OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Chesapeake City Council Meeting - January 23, 2024

City Council — Tuesday, January 23, 2024
BodyChesapeake, Virginia
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, January 23, 2024
StatusFILED
Video Record
Meeting Thumbnail
⇩ GET FROM SOURCE

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:01

I want to welcome everyone to our January 23rd, 2024 Council Work Session.

0:06

I'd like to turn it over to Mr.

0:07

Manager at this time.

0:08

Thank you, Ms.

0:09

Mayor.

0:09

And I'm immediately going to turn it over to Mr.

0:11

McNamara for an update on the Greenbrier Area Plan.

0:14

Good evening, everyone.

0:15

Very excited to bring our consultants to you tonight.

0:17

We're going to be discussing the air Greenborough Area Plan.

0:20

We're about two-thirds of the way through here.

0:22

So we've got about six months to go, and we'd like to propose some initial concepts for your feedback.

0:27

So I'm going to turn things over to Brad Barnett from Cooper Robertson and Devin Cipson from Kimley Horn.

0:34

Thank you, Jimmy.

0:35

Good evening, everyone.

0:36

Devin Simpson from Kimley Horn.

0:38

So as Jimmy said, we met with you all back in May and we gave you a little bit of an update where we were in the plan.

0:44

So we're here tonight to give you an update and show you some of our exhibits and get your feedback with where we are today.

0:50

So we're about a year in, we've got about six months left.

0:53

We've gotten through our existing conditions analysis, our market analysis, and we've begun to develop land use scenarios.

0:59

And that's what we're here to get your thoughts on tonight.

1:02

Along this time, we've done a ton of community engagement.

1:05

We had over 50 hours of engagement with the community.

1:08

So this included public surveys, community meetings.

1:12

We've had several stakeholder meetings, both with internal city departments and external with residents, different folks in the business community as well.

1:19

So we've had a lot of really good feedback that's helped inform what you'll see here tonight, which is really a blend of this feedback that we've received, our existing conditions review, and our market forecast analysis.

1:32

So he is with Cooper Robertson, our urban design firm, and he's gonna walk you through the scenarios that you'll see here tonight.

1:42

Good evening.

1:42

It's good to be with you all.

1:43

Uh again, my name is Brad Barnett.

1:45

Um I'm gonna go through this at a pretty high level.

1:49

Um I'm sure you'll have questions and feedback, and so we're happy to go into into more detail on anything after we go through these slides.

1:56

Um, what we're gonna go through is what we're calling the preferred um land use scenario.

2:02

Um the way that we developed this was, as Devin said, really built on the engagement process to date as well as the analysis that our team has been working on together with the city.

2:12

Um to begin this work, we developed um three categories uh to inform uh the overall categories that we'd focus on.

2:20

The first being areas to preserve.

2:22

These are areas primarily single family residential areas or other areas that are functioning well today, where we did not anticipate significant changes coming to those areas from a land use perspective.

2:32

The second category we're calling enhanced, those are areas where they're still functioning well today.

2:37

There may be opportunities for public realm improvements like sidewalks or street trees or other minor improvements to these areas, but we still believe that they're functioning more or less the way they uh can in the future from a land use perspective.

2:49

And then the last category, the ones that you see um in color on this map are areas called transform.

2:55

These are the areas where we see the most opportunity for um substantial land use change in the future to achieve some of the goals that we've heard from the community to date.

3:03

And that's where we're gonna focus our our um effort um right now.

3:09

So I'm gonna go through each of these again at a very high level.

3:12

Happy to come back and answer questions or hear feedback on these.

3:15

Um the first is um what we're calling the health village.

3:18

So we're located right now on Battlefield next to the regional hospital.

3:22

Um, and this one really builds on the success of the hospital as a regional asset.

3:25

We envision the opportunity for more medical focused mixed use around the hospital, including more ground floor retail restaurants and other things to serve visitors and employees of the hospital.

3:37

Um we also see this as an opportunity for a lot of um age-targeted and senior housing, again, because of the synergies with the hospital function itself and the opportunities there.

3:47

And then on the east side of battlefield, we see an opportunity for more housing with active retail on the ground floors and parks and other amenities that can serve the the neighborhood residents in the surrounding neighborhoods.

4:03

The next area that we're gonna look at briefly is um Battlefield Corporate Center, what we're calling Battlefield Center.

4:10

Um you'll see in this one um a lot of housing.

4:14

I should mention that when we talk about housing, we're referring to residential mixed use.

4:18

So we're envisioning this could have a lot of retail and active uses on the ground floor.

4:23

It wouldn't necessarily be purely housing alone.

4:26

Um and the form could could change from block to block as well.

4:30

The other characters that we've seen for Battlefield Center is the opportunity we've heard from a lot of residents the desire for more community facilities, recreation facilities.

4:38

And so you'll see in the top in in the blue color the opportunity for an event field, pickleball courts, other sports courts as well to help that area become an asset for the surrounding neighborhoods and future residents.

4:54

As we uh make our way east, um, we're looking at the area that we're calling Eden Way and Summit Point.

5:00

Um, there are two main concepts in this area that we've been looking at with the community.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Child Care Services█████████████████17%
Historic Preservation█████████████████17%
Procedural███████████████15%
Planning And Development██████████10%
Public Engagement██████████10%
Community Engagement████████8%
Parks and Recreation████4%
Legal Affairs████4%
Land Use and Zoning████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Chesapeake City Council Meeting - January 23, 2024

The Chesapeake City Council convened for a work session at 5:00 p.m. followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on January 23, 2024, in the City Hall Council Chamber. The work session included presentations on the Greenbrier Area Plan and child care regulations. The regular meeting addressed appeals, consent items, library funding, a façade improvement grant, citizen comments, appointments to boards and commissions, and new business including an industrial waterfront study and a directive for lobbyist disclosure.

Consent Calendar

  • Resignation: Accepted the resignation of Nancy Tracy from the Chesapeake Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) Finance Board, effective January 31, 2024.
  • Ordinance 24-O-007: Amended the city code to add a street to the list where trucks of 1.5 tons or over are prohibited. (Public Works)
  • Ordinance 24-O-008: Amended the FY 2024 Capital Improvement Program and appropriated $18,700 to the Human Services Case Management Replacement System project. (Human Services)
  • All consent items were approved unanimously (9-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Nicole Anderson (self) raised concerns about the city's water billing calculation, asserting that the utility director does not have authority to change the term used to calculate usage rates, and requested that all accounts be reviewed for potential overcharges, not just those under 10 CCFs.
  • Vic Nicholls (self) spoke on city affairs, advocating for infrastructure improvements (e.g., widening Eden Way North) and expressed concerns about housing market trends and national economic risks.
  • Brad Moore (self) thanked city staff member Marvin Hodges for his service and praised the public engagement in the Industrial Waterfront Study.
  • Jennifer Economy (Rural Chesapeake Preservation Committee) requested updates on closing loopholes in rural zoning, criticized the postponement process for public hearings, and expressed concerns about the Comprehensive Plan review process.
  • Jeff Staples (self) criticized developers for submitting last-minute postponements and questioned the increase in dog license fees and the use of a Texas-based firm for fee collection.

Work Session Discussion Items

  • Greenbrier Area Plan Presentation: Consultants presented a preferred land use scenario for the Greenbrier area, identifying areas to preserve, enhance, or transform. Proposed transformations include a health village near the hospital, residential mixed-use at Battlefield Center, and a mixed-use corridor along Eden Way and Summit Point. Council members noted difficulty reading the maps and requested larger graphics. Councilmember Ritter expressed skepticism about market-based planning and emphasized citizen input. The Planning Director clarified that the plan balances community engagement with market data and noted that housing demand is being directed to areas with existing infrastructure. Over 600 survey responses were collected at a public meeting.
  • Child Care Regulations Briefing: Trish Meyer from the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) provided an overview of child care licensing requirements, including the transition from the Department of Social Services to the Department of Education. She explained the types of programs (licensed child day centers, family day homes, etc.), the application process, inspection types, and enforcement actions. Councilmember Ritter requested enhanced communication between the city and VDOE when licenses are revoked or sanctioned, to inform conditional use permit decisions.

Regular Meeting Discussion Items

  • Belkin Appeal (Public Hearing): Seth and Angela Belkin appealed the Historic and Architectural Review Board’s (HARB) denial of a certificate of appropriateness for sliding windows at 1345 Jackson Avenue. The Belkins stated they had obtained a COA for one-over-one windows but inadvertently installed sliding windows. HARB Chair Joe Maguire explained that sliding windows are not allowed under the design guidelines. Council debated modifying the appeal to require grids on the sliding windows. The motion passed 7-2 (Bunn and Ritter opposed), with the condition that the homeowners install grids to mimic one-over-one or two-over-one windows and maintain them.
  • Russell Memorial Library Expansion (Regular Agenda): The Council approved three emergency actions related to the library expansion:
    • Appropriation of $800,000 from available library proffer funds.
    • Transfer of $350,000 from the “Library Meeting Rooms, Kitchens, and Staff Lounges” CIP project.
    • Transfer of $105,383 from the “Integrated Library System (ILS)” CIP project. All three motions passed 9-0.
  • Great Bridge Façade Improvement Grant: Approved a resolution granting $20,000 to Wilson Village Shopping Center, LLC, with funds distributed through the Economic Development Authority. Passed 9-0.
  • Industrial Waterfront Study (New Business): Approved an initiating resolution (24-R-005) requesting the Planning Commission to consider amendments to the 2035 Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Industrial Waterfront Study. The study aims to understand current conditions, determine future land uses, identify adaptation strategies for resilience, and assess costs and benefits. Passed 9-0.
  • Lobbyist Disclosure Direction (New Business): Councilmember Ike proposed directing the City Attorney, City Manager, and Planning Director to include a requirement in land use applications for owners and agents to disclose individuals or firms hired to lobby Council and Planning Commission members. The City Manager stated he would provide an analysis of pros and cons but no policy recommendation. Councilmember Ritter requested that political action committees and campaign donations also be considered. The item was referred to staff for review.

Key Outcomes

  • Belkin Appeal: Approved 7-2 with modification requiring grid installation on sliding windows to mimic historic window styles and an obligation to maintain them.
  • Library Expansion Funding: All three funding requests approved as emergency actions (9-0 each).
  • Great Bridge Façade Grant: Approved 9-0.
  • Industrial Waterfront Study Initiating Resolution: Approved 9-0.
  • Lobbyist Disclosure: Directed staff to prepare an analysis for future consideration; no vote taken.
  • Appointments:
    • Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area Board: Justin Mathews (regular), Blaizen Bloom (alternate).
    • Chesapeake Hospital Authority: Lionell Spruill, Sr. appointed (5 votes) over Bill Mitchell (4 votes).
    • South Norfolk Revitalization Commission: Sabrina Bankes.
    • Animal Services Advisory Board: Nicole Yirenkyi (Health Department).
    • Chesapeake Board of Historic and Architectural Review: Marvin Hodges (Planning Department).
    • Chesapeake City Council Audit Committee: Continued to February 27, 2024.
    • Chesapeake OPEB Finance Board: Kristen Bailey (Finance Director).
    • Citizen Advisory Committee (to CLBA): Anthony Kelly (Western Branch).
    • Fine Arts Commission: Melissa Howerton.
    • Fire Prevention Code Appeals Board: Thomas Klecka and Ronald Morton (reappointed).
    • Natural Event Mitigation Advisory Committee: Kamille Primas (Emergency Management), Michael Stites (Public Utilities), Jonathan Vytopil (Citizen); one vacancy continued.
    • Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Board: Jennifer Batten and Jean McClellan-Holt.
    • Utility Review Board: Lakela Lofton and Daniel Wiggin; two vacancies continued.
    • Human Services Advisory Board: La’Toya Hines appointed (6 votes) over Johnical Haynes (3 votes); Ms. Hines declined after notification, creating a pending vacancy.
  • Clarifications: Councilmember Ritter requested that the Vice Mayor look into residency requirements for boards and commissions and that the City Clerk’s office report on attendance issues. Councilmember Carey requested a work session with the Chesapeake Regional Medical Center CEO and Hospital Authority members to discuss concerns.
  • Closed Meeting: Council certified the closed meeting held at 4:30 p.m. (9-0) and approved a future closed meeting on February 13, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. to discuss real property acquisition and conveyance (9-0).

Meeting Transcript

I want to welcome everyone to our January 23rd, 2024 Council Work Session. I'd like to turn it over to Mr. Manager at this time. Thank you, Ms. Mayor. And I'm immediately going to turn it over to Mr. McNamara for an update on the Greenbrier Area Plan. Good evening, everyone. Very excited to bring our consultants to you tonight. We're going to be discussing the air Greenborough Area Plan. We're about two-thirds of the way through here. So we've got about six months to go, and we'd like to propose some initial concepts for your feedback. So I'm going to turn things over to Brad Barnett from Cooper Robertson and Devin Cipson from Kimley Horn. Thank you, Jimmy. Good evening, everyone. Devin Simpson from Kimley Horn. So as Jimmy said, we met with you all back in May and we gave you a little bit of an update where we were in the plan. So we're here tonight to give you an update and show you some of our exhibits and get your feedback with where we are today. So we're about a year in, we've got about six months left. We've gotten through our existing conditions analysis, our market analysis, and we've begun to develop land use scenarios. And that's what we're here to get your thoughts on tonight. Along this time, we've done a ton of community engagement. We had over 50 hours of engagement with the community. So this included public surveys, community meetings. We've had several stakeholder meetings, both with internal city departments and external with residents, different folks in the business community as well. So we've had a lot of really good feedback that's helped inform what you'll see here tonight, which is really a blend of this feedback that we've received, our existing conditions review, and our market forecast analysis. So he is with Cooper Robertson, our urban design firm, and he's gonna walk you through the scenarios that you'll see here tonight. Good evening. It's good to be with you all. Uh again, my name is Brad Barnett. Um I'm gonna go through this at a pretty high level. Um I'm sure you'll have questions and feedback, and so we're happy to go into into more detail on anything after we go through these slides. Um, what we're gonna go through is what we're calling the preferred um land use scenario. Um the way that we developed this was, as Devin said, really built on the engagement process to date as well as the analysis that our team has been working on together with the city. Um to begin this work, we developed um three categories uh to inform uh the overall categories that we'd focus on. The first being areas to preserve. These are areas primarily single family residential areas or other areas that are functioning well today, where we did not anticipate significant changes coming to those areas from a land use perspective. The second category we're calling enhanced, those are areas where they're still functioning well today. There may be opportunities for public realm improvements like sidewalks or street trees or other minor improvements to these areas, but we still believe that they're functioning more or less the way they uh can in the future from a land use perspective. And then the last category, the ones that you see um in color on this map are areas called transform. These are the areas where we see the most opportunity for um substantial land use change in the future to achieve some of the goals that we've heard from the community to date. And that's where we're gonna focus our our um effort um right now. So I'm gonna go through each of these again at a very high level. Happy to come back and answer questions or hear feedback on these. Um the first is um what we're calling the health village. So we're located right now on Battlefield next to the regional hospital. Um, and this one really builds on the success of the hospital as a regional asset. We envision the opportunity for more medical focused mixed use around the hospital, including more ground floor retail restaurants and other things to serve visitors and employees of the hospital. Um we also see this as an opportunity for a lot of um age-targeted and senior housing, again, because of the synergies with the hospital function itself and the opportunities there. And then on the east side of battlefield, we see an opportunity for more housing with active retail on the ground floors and parks and other amenities that can serve the the neighborhood residents in the surrounding neighborhoods.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com