2,103 SF,
2ND FLOOR FINISHED
OPEN LIVING SPACE
1,632 SF
50'-6"
EXISTING
GARAGE
1ST FLOOR
(1,462 SF)
29'
ACCESSORY APARTMENT
ABOVE EXISTING GARAGE
PLOT PLAN FOR PARCEL "2C"
97,975 S.F.
2.249 ACRES
AS SHOWN
AS SHOWN
WLS
1
C3-14
STAFF REPORT
DESCRIPTION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: Conditional Use Permit Request C6-14, for a pawn shop in
accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
APPLICANT: Submitted by Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant, on
behalf of Mountain View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek, LLC, property
owners.
LOCATION: The affected property is located at 3215 Bridge Road, Suite 1 and also identified
as Zoning Map 12, Parcel 12I, Sleepy Hole Voting Borough.
PRESENT ZONING: B-2, General Commercial Zoning District.
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial shopping center.
PROPOSED LAND USE: Pawn shop.
North – RL district, single-family, agriculture, forested;
South – RU district, proposed residential development (The Retreat at Bennett’s Creek);
East – B2 district, commercial shopping center;
West – B2 district, commercial retail and office buildings.
being located within the Northern Suburban/ Urban Development Area (Suburban).
within the City’s Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Overlay District and designated as a
Resource Management Area (RMA).
STAFF ANALYSIS
ISSUE
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a pawn shop within a 7,200
square foot lease unit within an existing commercial shopping center located at the intersection
of Lee Farm Lane and Bridge Road. The proposed pawn shop will carry a mix of items for sale
and will offer short term loans or pawns. This business will also be a licensed precious metals
dealer in addition to the buying and selling of firearms.
The proposed hours of operation for the pawn shop are Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m.
until 6:00 p.m.
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 2 of 5
1.
Section 31-406 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires that a conditional
use permit be obtained for a pawn shop within the B-2, General Commercial Zoning
District.
2.
Supplemental standards are established in the UDO for pawn shops:
a) All pawn shops and pawnbrokers must comply with the Code of the City of
Suffolk.
City Code Section 18-246 to 18-256, and, Section 82-1158, specifies provisions
pertaining to Secondhand Dealer and Pawnbroker operations. In that regard, the
applicants will be required to obtain permits to operate from both the Chief of
Police and from the Circuit Court. They must also obtain a Retail Merchant
License from the Commissioner of Revenue; pay a license tax and provide a
$50,000 surety bond. The applicant is also required to provide daily reports of
business activity to the Chief of Police. It should also be noted that the City Code
prohibits pawn shops from doing business with those under 18 years of age.
b) All pawn shops and pawnbrokers must comply with Section 54.1-4000 of the Code
of Virginia.
This code section defines a pawn shop and pawnbroker.
3.
The proposed hours of operation of the pawn shop are Monday through Saturday from
9:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m.
4.
The site is currently served by public water and sewer.
5.
The off-street parking requirements outlined in the UDO for shopping centers require a
minimum of one space per 1000 square feet of gross floor area and a maximum of seven
space per 1000 square feet of gross floor area. The pawn shop use will require a
minimum of 8 and a maximum of 51 parking spaces. The shopping center has adequate
available parking to serve the proposed use.
6.
Pursuant to Section 31-306 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), a Conditional
Use Permit recognizes uses that, because of their unique characteristics or potential
impacts on adjacent land uses, are not generally permitted in certain zoning districts as a
matter of right. Rather, such uses are permitted through the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit by City Council when the right set of circumstances and conditions are found
acceptable.
Conditional Use Permit Approval Criteria (31-306(c)) - As may be specified within each
zoning district, uses permitted subject to conditional use review criteria shall be permitted
only after review by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council and only
if the applicant demonstrates that:
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 3 of 5
a) The proposed conditional use shall be in compliance with all regulations of the
applicable zoning district, the provisions of Article 6 of the ordinance and any
applicable supplemental use standards as set forth in Article 7 of the Ordinance.
The proposed use of a pawn shop is a listed conditional use in the B-2 zoning district
per the City’s Unified Development Ordinance. Supplemental standards have been
established under Section 31-711 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The
proposed use will comply with the standards of the UDO.
b) The proposed conditional use shall conform to the character of the neighborhood
within the same zoning district in which it is located. The proposal as submitted or
modified shall have no more adverse effects on health, safety or comfort of persons
living or working in or driving through the neighborhood, or shall be no more
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, than would any other use
generally permitted in the same district. In making such a determination,
consideration should be given to the location, type and height of buildings or
structures, the type and extent of landscaping and screening on the site and whether
the proposed use is consistent with any theme, action, policy or map of the
Comprehensive Plan which encourages mixed uses and/or densities.
The proposed conditional use permit request should conform to the character of the
neighborhood. The shopping center in which the pawn shop is proposed to be located
and surrounding commercial buildings contain a mixture of uses. With appropriate
conditions this use will not be adverse to people living, working in, or driving through
the neighborhood as compared to similar retail commercial uses. The applicant has
experience with the operation of a pawn shop and has indicated he is a licensed
precious metals dealer and has a Federal Firearms License.
c) Adequate measures shall be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to
The request for the pawn shop has been reviewed by the City’s Traffic Engineering
Department who expressed no concerns regarding traffic for the proposal.
d) The proposed use shall not be noxious or offensive by reason of vibration, noise,
The proposed use is for a pawn shop and should not produce excess vibration, noise,
e) The proposed use shall not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted nor substantially diminish
or impair the property values within the neighborhood.
The property is located in an established commercial district and corridor. The
operation of this establishment should not be injurious to the uses in the immediate
vicinity. The proposed use will occur entirely within the existing commercial
building. The proposed use will be required to provide in store surveillance cameras
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 4 of 5
as well as an alarm system to protect the merchandise within the pawn shop. The
police department has also recommended that store employees be trained to operate
the surveillance system and provide the police with copies of surveillance photos and
videos as requested.
f) The establishment of the proposed use shall not impede the orderly development and
improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted within the zoning district.
The property is located in an established commercial district and corridor. The use of
this property for a pawn shop should not impede the orderly development and
improvement of surrounding properties.
g) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the proposed use shall not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general
welfare.
With appropriate conditions, this proposed use should not be a detriment or
endangerment to the public with the recommended conditions in place to protect the
potential merchandise that the business will carry.
h) The public interest and welfare supporting the proposed conditional use shall be
The public interest and welfare should not be compromised by this conditional use
request.
RECOMMENDATION
It is staff’s position that the site in question is appropriate for the proposed use given the size and
nature of the establishment and the proposed hours of operation. The operation of a pawn shop
should not adversely impact the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends
approval of Conditional Use Permit request C6-14 with the following conditions:
1.
This permit is granted to establish a Pawn Shop, as defined in the Unified Development
Ordinance, at the location as specified in Exhibit B and Exhibit C.
2.
The applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 54.1-4000, et seq. of the Code
of Virginia, (1950), as amended as it relates to the operation of pawn shops, and, with the
terms of City Code Section 18-246 to 18-256, and, Section 82-1158, pertaining to
provisions for Secondhand Dealer and Pawnbroker operations.
3.
The applicant shall provide video surveillance with a minimum of two cameras placed in
the front of the store to capture ingress and egress as recommended and approved by the
police department.
4.
There shall be an employee on staff that is able to operate the surveillance system at all
times. The applicant shall provide copies of the surveillance photos and videos to the
Planning Commission
March 18, 2014
Page 5 of 5
police as requested and have a monitor available for viewing on-site.
5.
All hand guns shall be locked in a commercial safe each night. All rifles and shotguns
shall be secured by a commercial grade locking system designed for the security of long
guns and approved by the Police Department.
6.
The hours of operation shall be limited to 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
7.
Payday loan services shall not be offered as part of the check cashing operation.
Attachments
Proposed Ordinance
Exhibit A – Planning Commission recommendation
Exhibit B – Zoning/Land Use Map
Exhibit C – Site Layout and Floor Plan
N
S
E
M
O
N
D
R
IV
E
R
W
I
PO N DY
D R IN T
IV
E
¹
N
A
N
INE AV E
EB E RW
C AN TER BU R Y
LANE
HO
L
PO ID A
I
N Y
N S DR I T
V
HO
E
RE
B
D
R
IV
RO
E
LE
RM
FA
NE
LA
(p
vt)
YE AT
E
DR IV S
E
(pv t)
Y
FER R
R OA
D
AD
RO
E
E K
LA
N
E
HIA
B E
N
GA RD EN
IA CT
ELD
E
RB E
ROA R RY
D
O LD W
HA RF
ROAD
SILV E R
CH AR M
CIR CLE
BEN NETTS
W
CREEK PA RK
IL
G L
ROAD
CI LE OW
R NN
CL
E
JUN IP
TU LA ER
NE
LI
CI P T
R C RE
LE E
KEM P
T ON
P A RK
SA GE
RO A D
LAN E
E
FO RS Y T
CT
CH
HI ER
LL RY
LN
IVY
LAN E
IN
CIDER LN
AL
D
PL E R
AC
E
W
C
ER
R
EB
R EE
RA INT E
CIR CL
IVY
LAN
E
N
SILV ER
CH AR M
CIRCLE
LA
CREEKFRONT LANE
ST BLU
EM E
CT
E
E
NE
BE
N
IN
N E T TS
EB
ER
W
CH ER R
Y
HILL LA
NE
UR
E
ST
LEE
FARM
LANE
PA
S
E
E
E Y
LL WA
BE N
VE
HA T
EA
TR IVE
RE DR
TT
G
AD
E
N
NA N SEM
OND
D RIVE
RI
D
AN
KL
UE (pvt)
EE
S CR
T
T
NE
B EN
C6-14
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A
PAWN SHOP ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3215 BRIDGE ROAD, SUITE 1, ZONING
MAP 12, PARCEL 12I; C6-14
WHEREAS, Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant, on behalf of
Mountain View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek, LLC, property owners,
has requested a conditional use permit for a pawn shop on a certain tract of land situated in the
City of Suffolk, Virginia, which land is designated on the Zoning Map of the City of Suffolk,
Virginia, as Zoning Map 12, Parcel 12I, which land is depicted on Exhibit "B"; and
"A".
Virginia, that:
Map" and Exhibit “C”, Floor Plan” which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated as
part of this ordinance.
Section 2.
Findings.
with conditions herein, the expressed purpose of which is to permit a pawn shop is in
conformity with the standards of the Unified Development Ordinance of the City of
Suffolk and that it will have no more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of
persons living or working in or driving through the neighborhood, and will be no more
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood than would any other use
generally permitted in the same district, taking into consideration the location, type and
height of buildings or structures, the type and extent of landscaping and screening on site
and whether the use is consistent with any theme, action, policy or map of the
Comprehensive Plan which encourages mixed uses and/or densities with the conditions
set forth below.
forestal land, the conservation of properties and their values, and the encouragement of
of avoiding the adverse impacts of a pawn shop is by the imposition of the conditions
provided herein.
Section 3.
Permit Granted.
Property, subject to the general conditions set forth in Section 4 hereof. The conditional
use permit is specifically for a pawn shop in compliance with Sections 31-306, 31-406,
and 31-711 of the Code of the City of Suffolk.
Conditions
1.
This permit is granted to establish a Pawn Shop, as defined in the Unified
Development Ordinance, at the location as specified in Exhibit B and Exhibit C.
2.
The applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 54.1-4000, et seq. of
the Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended as it relates to the operation of pawn
shops, and, with the terms of City Code Section 18-246 to 18-256, and, Section 821158, pertaining to provisions for Secondhand Dealer and Pawnbroker operations.
3.
The applicant shall provide video surveillance with a minimum of two cameras
placed in the front of the store to capture ingress and egress as recommended and
approved by the police department.
4.
There shall be an employee on staff that is able to operate the surveillance system at
all times. The applicant shall provide copies of the surveillance photos and videos
to the police as requested and have a monitor available for viewing on-site.
5.
All hand guns shall be locked in a commercial safe each night. All rifles and
shotguns shall be secured by a commercial grade locking system designed for the
security of long guns and approved by the Police Department.
6.
The hours of operation shall be limited to 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. Monday through
Saturday.
7.
Payday loan services shall not be offered as part of the check cashing operation.
Section 4.
(a)
General Conditions.
to Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant, and Mountain
View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek, LLC, property
owners, or their successors in interest, and a hearing at which such persons shall
have the opportunity to be heard.
(b)
(c)
deemed acceptance by Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant,
and Mountain View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek,
LLC, property owners, or any party undertaking or maintaining such use, of the
conditions to which the conditional use permit herein granted is subject.
that time period.
READ AND PASSED: __________________________
TESTE:__________________________
_______________________________________
Exhibit A
TO CITY COUNCIL RELATING TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO ESTABLISH A PAWN SHOP ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3215 BRIDGE ROAD,
SUITE 1, ZONING MAP 12, PARCEL 12I
C6-14
WHEREAS, Jesse Erwin, Jr., of Suffolk Pawn and Gun, LLC, applicant, on behalf of
Mountain View Bennett’s Creek, LLC and Club Forest Bennett’s Creek, LLC, property owners,
has requested the issuance of a conditional use permit for a certain tract of land situated in the
City of Suffolk, Virginia, which land is described and depicted on the proposed Ordinance
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the specific request is to permit a pawn shop in accordance with Sections
31-306, 31-406, and 31-711 of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Section 1.
Findings.
a. Will have no more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons
b. Will have more adverse effects on the health, safety or comfort of persons living
c. Will be no more injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, or
d.
consideration the location, type and height of buildings or structures, the type and
extent of landscaping and screening on site and whether the use is consistent with
any theme, action, policy or map of the Comprehensive Plan which encourages
mixed uses and/or densities.
Section 2.
a. Granted as submitted, and that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance
modifications.
READ AND ADOPTED:________________________________
TESTE:________________________________
C6-14
CONDITIONS
1. This permit is granted to establish a Pawn Shop, as defined in the Unified Development
Ordinance, at the location as specified in Exhibit B and Exhibit C.
2. The applicant must comply with the requirements of Section 54.1-4000, et seq. of the
Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended as it relates to the operation of pawn shops, and,
with the terms of City Code Section 18-246 to 18-256, and, Section 82-1158, pertaining
to provisions for Secondhand Dealer and Pawnbroker operations.
3. The applicant shall provide video surveillance with a minimum of two cameras placed in
the front of the store to capture ingress and egress as recommended and approved by the
police department.
4. There shall be an employee on staff that is able to operate the surveillance system at all
times. The applicant shall provide copies of the surveillance photos and videos to the
police as requested and have a monitor available for viewing on-site.
5. All hand guns shall be locked in a commercial safe each night. All rifles and shotguns
shall be secured by a commercial grade locking system designed for the security of long
guns and approved by the Police Department.
6. The hours of operation shall be limited to 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
7. Payday loan services shall not be offered as part of the check cashing operation.
12*37A
12*40B*1
12*41
12*12D
12*37
12*36
HH
1122
*
*
1122
BR
ID
GE
RO
EXHIBIT B
12*12A*4
RL
AD
LE
E
12*35
FA
R
M
LA
N
E
(p
vt
)
12*12A
BR
B-2
12*12C
12
*
12*12F*1
12*12F
12*12G*A*2
L
L
M
E
E
E
F
W
O
D
12*12I
12*12
H
AV
EN
AY
F RO
12*13
NT
LA N
E
RZ7-06
10/18/2006
RZ1-13
10/16/2013
RR
1 inch = 300 feet
RU
12*13D
BZA6-00
9/12/2000
RZ6-11 M-1
3/21/2012
BZA16-04
8/10/2004
22 11
1199
RR** 1199
1122 **
RR
1122
¯
C16-09
3/17/2010
W
EEK
E
G E RO
AD
E
RN
O
D
V
RI
BRID
12*12M
R 12*12A*3
A
CR
12*8
12*12A*2
LL
T
HO
A
N
AD
BE
1122
**112
2G
G**A
A**1
1
12
C
*1
RO
22KK
**11
1122
12
*12
B*
A
11
AA**
*
*
BB
1122
*
*
1122
GE
12*1
2J
12*12B*B
ID
RZ7-03
11/19/2003
12R*190
EXHIBIT C
C6-14
EXHIBIT C
C6-14
RESULTS OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF
February 19, 2014
A. REZONING REQUEST RZ10-13, (Conditional), submitted by Whitney G. Saunders,
agent, on behalf of Whitney Graham of Graham Real Estate, LLC, on behalf of Pericles G.
Christodoulias and Community Bank/ City National Bank, property owners, to request a
Approved
change in zoning from O-I, Office-Institutional District, to B-2, General Commercial District
w/proffers
(Conditional). The affected properties are located at 1032, 1036, 1040, 1044 and 1048
Centerbrooke Lane and are further identified as Zoning Map 25N, Parcels 2A, part of 2B,
2C, 2D and 2E, zoned O-I, Office-Institutional District, Chuckatuck Voting Borough. The
2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban
Growth Area (Suburban).
B. REZONING REQUEST, RZ12-13, (Conditional), submitted by Robert E. Harbour,
applicant, on behalf of Centerpoint Properties Trust, a Maryland Real Estates Investment
Trust, property owners, to request a change in zoning to amend the approved proffered
conditions pertaining to transportation and utility improvements pertaining to the
Approved
Centerpoint development. The affected properties are located at 1005 Kenyon Court and are
w/proffers
further identified as Zoning Map 32B, Parcel 3, zoned O-I, Office-Institutional District
(Conditional), and 2400 and 2410 Holland Road and 1005 and 1006 Kenyon Court and are
further identified as Zoning Map 32B, Parcels 3*2, 3*1, 3*3, and 3, zoned M-1, Light
Industrial District (Conditional) and 1000,1004 and 1005 Kenyon Court and are further
identified as Zoning Map 32B, Parcels 1, 3*4, and 3, zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial District
(Conditional), Holy Neck Voting Borough. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this
area as a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban Growth Area (Suburban).
C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C28-13, Believers Church, submitted by
Melissa Venable, Land Planning Solutions, agent, on behalf of Jamey Stuart, applicant, and
on behalf of Suffolk Towers, LLC, property owner, to permit a place of worship, large, at
least 6,000 square feet in the main sanctuary, and a daycare, child (as an accessory to a
Approved
permitted place of worship or school) and a public assembly not otherwise enumerated, in
w/conditions
accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406, of the Unified Development Ordinance. The
affected property is located at 8030 Harbour View Boulevard and is identified as Zoning
Map 6, Parcel 2H*2, Nansemond Voting Borough, zoned O-I, Office-Institutional District.
The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Northern Suburban/
Urban Growth Area (Mixed-Use Core).
D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C29-13, submitted by Whitney G. Saunders,
agent, on behalf of Whitney Graham of Graham Real Estate, LLC, applicant, on behalf of
Approved
Pericles G. Christodoulias and Community Bank/ City National Bank, property owners, to
w/conditions
permit a mini-warehouse facility, in accordance with Sections 31-306, 31-406 and 31-709 of
the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected properties are located at 1032, 1036,
1040, 1044 and 1048 Centerbrooke Lane and are further identified as Zoning Map 25N,
Parcels 2A, part of 2B, 2C, 2D and 2E, currently zoned O-I, Office-Institutional District with
Rezoning Request RZ10-13, Conditional pending, which will rezone the property to B-2,
General Commercial, Chuckatuck Voting Borough. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan
designates this area as a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban Growth Area (Suburban).
E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C30-13, Lemuria Health Beauty Fitness
Academy, submitted by Stacey Mossor, applicant, on behalf of Demetrius Panagopulos,
Approved
BackBay Outdoors, LLC, property owner, to permit a trade school, Nail Technology School,
w/conditions
in accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406, of the Unified Development Ordinance.
The affected property is located at 347 North Main Street and is further identified as Zoning
Map 34G11(A), Parcel 88, Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned CBD, Central Business District.
The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban
Growth Area (Mixed Use Core).
F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, C31-13, Shade Masters Window Tinting,
submitted by Charles D. Parr, Sr., Parr Saratoga Street Properties, LLC, agent, on behalf of
Approved
Melissa Engel, applicant, on behalf of Parr Saratoga Street Properties, LLC, property owner,
w/conditions to permit an automobile repair, minor, in accordance with Sections 31-306 and 31-406, of
the Unified Development Ordinance. The affected property is located at 156 South Saratoga
Street and is further identified as Zoning Map 34G24(A), Parcel 2, Suffolk Voting Borough,
zoned CBD, Central Business District. The 2026 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as
a part of the Central Suburban/ Urban Growth Area (Mixed Use Core).

suffolk planning commission agenda for march 18

Transcription

Similar documents

Regular Meeting - City of Dripping Springs

AIRSOFT minefield game copy

Minor Development Permit Detached Garage

Board of Zoning Appeals Variance Application BEGINNING JULY 1

WHEREAS, John Flink has submitted a written request to

Pool Permit Application

What does “Commercial/Industrial Mean to NAHBA Today?

Staff Report - City of Mobile Urban Development Department

PLAN COMMISSION MEETING STAFF REPORT

WellSpring - ULI Atlanta