No, no, no.

No, no, no.

Welcome everyone to our May nineteenth, uh, twenty twenty six work session.

We do have a couple of issues that have been of concern for council in the past.

So we'll uh, Mr.

Guys, I'll turn it over to you and look forward to hearing the presentation.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, as you stated, both these uh topics are uh requested by counsel for uh information, and then one is uh in uh advance of a uh potential agenda item.

So without further ado, we'll uh toss it over to Jay Tate, he'll take us through the two presentations.

Okay, I guess this is the night for handoffs.

To my um right is Kevin Kemp.

He's the deputy um director of development and permits and also the zoning administrator.

So he will be doing the first presentation tonight, which is regarding um making a number of the violations in the city, um, go from criminal to a civil penalty, and as previously indicated, that is um been a frequent request of city council.

Why are some of these penalties so severe for something that sounds so minor?

So um I will turn it over to Kevin at this point.

All right, good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor, or acting vice mayor, and uh members at council.

Thank you for this opportunity to go through this amendment uh proposed amendments with you.

We put together a presentation that will hopefully you know clarify what it's all about and and dig into it.

So, purpose of this work session.

There are three amendments that'll be considered.

The first is to the zoning ordinance, then also chapter 14, uh building regulations and chapter 26 floodplain management.

Now, what you will get is approximately 150 pages.

This is a bulk uh building regulations, and I'm here to assure you that it is not nearly as daunting as you think.

And I will walk you through it and try to try to simplify it for you.

Uh so as I said, a bulk is in the building regulations, but in all of this, there are only two policy changes, and that is changing certain violations from criminal to civil and increasing the civil fines for all violations.

A majority of the amendment is just reorganizing the building regulations, putting them in more a logical uh readable order.

I have in there an example, so section 14.1 of the new amendment is where it gives the authority and relates it to the Virginia State Building Code.

Prior, this was in the middle of the section, section 1431.

So you went through, you know, a whole bunch of building regulations to then get the authority to then have more building regulations.

So what this does is it reorders it, gets rid of some duplicate provisions, and you know, it makes it more readable and makes sense.

All right, so as Jay mentioned, this has been a concern of this council that the violations, the penalties don't necessarily sync up with the violations, and that criminal uh penalties are wrong for you know, particularly zoning and building violations.

Uh, it also is a realization that criminal enforcement uh can affect judicial action.

What I mean by that is civil enforcement tends to have a better chance at the courts upholding uh you know our our side on it.

It's easier for default judgment.

You know, judge may hesitate with a criminal enforcement, he may hesitate if a criminal record is the result.

You know, those things could impact things such as security clearances, and we all know you know the nature of a bunch of our residents that could impact their jobs, you know, their lives.

So there might be that hesitancy, which makes civil uh more effective.

And lastly, civil enforcement is more flexible and uh it's more efficient for our inspectors.

Uh, you know, the goal of our ordinances is to come into compliance.

They're not punitive, so if you go and you sync that up with the care standard, we want to give our inspectors the best tools to come to that compla uh compliance and the most flexibility.

So civil uh gives that.

So, currently all building and floodplain management uh violations are criminal as well as most zoning.

We're changing those to civil.

Uh big reason is that criminal enforcement takes longer and it has a much higher burden of proof.

You know, you're dealing with criminal being beyond a reasonable doubt versus civil preponderance of evidence.

So, you know, in these cases of zoning and building particularly, criminal is or civil tends to be a better way to go.

Uh we put together this chart that shows exactly what the differences are.

You know, what you're dealing with, what these changes mean.

The biggest difference is in the fines.

Currently, the criminal fines, uh, it's up to a thousand dollars for the first defense, 1, fifteen hundred for the second, and 2,000 for subsequent offenses.

This is a lot higher than the proposed civil fines, but we have to realize is that the courts are the ones who issue those fines.

So if you go through the criminal process, they have to go all the way up to the courts, the judge issues it, and they're stuck in that process.

Where in civil fines, it gives the opportunity for them to pay without having to go through that.

This is a good opportunity to talk to the second policy change I mentioned, which was an increase in the civil fines.

So currently they are 150 dollars for the first offense and 250 for every subsequent.

These this proposed amendment would increase that to 200 for the first offense and 500 for every subsequent.

What it also does is it adds in the ordinance the ability for a person to pay half of the fine prior to the court date to avoid that.

So it gives that option that speaks to what I was talking about with the more flexibility for our inspectors.

The other big difference I wanted to point out was summons services.

So with a criminal violation, the summons has to be served by the sheriff's office.

You know, for a number of reasons, workload and that sort of thing, that can cause delays.

With a civil summons, that can be issued directly by our inspector by the staff via in-person or certified mail.

So that you know adds to that efficiency of civil penalties.

So civil penalties are appropriate, you know, as we talk for zoning and building and flood maintenance, but there are still instances where criminal penalties can be used.

Uh, two main ones are if the civil violation fines go in excess of five thousand dollars, we can pursue criminal, or if the violation causes injury or an unsafe condition.

Um, you know, land use law is very, it can be slow.

We're bound by state regulations.

So when we do have repeat offenders, one uh method that seems to be the most effective in our ordinance is that we can pursue injunctive relief, and that is still in the ordinance and a very viable option.

So now I'll go through each of the three proposed amendments briefly, talk in more detail.

The first is to the zoning ordinance, it's to one section 20-202, and this is a section on violations and penalties.

This amendment was considered by the planning commission at their March 11th meeting.

It was recommended for approval unanimously.

So this changes a majority of zoning violations to civil penalties.

However, there are still a few that will remain criminal, and those are violations to the sign ordinance, land development, failure to meet CUP stipulations, and as I mentioned earlier, zoning infractions that would result in injury.

So a picture is worth a thousand words, so we put this picture up here of a play structure.

This is a four-foot by seven foot by ten foot tall play structure that was constructed.

It didn't get a zoning permit, it wasn't the setbacks, therefore, uh notice of violation was issued.

Um it wasn't corrected in a timely manner and resulted in a criminal summons.

Well, the sheriff's office went to this house, put the uh criminal summons a little note on the door that had some you know rather stern language.

You know, hey, report to the the jail or courts and pick up your summons, and it kind of took the property owner off guard.

And what that did was it kind of brought to light the realization that, you know, I was talking about was this disproportionate uh enforcement, especially when the goal of our ordinance is to come to compliance.

Um so that's a perfect example of you know maybe criminal enforcement isn't isn't appropriate in all instances.

So the bulk of this amendment, as I mentioned, uh is chapter 14 building and building regulations.

Uh, within all of that, the only policy change is to change the violations from criminal to civil.

Just to give you an idea of the violations this would most impact.

The four most common violations we deal with are working without a permit, failure to obtain inspections or complete a permit, the quality of workmanship or operating without a CO.

So currently those are criminal, they will be civil.

The other uh changes I want to point out to this, which is one of the reasons why you see so many strike through and underlines, is we are moving the pool and spa regulations from chapter 14 and giving them a new uh chapter in the city code, and that's chapter 71.

Uh that is we really wanted those regulations to stand out.

You know, if someone's putting a pool or spa in their you know backyard, rather than it being buried in the back of chapter 14, we wanted them to find it, be able to simply go through the regulations and make that easier for for the citizens.

So the rest of the items in 14 are all housekeeping items, as I mentioned, it's been reorganized for more logical uh order before it started with uh dangerous buildings, then it went into the authority and and adoption with the building code, then it circled back to unsafe structures and talked about pools and service stations.

Um the more logical order which is proposed with this amendment, it starts off with you know the administrative portion linking it to the building code, it then goes into the fees and violations.

We actually added a section for violations, which makes it a lot easier for the building official to cite and produce a notice of violation for exactly that section, and then it goes into the building regulations.

Uh the last big change is we removed the last section, which was requirements for service stations, and this is a great example of a duplicate provision because that was in the you know, chapter 14, it's also in the state building code, and it's also in the zoning ordinance.

So it really did need to be in all three places.

That's something we got rid of.

So the last uh amendment, I don't need that, is uh to the floodplain management ordinance.

That's chapter 26.

This is very similar to zoning, it just changes the penalty section, uh, just to give you an idea of the common violations that this will impact.

Uh really the big one we see is failure to obtain a permit for any use in the floodplain, and this includes accessory structures, you know, whether it's sheds or the you know, like the place structure I showed you earlier, any kind of earthwork filling, grading, uh technically even putting down mulch or uh storing, you know, anything in the floodplain uh it impacts, and then the last one is a failure to obtain an elevation certificate.

So all these which were criminal will now be civil.

And with that, I will stand by for discussion.

Council um will consider this hopefully on a uh future agenda, and if you have any questions, I'm available.

I'm not clear about um chapter 71 with swimming pools and spas.

What are what are the consequences there?

Is it a criminal or civil and and are the fines the same?

Uh it is the same.

It is a civil penalty.

What it did is it took the exact, well, not exact, but none of the regulations for pools and spas changed.

It was cleaned up a little.

So it really just removed it from 14 and put it in a new chapter 71.

Everything else is the same.

So it'll be civil violations.

The regulations remain the same outside of a few minor changes.

Um, but it's just the substantive change was just to move it to a new code section.

So a swimming pool is a pretty expensive proposition to move.

Correct.

Yes, sir.

So the civil fines are there, is that severe enough to require?

I mean, I'd rather pay 500 to whatever than to move a pool.

Um, well, that that's an excellent question, and that would be uh worth considering for counsel.

Um, but no, you rate you raised an interesting point.

Now, you know, the civil fines is still an effective method to bring them to compliance because with the civil fines, as they escalate, you can then take that further the criminal enforcement or an injunction.

But um, that's an excellent point.

So it yeah, I I guess it does escalate to could escalate to becoming criminal.

It could, yes.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments?

Mr.

Pedaker.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So just for the sake of clarity, to build a play set, uh, or a clubhouse in one's backyard could potentially require a permit.

Uh yes, it could require a zoning permit, not a building permit, but a zoning permit where we would check the setbacks uh and make sure uh of that, yes.

Understood.

Well, uh just from my own personal perspective, uh uh understand codes probably more than most other people because I I am a licensed contractor.

Um having uh um the potential of injunctions or uh criminal uh the the possibility of criminal prosecution is very uh excessive.

And so I think this is definitely moving in a better direction of uh to better facilitate a care standard.

This is uh much better than what you have, so I'm very much in favor of it.

Thank you.

Councilman News.

Thank you, Ms.

Mayor.

I just have some questions for clarification.

On page five is our slide, it indicates that there's violations that are still going to be pursued criminally under certain circumstances.

Uh one being if the violation not remedied total fines exceeds five thousand dollars, and the other if the violation causes injury or creates unsafe conditions.

But when I'm looking at the ordinance proposal on page two, it indicates that the following provisions are criminal infractions that cannot be public punished civilly, those civil injunctive measures can still be used to present prevent.

Number one, failing to comply with sign regulations as set out in section 14700 of this ordinance when such violations relate to the posting of signs on public property or public rights away, any violation for activities related to land development, and then three, which indicates the injuries and the um $5,000 fine one.

So can I just get some clarification on one and two are not listed on our slide as things that are going to still remain criminal?

And why is the recommendation for those two to be criminal versus civil?

Um, well, the it remains in the code, and I believe the the attorneys could correct me if I'm wrong, it comes from the state code that if those fines exceed five thousand dollars, criminal may be pursued.

And so that's not my question is one and two under our materials in the agenda.

It's not the five thousand or the unsafe injury.

There's two additional things that are remaining criminal that are not on our slide.

Failing to comply with sign regulations and then violations relating to land development.

It indicates those will be criminal.

So why are those criminal?

And I guess what's the rationale behind that?

Both of those by state code are not allowed to be civil, and that's why they remain criminal.

So at one time, the state code actually had more requirements for things to be criminal versus civil, and they freed up the opportunity for more things to be civil, but it's my understanding they actually took the signed violations and went from civil to criminal, and I couldn't tell you exactly why, but you know, we follow the state code.

Perhaps um then Mr.

Geis, we may want to consider making this a legislative priority.

It just seems a bit um severe to me that we're gonna criminally punish a sign violation on public right of way.

I mean, if that's the case, then we don't even need a scienceweeper program.

We need a prosecution team that's gonna be prosecuting everyone for putting their signs on public property.

Um so that's maybe something we want to consider as a legislative priority moving forward.

Um I did have a couple other questions.

So um to the mayor's point about the pool, um, I guess from the other perspective, I read in the ordinance that it indicates every day shall constitute a separate violation for a civil penalty.

So for the instance of the picture of the play pen that was erected that it's in violation of the setbacks, so for every day, we can then theoretically go and find that person $200 for the first and then the second is five hundred dollars, and then from there it's five hundred dollars for every day until they fix it.

Is that correct?

Um, let's uh let me kick that over to the city attorney's office.

I don't think that was our creation necessarily.

That's how the state law is written that says that for civil penalties, exactly what you said.

Every day can constitute a separate offense.

In application, the development or department does not employ it that way, but technically the state law allows it.

So perhaps then we should consider a policy that that it's our intention that because I I just think that's wholly unfair.

We're giving somebody notice, and then theoretically, we legally could just nail them day after day after day after day with violations.

I don't know if we want to consider sometimes and I don't know what the law allows us to do, like in good faith, if the the violator is trying to rectify the situation that will toll any future violations for a period of time.

I just think there is the potential here that someone could get really hemmed up with a significant amount of fines and could hit that 5,000 literally in a week, and now we're criminally prosecuting them because they didn't get it fixed quick enough.

So that's I mean, and these things don't get fixed very quickly.

If you're moving a shed or a play structure, it's not gonna take you a day, 24 hours, it's gonna take you a week, it's gonna take you two weeks.

You need to get a contractor out who can get the permits to get it done.

So it almost feels like a backdoor way of how we are gonna still get people, we could get people criminally.

Not saying we would do it, but if it exists, that it's possible, I still think if that's not our intent, we should try to clarify that.

It could be a policy, and Jay Tate can speak to this more than I can, but I've been here 19 years and I represent a development permits.

I've never seen them do that.

So I don't think that there's really any track record of that.

However, if it was a policy council wanted, I'm sure the department head could speak to it.

Yeah, so the state code dictates it that way, but if we wanted to seek penalties, we would end up over in court, and not only do we want to be caring and accommodating to people to say, you know what, I need 30 days, can I have 30 days to move my shed?

If anyone's moving in the direction that's our policy, but if it wasn't our policy, it's been our experience that for these lower level offenses, the judges tend to not want to see a heavy-handed enforcement.

So even if we wanted to do that, we don't think there would be a reception in court that they would find that.

And in some cases, we have thought, okay, we need to be a little more assertive, and we've still backed off a little bit based on the expectation that the judicial branch would want to see some level of reasonableness for the level of violation.

So I don't know what we could do to, you know, assure you of that, but um I can tell you that it's not been done, and if it was done, it would not be dealt with very nicely by the judges either.

I just think for at least transparency to the citizens, we should have some type of policy that if we're trying to follow the care standard that we make it clear that we're trying to allow people the opportunity to fix things before we seek additional violations.

I just think if we're if we've never done it before, great, it's not gonna happen.

Why not codify it in some manner that we put forth a policy and say this is council's policy that we're not going to wouldn't you be intentionally writing policy that's violate state code?

Why not do that like you did the other, try to get uh legislation changed from the state level?

Well, I think we can enact our own policy of enforcement.

The I think correct me if I'm wrong, Miss Linley, the code allows us to enforce every single day as a violation if we want, but we can choose if we do that or not.

No, we don't necessarily need to put it in an ordinance, but at least we could have a written policy that council's intention is that we'd like to follow the CARE standards and allow folks a reasonable period of time to fix the problem before issuing an additional violation.

You could basically kind of build off of the state law council has that discretion to give staff some guidance on how you want them to implement state law.

Um yes, you could do that.

Okay.

So perhaps then I don't I mean, Miss Lindley, perhaps we could work with you to come up with some kind of written policy for consideration.

I think that would be separate and apart from this item that that council is considering on the agenda, but we have some type of policy that council agrees with on how we're to enforce them.

We're happy to help.

Um, I mean, this is kind of similar a little bit to like continuation of uses policy where you know, we're all familiar with that one.

Um so yeah, we're happy to work on that.

Okay, thank you.

Councilman Jeffries.

I think she answered it.

My my real question was is the is the law written so strict that it's a shall and not a may, and if it's a may, I think it would be the council member Newman's uh point, the best interest to construct verbiage that protects the citizens beyond who occupies these seats now.

Well, I have no doubt uh Mr.

Tate's office would would continue to do business as they have in the past.

We don't know the future in the positions of folks that hold those seats in the future, and this would be a layer of protection that would have to be changed in order for it to be violated.

I think that's totally fine.

I mean, right now, like Jay said, we've had this, obviously it's within the discretion of the department head and the department, but there is a really strong judicial check, and I really appreciated him making that point because I can tell you the attorneys in my office think about that every time we go to court.

We don't want to ruin our reputation in the eyes of the judge, though we do not want to go in there and ask on reasonable things.

Half the time when I used to go to court with civil penalties, everything was knocked down to fifty dollars, even if it was a you know, hundred and fifty dollar fine.

So there is a strong judicial check.

However, if it would give counsel a greater sense of confidence, we can work on compiling a policy for its consideration.

Dr.

King.

I just wanted to say I think the key word is the state code allows, so we don't have to enforce it.

And the judicial people may change at any point in time, and that's why we need policy because we can't depend on the judges to do that.

We don't know who the judges will be.

So I think we really do need a policy.

I agree with councilwoman new ones.

Did you?

I was just saying as long as and we'd have to also keep in mind as we're building the policy that there could be someone in the future uh citizen that may not want to comply, and we'd want to make sure we'd still have the ability to use more um tools at our disposal to to ensure we get into compliance.

Thank you.

Are we ready to move next?

Next uh topic.

Thank you.

Okay, the next topic came up um recently uh was a request of council for a briefing on how we determine the agricultural site development fees and whether there should be consideration for any type of adjustment in those fees, so that we're one trying to preserve agricultural uses and incentivize the continuing um use of property for agricultural use.

So I will fairly briefly go through exactly what we currently do as it relates to site development fees, and then we can talk about what other options we think we need to do.

So the first slide shows you there's um these are our site plan review fees, and they are not unique for any um conditions as it relates to what zoning or how big the development is.

There's two variables that kind of adjust the fee itself based on the number of apartments or the number of disturbed acres, and so as indicated, the policy does not differentiate what type of development is or what zoning district it is.

Now, one thing I would point out in this case is these fees are set and we review them periodically and compare them to other municipalities.

They don't really cover the city's cost to process these permits and these construction plans, but we try to stay competitive with what our other municipalities in the area charge.

Next slide.

The last time we increased fees, well, not the last time, but in a previous time, we recognize that one set of fees might not be appropriate for all site development based on how complex the construction plan is.

So we created a policy that would allow us to reduce fees if it was a less significant project.

And that is an administrative regulation, and it was authorized for uh in the city code that the department could come up with this policy, and the city adopted it and published it.

We worked with the development community years ago when we came up with it, and it was really their idea to say, well, what about these projects where there's very little improvements?

You know, do we need to pay the full fee?

So there is a reduction policy, and if you had to do a site plan in Southern Chesapeake, for instance, there's probably a number of things you wouldn't be doing.

You wouldn't be doing sewer and water, you wouldn't be doing um stormwater management because you probably have exemptions.

So just about everybody would be entitled to some reduction in the fee as it relates to how complex the plan is.

Next slide.

The next thing is we went back and we compared what we're doing to state code, and state code already provides exemptions for most agricultural uses in the way of saying you can't regulate these things, and so by not regulating them, we're not charging them fees as well.

We went back and looked at a number of of not necessarily agricultural uses, but uses that were less significant, and we would have stables and kennels and things like that that aren't necessarily agricultural, but they were less significant and they didn't warrant any type of site plan requirement.

There were also a number of more significant sites, and as a result of them not being complex, we not only reduced the fee, we didn't require a site plan, and we just got an entrance permit, which might have been like $50 as opposed to the $2,000 fee.

But these exemptions would apply to agritourism in addition to any kind of agricultural use.

Um there is an exception to this in the state code.

Let's see.

And that's on the bottom.

If it's determined to have a potential impact on health safety and general welfare, then in those cases there could be a site plan requirement employed for the development in the above um examples, agricultural and agritourism.

Next slide.

So that's the code.

Here's the reality of what's been done.

So for non-agricultural uses in A1, you know, there's a number of them, and all of them have been treated with the requirement for the site plan.

You see the solar farms, that's a common one.

Recreational entertainment facilities, schools, libraries, religious facilities.

These are things that might have gone down in A1 as a result of use permits.

Um there's been a number of commercial uses within the fentress airfield, which actually encourages commercial use over residential.

So if you go out to, for instance, Bedford, you'll see a lot of small businesses out there that would have gone through the site plan requirements.

Um there hadn't been a whole lot of agricultural or agritourism in the city of Chesapeake.

Um, but when it's occurred, um, there hadn't been many cases where we've actually required a site plan, and a lot of times, if the use permit is required, we will tell them up front, and you might have even seen an advisory notes and reports that went with the proposed use permit that no final site plan is required.

You know, you might need to do a buffer within certain time period, but a site plan wouldn't be required.

And again, that's based on the complexity of the site itself.

So with that, um, we will open up to discussions or ideas for any changes.

Anyone have any questions or uh Councilman Newlands?

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So I guess I just am looking for um the recommendation because this is something that I had talked to the manager about is redeveloping our plan types for the fees and coming up with a separate plan type for agricultural or agritourism, to show that we are a city who wants to have agritourism, agricultural things here in Chesapeake.

So I guess is it staff's recommendation that that's not necessary, or we should not develop the different plan types?

Because um, and I know you're kind of in our position, Mr.

Geis, because the manager's not here, but um he and I talked about evaluating the different plan types.

Other cities have so many different designations than just residential and non-residential.

So I don't know.

Maybe we need more information to see if that's something that we need to do, or what the recommendation actually is moving forward.

Well, we didn't necessarily recommend it, we're not opposed to it because we feel like it's already built in that per state code that we wouldn't regulate it.

We do like the idea that there is an exception that if the city is expending funds to provide plan review, that you know everyone should, you know, contribute their share, and we didn't know why we would deviate from that.

As a financial matter, the number is so small, I don't think there's a financial thing.

I think it's really an equity thing to say if the city's incurring cost for doing plan review, do you want to exempt one person because you know you could just as easily say, well, you know, we all love religious organizations.

Do we want to say, you know, should churches be exempt because you know they have to scrape together their money to do a church improvement, you know, should they get the benefit of not having to do site plans?

So we're not opposed to it, but that's how we came to it is basically just uh an equitable thing of you know, should everyone pay a share based on what is the city's cost.

So I guess I just need to talk to the manager because I am a little bit confused.

We're a council that I think wants to have more agritourism and agricultural things here in Chesapeake, so from my perspective, it's not necessarily an equity issue, it's we're trying to promote bringing those things here to Chesapeake, so trying to cut some of the red tape, like a $2,000 fee plus $200 per acre, which is substantial when you're talking about an agritourism project and we're trying to maintain acreage here in Chesapeake in that status.

I mean, Mr.

Tate said there's not a lot of agritourism agriculture in here in Chesapeake, and that's kind of what really keyed me in.

Was like, well, yeah, well, how do we get it here then?

Let's cut some fees so they can come.

So that's my position in bringing this forward was how do we make it easier for agritourism and agricultural type ventures to come to Chesapeake without having to foot such a heavy bill up front.

So perhaps we just need to have a discussion.

I know we're having a retreat soon.

Maybe this is a topic that can come forward with the retreat, and we can discuss um a specific designation.

I I know there's a way to do it.

I'm just big on having an objective standard so people know from the front what to expect when it comes to fees.

Not, well, maybe I could get a deviation potentially.

I mean, I just think we should be very clear in what the expectation is for applicants with what the fees are.

So perhaps we just have a further discussion at the um retreat on developing something.

I know Mrs.

Ritter, this was something very important to her too.

So I'm sure she would appreciate being involved in the conversation, perhaps.

It may be a good idea to look at what other localities that do have agritourism for the retreat, bring that up, uh Dr.

King?

Yeah, thank you.

I'm sorry, mayor, I left that out of the presentation.

We actually did check with all the other municipalities, nobody else had an exception for any individual use including agricultural agri tourism.

I'm just where I have seen it is uh a lot of it was Montgomery County and uh Maryland, and I don't know if they're so different that we couldn't get anything from it or not, but uh there's a considerable amount of agritourism activity.

Uh Councilman King.

Right, okay.

So I just wanted to ask how do we determine if there's a substantial impact on the health safety or general welfare of the public?

Who would actually determine that?

What would be the methodology?

I'm sorry, I did not hear you.

When it comes to determining whether or not there's a substantial impact on the health safety and general welfare of the public, what is the methodology for determining that and who would be responsible for that?

Well, that would be determined by the development and permits department, and it would be based on are there any improvements that would adversely affect drainage or affect um traffic, for instance.

So if you're on a roadway and you had uh significant volume of traffic coming in and out the site, you might not want a dirt road, which would create certain safety issues for a higher volume of traffic coming out in and out of the road.

So how much traffic you generate could be an issue, where you're located could be issued.

For instance, um, there was an agritourism on Ansel Road that was approved for a use permit from City Council, and there was no site plan required, and had there been a site plan, there wouldn't have been any fee because the entrance was off a very small road.

There was a similar development next door that um was projected to have, you know, an unlimited number of events with a large volume of people, and had they had a dirt road entering in the middle of a curve, you know, there was a risk of people safely going in and all on and off the road and being able to get out and ingress safely.

So in that instance, that's probably one of the few times that I've seen a site plan actually required for anything that would be considered agro tourism.

But most of the other ones, they're either so low volume or they're in a location where it wouldn't be warranted.

Um, I'm not sure.

So the developers will determine the potential impact on health.

No, it would be development and permits.

So if somebody comes in and they tell us, you know, this is my proposed uh development, we would tell them one is a site plan required, and at that point, I mean, they could raise the issue and say, well, we don't think we're generating any any um safety risk, but ultimately it would be the city's decision at the time the plan is submitted.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

I similar in a similar vein, I think what possibly we're asking about is under the state code in Section C, where it's determined substantial impact on health safety, would that ever that criteria ever trigger the regulation of the items that aren't typically regulated in A?

It would not create um a zoning type of requirement, but you would still have a site plan requirement for any of the stormwater or roads or improvements that would be needed to submit it to support the entity on site.

So in the case of Bond Road, there was a site plan required, and um they did pay a fee for the site plan review, but there was no stormwater requirement because they were exempt from the regulatory requirements on site.

Any other questions or comments?

Thank you.

Appreciate you both very much.

Thank you very much.

Uh any other items?

Mr.

Geis.

No, sir, that's our uh work session for today.

Thank you.

Our regular council meeting will begin at 6 30.

Council is now in session.

I'd like to recognize Council Member Bunn at this time for invocation and the latest in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you, Mayor West.

Let us pray.

As we begin our meeting tonight, let us always pray to have the eyes that see the best in people, a heart that forgives the worse, a mind that forgets the bad, and a soul that never loses faith in God.

In Jesus' name we pray.

Amen.

Please join me for the Pledge Allegiance.

Councilman Bond, thank you.

That was very nice.

Appreciate that.

Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Council Member Bond.

Here.

Council Member Jeffreys.

Here.

Council Member King here.

Council Member Newman's here.

Council Member Smith.

Councilmember Ward.

Present.

Council Member Whitaker.

Present.

Vice Mayor Ritter is excused.

Mayor West.

Here.

Next is the uh approval of the proposed agenda.

Are there any changes that council members have for the proposed agenda?

We need to ratify Ms.

Ritter.

Pardon?

We need to ratify Ms.

Ritter.

Oh, okay.

Thank you.

Let's just take this quick and then we'll do the ratified.

Okay.

Well, she can't vote on it.

Okay, go ahead.

Motion to ratify.

Remote participation.

Vice Mayor Debbie Vitho.

May nineteenth, twenty twenty six.

Pursuant, Virginia Law and City Council's adopted remote participation policy.

I move that we ratified the remote participation of Vice Mayor Richard in tonight's meeting.

Vice Mayor Ritter notified the mayor that she is unable to attend in person due to a medical condition and has requested to participate electronically from her residence.

The mayor has reviewed the request and determined that it complies with council's remote participation policy.

Vice Mayor Ritter.

We'll participate in the meeting in a manner that allows her to voice to be heard by everyone in the council chamber and her remote location will be noted in the meeting.

Minutes as required by law.

Thank you.

Could Mr.

Bunk, we have a second.

Second.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, please prepare to vote.

Vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

Is approved by an 8-0 vote.

Thank you.

Next is the approval of the proposed agenda.

Are there any changes to the proposed agenda?

Seeing none, could we have a motion?

Move approval.

Thank you, Dr.

Ward.

Second.

Thank you.

Mr.

Whitaker.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Motion to approve the agendas presented is adopted by an 8-0 vote.

Excuse me, Ms.

Ritter.

Yeah, I vote you.

Motion to approve the agenda as presented is adopted by a 9-0 vote.

Thank you.

I'm sorry.

Next is uh I would like to recognize council member uh ward.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, and to all those present.

Uh it just gives me a great pleasure to recognize the chapter president, Mrs.

Carla Ingram Smith, and the social action chair, Miss Andrea Bolden, with the Chesapeake Virginia Beach alumni chapter of Delta Sigma Thesa Sorority Incorporated.

They are present with us tonight as part of the Delta Day at the Chesapeake City Council.

And I thank all of you for coming, my sisters and our sisters, because uh Dr.

King is also a sister, and you look beautiful.

And thank you, thank you, thank you for coming and for all that you do with social action in the city of Chesapeake to help our citizens.

Thank you, and God bless all of you, and we love you.

And I hope you're gonna stay for the rest of the meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

That sounds like a sentence.

Could we have actually have the uh chapter president and uh the chairs please stand as you are recognized?

Uh thank you, ladies.

We're really glad to have you here tonight.

Next is a proclamation, uh, National Public Works Week.

I'd like to ask uh Director Public Work Earl Sorry, along with the staff to please come to the podium.

Everybody's working their way up here, but uh, mayor and members of city council on behalf of the 500 men and women of public works.

Thank you for this proclamation and the acknowledgement of public works week.

The theme this year is rooted in service, powered by community, which acknowledges that the roots of service run deep in public works.

It's what has propelled public works innovations that have helped communities evolve into places where people can lead lives of purpose and possibility.

Some of our work, like building roads and bridges, weekly collection of trash, operation of our toll facilities are all highly visible, while other public works contributions like maintaining our stormwater systems, our municipal facilities, running our environmental programs, and the fiscal support are sometimes hidden from view, but together these efforts form the foundation of a thriving community, reminding us that every project, seen or unseen, powers the connection between service and the people that we serve.

And so, since this is a you know about you know the the best of what we do in public works, uh receiving the proclamation tonight on behalf of the department or our American Public Works Association award winners.

Uh, these employees competed for awards with hundreds of other nominees throughout the Mid-Atlantic region.

Uh, that goes from South Carolina uh up to uh Delaware and West to West Virginia.

So very competitive, you know, you know, large area.

And so I will just name a few of our uh our award winners.

So the recipient of the Robert S.

Hobson Leadership Service Award is Mr.

Mr.

Keith Brazil, our facilities maintenance administrator.

The recipient of the non-public contact customer service award is Mr.

Frank Klein, our business administrator.

Receiving the public contact customer service award, and we went outside the department for this one.

The Sergeant Chris Chanceowitz, a member of the police department, and an honorary member of Public Works.

And receiving the Project of the Year Award on behalf of the project team is Mr.

Kevin Brookshire, project manager for fire station number eight.

Also joining us tonight is Sam Sawan, our Deputy Director, Jason Brown, our customer service manager, Alison Harper, our public information coordinator, and Lena Jimenez, our facilities construction manager.

So again, thank you for the recognition.

Mr.

Soy, if I may, uh just want to just say a few.

What you said earlier, so much of what you do is behind the scenes, and I had the opportunity a couple years ago to see that on a stormy snowy night and saw all the behind the scenes works that you do that really does save lives and makes us city who we are.

So we really do appreciate you and your team, your leadership, and all that you do.

Every time we I meet someone on the street that works in your department, they're always friendly and courteous and always trying to improve our city.

And they will tell you that in a heartbeat.

So thank you.

Thank you all.

And if you'll indulge us for a couple of pictures, yes, please do.

Thank you.

Mr.

Mayor, while they're doing that, may I say something?

Please.

I think I can speak for the majority of law enforcement in the city that on those dark stormy nights and the snowstorms, those of us standing next to the blue lights.

There's no better sign coming our direction than the yellow lights.

So thank you for that.

Well said, thank you.

Applicants, agents, and citizen comments on public hearing items.

Next, the city council meeting constitutes limited public form.

Therefore, public comments must be relevant to the items on council's agenda tonight.

When speaking on the agenda items, please make sure your comments directly relate to the merits of the application.

Which means you should focus on the details and the facts of the proposed agenda item.

Focusing comments on the merits of the application will ensure that the public hearing serves its intended purpose of gathering relevant information for the voting body.

Further, to strike a balance between maintaining order and honoring the public's right to express themselves and as established by the city's council's rules of order and procedure, any speaker that delays, interrupts, or otherwise disrupts city council's ability to conduct its meeting in an orderly manner by disorderly insolent or disturbing action, speech or other conduct will be declared out of order.

Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers who wish to speak prior to the to the presentation of the public hearing items?

No, sir.

Thank you.

Next is uh council's consideration of public hearing items.

Madam Clerk, would you please present the items?

Item A, PLN R E Z 2025-009, Veridian Reserve North, Coal Residential Inc., Applicant Drawing Development Group, LLC, owner, Williams Mullen Agency, for a conditional zoning reclassification of approximately 25.3 acres from A1 agricultural to R8 residential.

The property is located west of Berkshire Forest, north of Viridian Reserve, and south of Hanbury Woods in the Great Bridge Planning Area.

This item was continued from the March 17th, 2026 City Council meeting.

Planning Commission recommends denial.

However, if council chooses to approve the application, proffers are listed in the official agenda.

Mr.

McNamare, what's the planning staff's recommendation?

The proposed rezoning continues a compatible residential development pattern while dedicating public parkland, making critical roadway connection, and preserving open space and an opportunity for future pedestrian and vehicular connections.

It aligns with city council's smart growth principles by supporting attractive communities, walkable neighborhoods, and compact conservation design.

Staff recommends approval would revise proffers.

Thank you.

Madam Clark, are there any speakers who wish to speak?

Yes, sir.

We have eight speakers.

The first speaker is Grady Palmer.

Rep applicant speaking in support, followed by Rodney Flores.

Good evening, Mayor West.

Um, Vice Mayor Ritter, uh, members of the City Council.

My name is Grady Palmer.

My business address is 222 Central Park Avenue.

I'm also gonna give my home address tonight because it's gonna be important for what I have to say.

Uh it's 225 um Avonley Point in the Berkshire Forest uh community.

Uh Edinburgh Parkway has long been planned to create a new north-south connection between Hanbury Road and Hillcrest Parkway.

It's taken about 20 years, uh, but the end is in sight.

Um, you can tell if you can scroll back to the um yeah, that I think that'll do it.

You know, little sections of Edinburgh Parkway have have come online over the years, and so in um if you look to the top of the page uh there, there's there's a neighborhood that's called Hanbury Woods.

They built out one section of Edinburgh Parkway, and then you see Viridian to the south of the project limits built out uh a second section of Edinburgh Parkway.

And there's been a big gap in Edinburgh Parkway for many, many years until uh the Ashburn Meadows project was approved.

And so Ashburn Meadows is under construction right now and anticipates extending Edinburgh Parkway north to connect into Viridian uh by the end of this year.

So that will be uh if they stay on schedule a full functioning roadway uh connection that will that will that will be made to Viridian, and so uh and then beyond that it goes all the way down to Edinburgh right now, and so this is the final missing piece for Edinburgh Parkway.

And so um it's taken about 20 years.

We've been working on it for for a long time, but uh I I personally am very excited uh to see this uh come online if the council approves the project.

Now the next section, um, uh one of the things I want to just clarify a little bit, we have been made some adjustments to the proffer to sort of coordinate the improvements on if it's approved tonight.

Uh the improvements on the project limits, and then so that's that stretch of Edinburgh Parkway.

You can set up see it running from the from the north to the south there from the little cul-de-sac up to the top down to the to the connection to Viridia.

That's Edinburgh Park, they w that will run the length of our property.

And so one of the things that we've tried to do is to coordinate uh our improvements with the little stretch of improvements that just have to go across uh the adjoining property owner who's actually a neighbor of mine that lives in Berkshire, so just to the north of that uh cul-de-sac there is a little little stretch of land that could separates the existing Edinburgh Parkway from that cul-de-second and the project that we're proposing tonight.

And so the proffer would coordinate those improvements so those improvements would be made uh on that adjoining property at the same time that our improvements are being made uh in our in the subdivision project that we're proposing.

So we've we've been trying we have been very working very hard uh to coordinate all the improvements to make sure they all go in at once, uh, and that the city has the rights uh to the right-of-way on adjoining property owner.

And so I've been working with that owner.

Uh they have signed a contract with us to purchase that bit of property.

Uh we uh have appraised this property.

The bank has agreed to release it.

Uh the paperwork is trying to catch up.

We expect to have the bank's signature this week, and so but all that has been going on uh in the last 60 days to sort of get to guarantee that these improvements will all go in at once and the road will be opened.

Um so that's been a lot of work, but it's been worth it because that's the goal is to get a full functioning uh connection for Edinburgh Parkway north to Hanbury Road, and that's gonna be important for a couple of different reasons.

And one other one other adjustment we made to the proffers, just a bit belt and suspenders approach here, just to make sure that there aren't any wrinkles.

We have additionally proffered that in the event something were to happen with the bank, that we would take the money that we were gonna pay the property owner, convert that to a cash contribution to the city uh for the city in the if subsequent decisions had to be made, but would have the ability then to acquire the right-of-way directly.

And so, again, another belts and suspenders approach here, trying to make sure that there isn't uh issues that are lost in the shuffle.

And so, another thing that we've updated uh since the last time uh you heard this uh application.

So I live in Berkshire Forest.

Um, my neighborhood has experienced significant loss over the years.

Three neighborhoods have come online over the past 10 years that border Berkshire on three sides: Hickory Woods, Hickory Manor, and Viridian.

All three of these neighborhoods resulted uh uh in viewshed changes uh and and changes to people's backyards, particularly the people that live on the perimeter of Berkshire.

But Berkshire gained a lot too.

Uh we walk those neighborhoods, my friends walk those neighborhoods, we have friends in those neighborhoods, my children have friends in all three neighborhoods.

There it's they're all welcomed addition.

Um Berkshire for for many many years was alone by itself surrounded by woods, and all three of those communities have added uh to Berkshire and uh in many many ways, uh understanding that there was loss, but what has been gained over the years is it's been so much more.

And I think the same is true of this community and the and the impact that this community that we're proposing will will reach beyond Berkshire.

Uh you will see if you can you can kind of tell there uh in the middle of the of the diagram there uh to the northwest.

There's a little, oh Jimmy, if you can point to the little stub connection that we're proposing uh that would eventually connect to Johnstown Road, correct, right there.

And so there's a planned connection uh that will that will extend as we call it drawn road now, uh, but would extend from Johnstown Road that would connect into Edinburgh Parkway.

So even more communities will be connected uh either to bike or to walk uh to Edinburgh Parkway.

Biking and walking to Edinburgh, the retail and the restaurants in this area of the city does not exist right now.

You have to go get in your car and drive to Edinburgh.

Uh so that this is a very important piece of the puzzle to unlock a lot of pedestrian uh connectivity uh for for this area.

And opening up Edinburgh Parkway to Hanbury Road will solve another problem.

I just drove my son uh to Miller's, we go to Miller's every afternoon.

Uh, we and we'll come back down battlefield and turn on to Kegman.

There were there.

I tried to count the cars that were that were trying to turn left off of Kegman on the battlefield.

I think it was about 15 cars deep, just waiting uh their turn to turn left off of Kegman on the battlefield.

If that's not sustainable, opening up Edinburgh Parkway to a full connection uh to Hanbury Road will relieve the Kegman Road intersection, in my opinion, significantly.

And one additional uh component of this project that isn't just unique to this project, but coming up Edinburgh Parkway out of Edinburgh is a water line uh connection that's being made.

And so the city uh the utilities department specifically has been working to get a redundant water line uh available out of Edinburgh.

There is Great Bridge basically it runs on one water line in Battlefield.

Uh, this will provide another utility connection that will be a redundancy uh and a safeguard in the event something were to happen to that 30, 35 year old water line and battlefield.

So again, it's another good piece of planning uh that your staff has done uh to manage infrastructure and to make available redundant resources.

Uh, this will create uh redundancy and and water pressure looping.

So another thing you wouldn't normally think about, but the things that staff thinks about, and we in the development community think about, uh, will make be a major improvement uh to this community um in general.

And so with that, I do ask uh for your approval tonight.

I will stand by for any questions that you have, and I thank you very much.

Rodney Flores available for questions only.

Kurt Grizzard.

Speaking in opposition, followed by Casey Hong Kong.

Mr.

Mayor, ladies and gentlemen of City Council.

I'm here in opposition to this project.

We have seen a lot of growth within Verdian Reserve.

I live at 251 Wisdom Path.

First name is Kurt.

Last name is Grizzard G-R-I-Z-Z-A-R-D.

We have seen, because currently there is the neighborhood that's being built, which I'm not sure exactly what the name of it is, but it's 400 housing units.

We were promised by the developers, you would see very minimal traffic in the neighborhood.

We see on average 20 dump trucks coming through there on a regular basis every day.

When this new neighborhood is built, we're going to continue to see this because we're the main thoroughfare to where both of these neighborhoods are going to connect.

So they're all cutting through here.

They promised us they would cross off peaceful.

And then this neighbor, then this developer is saying, Oh, we're gonna cross through on battlefield.

However, a lot of these dump truck drivers say for safety concerns, we stay on the paved road.

Only paved road is up wisdom path.

But with these houses being built, we're destroying the wildlife.

We have bald eagles that live in the trees in those that section of woods.

We have deers that constantly come out and you know migrate through our common areas.

So we're not gonna see that anymore because all those trees are going to be ripped out.

Most importantly, though, is my daughter will be going to Southeastern Elementary with the new builds of the 400 homes that will be built after that has been completed.

Southeastern will be at a hundred and fifty percent capacity, even with the new addition.

So to add 45 new homes is gonna put them a harder strain on them.

These teachers have enough strain as it is without the addition.

The addition comes in, more children come in.

These kids' educations are going to suffer because these it's the staffing levels are low, the kids' level are high, so you're gonna have to increase numbers of kids per class.

Not to mention all the traffic that the neighbors are gonna, neighborhoods are gonna see.

Yes, it may connect Edinburgh through, but one little small section of the road, it's not guaranteed to cut down the traffic.

You're gonna have more traffic constantly cutting through on Edinburgh, which poses a risk to our kids and our safety.

There's a lot of kids that play in that little section around there because it's open common area.

So with the house on the corner, if they're playing baseball, you have these cars that come down.

And you know, unfortunately we see it through our neighborhood alone, but you're gonna have a nice straight straight stretch of Edinburgh.

It potentially couldn't turn into a racetrack.

We see it up on 168 now where at night they're sitting there having it as a drag strip.

What's not to say that this section of Edinburgh cut cutting back through from Target over to Hanbury is not gonna turn into a drag strip.

So I greatly appreciate all your attention, and I encourage you to vote no.

Cassie Hung.

Speaking in opposition to follow Emma Debian.

Good evening.

My name is Cassie Hung.

I live at 343 Wisdom Path in Viridian Reserve.

I will also declare that I am a certified planner through the American certified American Institute of Certified Planners, but I do not work for any of the organizations involved in this.

I'm purely here as a citizen and a resident of the neighborhood.

My major concerns are the three same concerns that Mr.

Grizzard just took to you about.

One, you're developing an area for a roadway.

That's all it's pretty much gonna get us.

You're gonna put 40 something houses on an area that's 25 acres, a quarter of which is documented as wetlands in the proposal.

I gave the clerk a map of the current witlands, which unfortunately I'm sorry, I did not have enough copies.

If you look at this copy of this area, it is a lot more than just six acres of wetland.

They're only gonna keep about three.

They're gonna put a BMP in there and they're gonna put in some conservation area, but they're still gonna build on it.

By the way, they also built on it to build on the other two.

The Berkshire Forest area, they have houses on the wetland.

You're killing your wetlands now.

Now, granted, you we Chesapeake have a lot of wetland area, most of it's in the dismal swamp.

We're never gonna build there.

But if you keep building on these areas, where is the water gonna go?

My background is in civil engineering and planning.

Water has to go somewhere, and if we keep putting into the stormwater, we're gonna kill our land.

This area is coloredly zoned as agriculture.

I don't think there's been agriculture on there for at least a couple 50 years because there's forested area there now.

It hasn't been agriculture for a very long time.

Your wetland area has taken over that area, and it is a great asset to both our area, Berkshire Forest, and the other neighborhoods around here.

It's a great buffer to have to provide that.

Additionally, my other concern is traffic in schools.

My child is a fourth grader.

We stand at that bus stop at Edinburgh Parkway.

There's two of them on that connections, right at those two roads of wisdom path.

Trucks going back and forth, roaming down that road, parking on that street.

There's a lot of construction.

I know that's temporary.

I'm part of the world of that.

Construction is part of it.

But what's gonna happen when all that goes through?

And you bring it all the way up.

Connectivity is great, but like they said, it's gonna turn into a drag road.

Wisdom Path already has that problem, and we're only a small little bit.

You go, I live at the very end of the U.

People come flying down the street, the straightaway in Viridian.

Kids playing in the roads.

I just drove by.

There was three kids, four kids driving around playing with road RC cars in the roads.

We use the common areas.

There's all those kids around there.

This is 165 homes in Viridian Reserve, and we're the only ones that are gonna impact.

Because if that deal doesn't go through, it dead ends in our neighborhood, and everybody's going up and down there, and it doesn't go all the way through.

I don't I don't like planning on something that's not guaranteed.

The schools, that development, yes.

You finally told us that hey, last time we were here, we were supposed to go to the school board if we had an issue with overcrowding.

The city council's causing it.

You keep providing homes.

He talked about the 400 homes at Ashburn Meadows.

Twenty, seven hundred approved homes in just this area are documented in the proposal.

Plus another 400 that were proposed.

Those were the approved 2700 have been approved since the last 10 years just in this one area, and we're just now finally getting an addition to Southeastern Elementary in 2026.

10 years have passed in that time frame, and you're adding another 50.

It may not seem like a lot, it's 4743.

It keeps changing.

I don't know how many there are now.

But you keep adding it, and it's great.

I'm all about compact and growth, but you do it on an area that makes sense, and this is a wetland area that doesn't make sense to put that many homes.

Thank you.

Emma Dabian speaking in opposition, followed by Brooks Spangler.

Good evening, mayor, council members.

My name is Emma Dabian.

My address is 300 Wisdom Path.

I live at the intersection of Wisdom Path in Edinburgh Parkway.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

As mentioned, I'm here in opposition and would like to share two of my primary concerns, the same as what others are sharing tonight.

The first of those concerns is the impact on our schools, specifically Southeastern Elementary.

The school is already over capacity, and many families are seeing firsthand the strain this is placing on our children, classrooms, and teachers.

Adding a significant number of new homes, particularly family housing, is inevitably going to increase enrollment numbers.

As mentioned earlier, even with the planned expansion at Southeastern, we're concerned the school is still going to exceed capacity due to multiple other nearby developments that are already in progress along Battlefield Boulevard and in Viridian Reserve South.

I ask that we consider making concrete commitments for our children and not just future considerations when thinking about future developments.

My second concern is the Edinburgh Parkway extension and right-of-way agreement.

Connecting this back to the city council meeting we had in March on this topic where things were continued.

It was shared that the property owner of that small piece of land was fully in support of this development.

With this update and no longer being able to absolutely secure that, it seems that's clear that is not the case.

While I understand the intent to align with the city's long-term transportation plan, the structure of the agreement and the proffer leaves too much uncertainty and transfers the risk away from the developer and gives that burden to the city and gives the burden to existing residents.

Specifically, the developer is only required to make a limited one-year effort to acquire the necessary right of way before the responsibility is shifting to the city.

The alternative with the fixed cash contribution doesn't guarantee that the right of way is going to be secured and that Edinburgh Parkway is going to flow all the way through.

Critical elements of this project, like securing the land timing, funding, and the actual execution are dependent on future agreements and conditions that aren't guaranteed at this time, leading us to a potentially fragmented infrastructure and causing direct impacts to those of us in the existing community and along Wisdom Path.

In other words, just to put it very bluntly, the impacts of this development project are certain.

We know the impacts this is going to have for those of us who are already in the existing community of Veridian Reserve, but the infrastructure solution is conditional and very unknown at this time.

And second, to confirm that funding, right of way, and construction are secured, not just contingent before this development is approved.

I understand the need for housing and thoughtful development.

However, growth should not come at the expense of our children's educational quality, nor at the expense of sound infrastructural planning.

Thank you.

Brooke Sprangler.

Speaking opposition, followed by Kyle Sprangler.

Good evening.

My name is Brooks Bangler and I live at 324 Wisdom Path.

I'm here tonight to urge you to follow the Planning Commission's recommendation and vote no on the Verde and Reserve North project.

This development is fundamentally flawed, lacks community support, and relies on infrastructure promises that are not guaranteed.

As a reminder, the planning commission reviewed this proposed development in depth in February of this year.

After going through the impacts of this project, that group voted against the Verde and Reserve North project moving forward.

The topics discussed at that time included disruption of this environmentally sensitive area, pushing a dense 43 unit residential subdivision into a designated conservation area, fragments the local ecosystem and destroys the vital green spaces that protect the watershed.

We also discussed the strain, as multiple families noted already, the strain on Southeastern Elementary School.

The school is overcrowded and will continue to be so after this extension is opened later this year.

At the last city council meeting, we were directed to go talk to the school board.

And so I contacted them.

The most consistent point made by all the members that I spoke with is that the school board has zero authority over the land use, rezoning, or the approval of new developments.

While the school system does provide data to the city council to inform of their decisions, they are simply responsible for reacting to and solving the problems created by city council approvals.

Members also noted that the school board is where capacity is managed, but they're limited by available resources and the pace of growth, which can outstrip the ability to build additions or new schools.

More than one member comment commented that directing the residents to the school board for developmental concerns is misleading because the school board has no has no ability to stop houses from being built.

Lastly, we talked about the lack of community support.

The Veridian Reserve neighborhood does not want to lose the green space.

That is also a very important wet zone, and we also don't want to deal with additional traffic coming from either construction or if this private property is not acquired to extend Edinburgh Pathway.

Is actually not interested in connecting to this new development, whether there's an extension to Edinburgh Parkway with or without the Verdian Reserve Project will continue to have these same issues in one year and will not be alleviated by a 47,000 dollar contribution from the developer.

The planning commission looked at the broken infrastructure, listened to the community, and voted no on this project.

I ask you to do the same.

Thank you.

Kyle Sprangler speaking in opposition.

Followed by Beth Johnson.

Good evening, members of City Council, Mayor.

My name's Kyle Spangler.

I live at 324 Wisdom Path, and I'm here to strongly oppose Viridian Zorn Viridian Reserve North rezoning, as it's being proposed.

This project is being represented as responsible growth, but it isn't.

It's a development that relies on a single point of access through an existing neighborhood, forcing all traffic, all impacts, and all risks onto current residents.

There is no functioning second outlet.

There is no traffic distribution, and there is no infrastructure in place currently to support what is being proposed.

The applicant points to future connect to a future connection to Hanbury Road.

But let's be clear, the connection is not real today.

It depends entirely on land.

The applicant does not own, does not control, and cannot guarantee.

And that land belongs to a private citizen.

This proposal does not comply with the 2050 master transportation plan as it lacks currently connection and would funnel traffic from 43 additional homes through the entire length of Viridian Reserve and on to Kegman, worsening uh conditions at an already hazardous intersection with Battlefield.

So this council is being asked to approve a project based on based on one of two outcomes.

Either the connection never happens, and the surrounding neighborhood lives with permanent congestion safety concerns, or the city is eventually pressured into taking private property from a decorated war hero to force that connection.

Neither outcome is acceptable, neither outcome reflects responsible planning.

This is not how we should manage growth in Chesapeake.

Moving forward with development before infrastructure is secured and relying on someone else's land to fix the problem later is not responsible planning.

It passes risk and potential legal expenses on to taxpayers who may and likely will ultimately bear the high costs of acquiring through litigation the neighboring property and the additional costs of construction of the road after the project is done.

I ask that you not approve a project that depends on infrastructure.

We cannot guarantee, and land we do not control.

Thanks for your time.

Beth Johnson.

Speaking in opposition.

All right, good evening, everybody.

My name is Beth Johnson.

I live at 326 Wisdom Path.

I'm here again.

I have come every single time, and I'll keep coming if we have to, but I strongly oppose the proposed development behind the Viridian Reserve, behind our Viridian Reserve.

You've heard all of our concerns.

The traffic and safety concerns tied to the added density, overcrowding in our already strained schools and transportation systems.

We have four children, two have already gone through Southeastern.

It was overcrowded, and they were they're about to go to high school.

I have one in fourth grade.

Every day.

She tells me they're getting new students, and then that's just from the development that's going on further down battlefield.

Not even the other section that's that they're talking about adding on to us.

I have one starting kindergarten.

Today is her birthday.

Happy birthday, Madeline.

Instead of having cake, I'm here tonight fighting for the land behind our house.

Okay.

The loss of all of this, the overcrowding, it's it's ridiculous.

I I truly understand that the city of Chesapeake wants Edinburgh Parkway complete, it's in the 50-year plan.

I think at some point we would all like the road.

I mean, I get it.

It would be nice for my kids to be able to go to high school straight out of the neighborhood, but that's also going to be a very dangerous thing that's gonna happen, and y'all are gonna have to be looking at red lights and that's a whole other story.

Okay, so my point is I guess um our community deserves to be heard and how the development takes shape.

Um the developer is hanging dangling a nice little piece of road in front of y'all, and it's basically gonna be included in their neighborhood.

But um all these houses, that's where we have to stop.

There's too many houses, and y'all are it's they're just being crammed in every little nook and cranny in Chesapeake.

And we left Virginia Beach because it was so overcrowded, and there was nature around us here in Chesapeake, and now it's all being destroyed, and it's looking like Virginia Beach.

And while parts of Virginia Beach are beautiful and wonderful, we left to come to find more nature, and a Viridian reserve was supposed to be green and we had forest all around us, and now two-thirds of it's already been wiped out, and y'all want to take out the last bit that we have.

I say y'all, I don't mean y'all, y'all know what it means.

Anyways, uh so I'm just asking at minimum to um listen and to help reduce the impact on our neighborhood.

The they're only offering a 10-foot easement, which is not sufficient for to preserve any privacy, protect any wildlife corridors, maintain the natural buffer that defines uh Viridian Reserve, um at least expanding the buffer would uh would help.

Um the density of the project, cramming 43 is I think what we're at right now.

Um it's already intensifying the strain on everything.

Uh if it can't be stopped, if the development's not gonna be stopped and it's gonna be improved in some way, then it still needs to take in account the the neighbors.

Uh we don't want this.

And we're not necessarily asking for all progress to stop, we're asking for thoughtful balanced growth that does does not come at the expense of everything that makes Chesapeake.

You know, we're supporting Chesapeake online as green and clean, and well, that's the school thing, but all of this n nature and beauty, and but it's being taken away from us every second.

So I laugh when I see the advertisements about our beautiful city of Chesapeake, and then drive down 168 and it's all flat, and there's giant big concrete pipeline things going in to promote more houses.

I'm sorry, I'm it's been a lot of times coming up here, and I'm we don't want to come up here anymore.

We'd like for it to be denied, but like I said, if you're going to approve it in some way, don't do that tonight because there's a lot that needs to change on there, like 43 houses, um a road that is actually guaranteed because nothing up there is guaranteed.

Nothing.

So thank you.

That concludes the speakers.

Thank you.

Motion is now in order with proffers.

We have a motion, please.

Move to approve with proffers.

Thank you, Mr.

Whitaker.

Second, please, Mr.

Jeffreys.

A second.

Thank you.

Any discussion from council members?

Mr.

Bond.

Thank you, Mayor West.

I have a question for the applicant, please.

Yes, sir.

Um Mr.

Palmer, several of the speakers tonight brought up a to me a good point.

The right-of-way, the easement, the right-way.

Can you go into some details?

So a couple, just let me back up just one second.

So typically when we're coming to and presenting projects to you, uh the property is under a purchase agreement.

So this property's no different.

The the project site is under a purchase agreement with the property owner to sell us this property, and some of the contingencies are that it the council approves a rezoning.

The same is true for the piece that we're acquired acquiring uh just north.

And so it is it that property is under contract.

Uh, and we are gonna purchase it.

We have a we've agreed to a price, and one of the contingencies is council needs to approve the rezoning.

So that's not saying council has to do it.

Uh uh, but it's a contingency.

But the same is true.

We have this property under contract.

That property, that additional property that we need to make the full connection is is uh under contract as well the purchase.

So we have we do have control over it.

I do believe that um speaker also alluded that the owner of that property is not in favor.

That's not true.

He sees yeah, he has signed the contract and supports what we're doing.

Okay.

Any other uh let's see, okay, Mr.

Whittaker.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um Mr.

Solis, uh, if you could please compare with the levels of service, exactly what is the direct effect to Southeastern Elementary.

Yes, sir.

Part of the uh analysis of the other rezoning includes um input and feedback from our school system, and I'll defer to Plan Director uh Jimmy McNamara on uh the input they provided.

So levels of service right now, currently at Southeastern elementary uh capacity based on existing enrollment is at 120 percent, which is right at line for performing with with uh the levels of service policy.

Uh the projected LOS capacity based on preliminary approved plans and this application will push the uh the levels of service to 146.8, however, that is not including the additional uh classroom space that is being uh constructed right now and is scheduled to be open.

Okay.

Since you got the mic, Mr.

McMare, if you would so uh kind.

So you say exact well, okay.

These forty-three homes that we're that we're uh uh deliberating over tonight.

What is the direct effect or capacities to Southeastern Elementary based on this project?

Yes, sir.

The uh projected number of students from this proposed rezoning for Southeastern Elementary is expected to be nine students.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Councilman Smith?

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh my my question would be in reference to the clause they spoke on uh if the roadway is not completed through uh the city will receive 47,000 dollars, something to that effect, could someone share some information regarding that piece.

Yes, yes, sir.

That was a um a provision that was added to the proffers to as an insurance, like in the event that we could not acquire the property.

That was before we had it all under contract and had it worked out with the bank, that was added in as a measure of last resort that uh the city could know that it could get the property and we would then pay the city the cash contribution that then would then in turn be used to acquire the property from the property owner.

That is not gonna be necessary, but it was added as an insurance policy.

Okay, what one for that that threw me off.

Then the other thing is in reference to Kegman, has the feasibility study been done in reference to that stoplight.

Could anyone share anything on that?

Well, you got uh uh Mr.

Solas, maybe we should you should call uh Mr.

Tate or someone, do you think it'd answer that question?

Yes, sir, Councilmember uh Smith and and um Mayor West.

Um analysis was well staff did uh take a look at coming away from the March 17th public meeting, uh staff did take a look at the uh Kegman and Battlefield Boulevard South uh intersection and provided a a um detailed memorandum to to city council, and I I would like to um invite um development um permits director Jay Tate to come down and somewhat summarize that uh for council and for the public.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

So on uh May 5th, we sent y'all a report in anticipation of some of the questions that might come up tonight.

Um Kegman Road has been a concern for a number of years because there is periodic delays at that location, and so it's been studied numerous times, and in the report we indicated that if you just look at the traffic warrants, it's getting close to when a signal would be warranted, but those warrants then push you in the direction of doing additional analysis.

So with that additional analysis, we did a brief time study to see what kind of delay was there, and we found that there wasn't significant delay during the peak hours, and so it was the recommendation of both development and permits and public works that a signal not be pursued at this time and be reviewed in the future with the additional units that are going in and the additional roadways that are planned.

You could see additional traffic, but you could also see a reduction in traffic as a result of multiple distribution points for both Peaceful Road, Edinburgh Parkway, and then Edinburgh Parkway north to Hanbury Road.

That would probably be the most favorable exit for a number of people who are currently going out of Kegman Road.

It would probably be preferred, especially in the exiting direction, to go north on Edinburgh Parkway and make a right turn on Hanbury Road and then go through the light that way during the peak hour.

So we would we would not recommend a signal at this time, but in the future there may or may not be one warranted.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Ward.

Just briefly, Mr.

Mayor, uh yes, Mr.

Liz or Jimmy.

What um it's a projected opening of the additions to Southeastern, and I think um you said I wanted you to that nine students would perhaps result from that 43 homes.

I think Mr.

Maxime, either one of you, could if you can answer that.

Yes, ma'am.

I I believe the uh opening is um the fall of 2027, and there's a proffer that um basically says a certificate of occupancy cannot be uh issued for any of the homes in the development until Southeastern um Park Southeastern um elementaries expansion is is completed or not.

Is that correct?

So the the projected opening is scheduled for the 2026 27 school year.

So it'd be this fall, and uh did I hear you say that nine students uh projected from 43 homes?

Yes, ma'am, that is the projection based on the the formula.

Thank you.

Any other council members have discussion?

Seeing none, we do have a uh motion for approval.

Um could I uh uh Ms.

Ritter wants to uh you want to weigh in?

Ms.

Ritter?

May I please?

But yes, um the sound system isn't the greatest, so I've tried to listen carefully to what everyone has to say.

Um I appreciate all the work that has gone into this.

I know it's a complicated situation, but we continue this in March to be assured that the property actually was able to be transferred, and that hasn't taken place yet, but I also I do have concerns about the schools, the enrollment um, and the reluctance of the school board to kind of say, yeah, we should consider um where the children may go to school, but my my biggest concern uh was the change to the fourth part.

I'm sorry, this is hard to do from my phone at home.

Um, and there's a lot of uncertainty there for me and possible obligation of the city into cost sharing on what I agree is a needed connection, but I'm not sure we've gone far enough to allay the concerns of the folks who live there, and my concerns about obligating the city to further cost them uh um infrastructure improvement.

So for those reasons, I'm gonna be voting no, um, but I just felt like I needed to explain that.

I wish I could have heard everyone else.

I probably am piggybacking on what they were saying, but thank you for the opportunity, Mayor.

Thank you, Mr.

Better.

Uh Madam Clerk, would you uh contact Ms.

Mitter for the for her vote and then we will all vote?

She just um gave me her vote, so no.

She said she's planning on doing it.

Yes, but my my vote is I didn't quite hear the motion, was it to approve?

Yes, ma'am.

I'm voting no.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Council members, please prepare to Mr.

I'm just thank you, Mayor West.

My main concern is the connectivity.

Is there a way we can do a substitute motion saying that has to be secure?

Not the proffer of paying us 30 27, 30 47,000.

You're so if you want to make a motion to.

So I'd like to make it, I'd like to make a substitute motion that we approve it with the um, is that legal to do that?

We cannot change the proffers at this point of the hearing.

Okay.

Oh, I thought that's what you were doing.

You're not you didn't make a motion to continue.

We can continue it.

You can't change proper.

Right, okay.

I think that would be smart, you know.

Cause that for me to vote yes, that's the the will of the council.

If you're ready to vote for it now, that's the the school is an issue for me too.

Um I'm surprised to hear the formula that only says non-students.

I I would think it'd be a little bit more than non-students, but that's a formula we use.

I have to respect that.

But to me, is that connectivity is so important.

I know when we met before, I sort of kind of thought that it was secure, but apparently it's not 100%.

And that has to for me to vote in positive, I have to make sure I secure.

So do we have a second on the motion to continue?

Second, thank you.

I'll check in the motion.

We have a second for Mr.

Smith.

Uh, do we have any discussion regarding the substitute motion to continue?

Uh council member's thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

It's Mr.

Palmer.

Um, what time frame do you think is necessary?

And can you just give us some information on is I just want to make sure I'm understanding with the status of the property.

So we're under contract or you're under contract right now with the um property owners.

Correct.

Can you get more secure of an agreement between now and another council meeting, or is that the yeah, so the yeah, we uh we were supposed to get the release yesterday, the deed of release.

So what they're having to do, the mortgage company has a mortgage on the entire property and they're releasing the portion that we're buying.

Uh they've agreed to the release.

Uh they're just changing one name of a trustee on the deed to another name of a trustee, and so uh actually expecting to get the deed of release this week.

So a one-week continuance would be sufficient.

Based on what they're telling me, yes.

If council's will was to continue the matter, what how much time would you ask for or request?

I mean, I'm I'm told I'm gonna get it this week.

So I'm a lawyer too.

We know that doesn't have to be.

And if you if you continue to week, I think I just don't have any control of that.

That's not that's the only reason I'm saying that because I just I just don't have physical control over it.

Uh but they have they have agreed to the release, their lawyer has released the the a mortgage company to sign the release.

Um, so it's just a matter of just hitting my inbox.

Okay.

So if it's 30 days, I mean we've done I mean the only thing we need to be careful of is I have the property under contract with the adjoining property owner, and it is required to be if it's approved, it's gonna be approved by the third week in June.

To maintain control of the other adjoining property.

Okay, so the next planning meeting will that satisfy.

Okay, that won't okay.

So I guess to the maker of the motion.

Just to clarify, if you're asking for a continuance, do you want to make a date certain?

The June um planning meeting.

Yes, okay.

So the motion is to continue for 30 days or to the next planning commission.

I mean, excuse me, next planning meeting.

Or or if the applicant, I'm not sure if it's okay to do this, or as soon as he has that secured, next week, two weeks, whatever.

Just make it 30 days.

That's fine.

Yeah, any uh so we're gonna any other discussion on the can motion to continue.

So we do have that motion to continue for until the next meeting, the planning meeting.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clark.

Ms.

Ritter, will your vote to continue?

To what date, Ms.

Matthew?

30 days.

June.

Our next planning meeting.

I will vote yes.

Okay.

Council, please prepare to vote.

Oh, we already have.

Okay, good.

All right.

Madam Clerk.

Motion on the substitute motion to continue the item.

It is adopted by an 8 to 1.

Thank you.

Next item.

PLN PUD MODICACON 2025-001.

Scenic Heights PUD Modification.

See Chris Scenic LLC applicants.

C Chris, Scenic LLC, and JCB LLC owners.

Williams Mullen Agency for modification to the scenic heights PUD to alter the to alter the development timeline for the required right-of-way and infrastructure improvements and to clarify the details of the scenic loop.

The property is located south of Dominion Boulevard, west of Shilleley Road, and east of Scenic Parkway in the Grassfield Planning Area.

This item was continued from April 21st, 2026 City Council meeting.

Planning Commission recommends approval with development criteria dated February 18th and master development plan dated May 29th.

A withdrawal has been requested by the agent.

And Mr.

McNamara staff supports the applicant's request for withdrawal.

Do we have any speakers?

Mr.

Whittaker.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I have a personal interest in disqualify from participating in the scenic heights PUD application.

Because I provide professional services to the applicant, my as my client may benefit from this transaction.

I am disqualified from participating pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3112A.

Thank you.

Miss Ritter, we have a request for the withdrawal by the agent, the planning staff supports that request.

I'm asking now, is there a motion uh to withdraw?

Um I would support that motion.

That we have moved to the excuse me.

I'm sorry.

I didn't could you repeat it, please?

Ms.

Ritter?

Yeah.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

I move to approve.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion to approve the uh request for withdrawal.

Any discussion?

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Motion to withdraw PLM PUD modification 2025-001 is adopted by an 80 vote.

Next item.

PLN use 2025-003 Bainbridge Boulevard Infield Lots.

Chesapeake land bank authority applicant owner for a conditional use permit for five single family residential lots.

The property is located at 1413, 1417, 1420, and 1421 Bainbridge Boulevard in the South North of Planning Area.

Planning Commission recommends approval with the stipulations stipulations listed in the use of existing utilities and infrastructure and will provide quality housing that is suitable to the traditional context of the existing neighborhood.

Staff therefore recommends approval with stipulations dated March 19th, 2026.

Thank you.

We have any speakers, Madam Clerk.

Yes, sir.

We have one speaker, Robert Bradshaw.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of council, Robbie Bradshaw.

Uh I am with the law firm of Kinzer, Lefwich, and Cale here on behalf of the Chesapeake Land Bank Authority.

We're just asking for your approval, and I'm here to answer any questions if you got them.

Thank you, sir.

We do uh need a motion.

Second, Mr.

Whitaker and Dr.

Ward, thank you.

Any discussion, Ms.

Ritter?

I'm voting no.

Okay.

Any discussion come to Council members?

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Mr.

Whitaker.

Yeah.

Um, you know, this is for me.

You know, being appointed to the land bank authority is very exciting to see where now you have you have uh uh the possibility of private dollars, private the sector folks coming in and investing in the community, and it's no longer taxpayer money doing it.

So uh very excited about this.

This is a very much a positive change that will be a great tool for revitalization and redevelopment and uh the Bainbridge corridor.

Thank you.

Mr.

McNair, did you want to weigh in?

No, sir.

Okay, thank you.

Uh any other discussion, council members.

Uh just briefly as it's a ward, thank you.

But I do think it is really a great event for um South North of the Mainbridge Little Board.

So I'm just happy to see and private sector investing in this uh community.

So I agree, thank you.

Thank you.

We heard from Miss Ritter and she's already voted.

Council members, would you please prepare to vote and vote and record Madam Clerk?

Motion to approve PLN use 2025-003 with stipulations as presented as a dot is adopted by an eight to one vote.

Thank you.

Next item.

PLN comp 2026-001, Deep Creek Area Plan, proposed amendments to the adopted Chesapeake comprehensive plan to amend the text, correlating maps, and technical document as necessary to adopt and incorporate the Deep Creek Area Plan.

Planning Commission recommends approval of the version dated January 2026.

Mr.

McNamara.

The plan will serve as a long-range vision that will address goals of enhancing quality of life, improving connectivity and access, and strengthening economic vitality for the Deep Creek and Camelot communities.

The plan framework will build on the goals and recommendations of the adopted comprehensive plan with tailored policies, projects, and recommendations that will guide the implementation of the vision of the Deep Creek Area Plan.

Staff recommends approval of the version dated April 2026.

Thank you, sir.

Uh Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers?

No, sir.

Thank you.

Well, let me go ahead and ask for a motion.

Version dated April 2026.

Excuse me.

Excuse me, Mr.

Jeffries.

Oh.

I'd like to make a motion for approval.

Mr.

Whitaker.

I'll second that.

Thank you, sir.

Yeah.

Any discussion?

Yeah, version dated April 2026.

Any discussions from the either of you?

Mr.

Jeffries.

I would just like to say as a chest, as a Deep Creek resident, I'm honored to be a part of this approval.

I think it's a fantastic vision for that portion of our city.

The staff did a phenomenal job.

Thank you.

Mr.

Smith.

Councilman Smith.

Yes, I did all what Mr.

Jefferson just shared.

I'm also a Deep Creek resident, and I appreciate all the hard work that staff has done to make this happen.

We've heard from two Hornets.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Newens.

I'm not a Deep Creek resident.

I don't mean so I'm gonna ruin the um the vibe here.

But um to Mr.

McNamara, I just have a question.

There was a distinction between what the planning commission recommended and what staff is recommending, the version dated January and then the version dated April.

Do you mind just explaining um what the differences are there?

Yes, ma'am, we'd love to take the opportunity to do that.

And uh first I'd like to introduce our project manager, Anna Gorniak, who has seen this project through from uh for quite some time now, and I'd like to turn things over to her to address what's changed from planning commission till now.

Yeah, certainly.

So um, in preparation of um coming before council tonight, uh staff did note a few minor revisions to be made between the January version and the April 2026 version that we are presenting to you tonight.

Um these focus on improving the integration of the Deep Creek area plan into our already adopted comprehensive plan and accompanying documents.

Um we are seeking to eliminate a few minor conflicts when it comes to typology with um a few of our layers, including the character districts that are included in our uh adopted comprehensive plan, as well as some minor revisions to the open space plan and the mobility plan within the Deep Creek Area Plan.

Um again, these revisions are to promote consistency.

Um there were a few errors in designation when it came to uh conservation districts, which are um defined quite specifically in our comprehensive plan.

So there's just a few parcels that had to be uh corrected on the maps in this April 2026 Deep Creek Area Plan version, um, as well as a few minor consistency adjustments between the locations of trails and and things like that in again in consistency with our comprehensive plan as well as our TCON and MTP uh documents.

Perfect, thank you.

And then uh we had a work session on this, and as a result of that, we had a meeting to follow up on some of the concerns I think that council um had regarding density, and you all shared with me some great information about traffic impacts and the route that we have in our plan moving forward.

Um, is that the lowest traffic or the most I guess economical traffic impact that um exists for all the different options between residential um commercial mix, things of that nature?

Yes, ma'am.

So that is the that is a much lower traffic generator than the previous use and uh the potential use of the site for commercial type purposes.

Uh in particular, there's some real issues when we look at using this as a wholly commercial parcel with conflicts, uh, particularly during those high traffic hours.

So the the proposed use mix that is there is a low traffic generator and uh certainly will make better use of the site throughout the day as opposed to just during those high peak hours.

Thank you.

And I just want to echo my colleague.

I did an excellent job on this plan.

Um it is well overdue, and even the follow-up I think is fantastic from staff when the public voiced concerns.

You followed up and you addressed those, same with planning.

That's why I asked what are the changes.

You did even more follow-up, and then we had a work session and we voiced concerns, and you still followed up.

So I really appreciate the amount of input you took from the public planning and then us as well to uh come up with this plan and thank you all for the hard work you've done, and I'll be happy to support it.

Very good.

Thank you.

Uh Dr.

Waller.

Thank you, Ms.

Mayor.

And thank you, Mr.

McNamara.

And as a former member, uh former Deep Creek and a former member of the chest is the Camelot community, and I'm still a financial member of the Camera Light Civic League.

I just commend you on what you're doing and what you have done, and all these, you know, changes really are making it more positive and more friendly without residence.

And I'm just excited about it.

Okay, so I do appreciate something other than Western Players, Mr.

Mayor.

Just you know, okay, I'm a former Deep Creeker.

Mm-hmm.

Always a creek, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Ms.

Ritter, do you have anything to add to the discussion?

Thank you.

Just a couple questions, perhaps for Mr.

McNamara or Ms.

Lemley.

Just to if they can hear me.

They can hear you.

I just always okay.

I inject this into a discussion.

That a comprehensive plan is just that, correct?

Whomever wants to answer.

It is a plan, but does not carry the force of law as underlying zoning may.

Is that correct?

Yes, ma'am.

You're correct.

Okay, and so that it is within the purview of the council.

Oftentimes, we approve or disapprove an application that may contravene the plan, but that's certainly more than allowable, correct?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

I just want to make it clear to anyone who may be listening.

This is not set in stone.

It still is determined application by application, staff review, and council approval, correct?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

I just don't want to preclude an opportunity people think opportunity may be precluded because it may not fall in line with the plan.

So thank you very much for clarifying that.

And the mayor, if you want me to, I'll cast my vote now.

Yes, please.

Okay, I'm gonna vote yes.

Thank you.

Other council members, please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

Motion to approve PLN comp 2026-001 version dated April 2026 as presented is adopted by a 9-0 vote.

Next is item D.

PLN text 2025-010, civil enforcement.

An ordinance amending appendix A of the Chesapeake City Code in Title Zoning, Article 20, Section 20-202 to provide general updates to change criminal zoning enforcement to civil enforcement.

Planning commission recommends approval of version dated February the 20th, 2026.

A continuance request has been received.

Thank you.

Mr.

McIntyre?

Yes, staff has requested a continuance of this item due to the work session presentation today to allow council time to uh provide any feedback that's necessary.

Thank you.

Are there any speakers, madam?

No, sir.

Thank you.

Uh council.

If you wish to continue, please make a motion.

Move approval to a date certain or we're just did you have a date?

30 days, I believe, will be sufficient.

30 days.

Move approval.

Mr.

Whitaker, I second that.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

Ms.

Newlands?

Just to clarify, when is our retreat scheduled for?

It was in August, correct?

August 13th.

Councilmember Jeffreys reminded me that at the work session we talked about wanting to discuss this topic at the retreat.

So perhaps this is to be continued to the September meeting?

September September planning meeting.

As long as yes, as long as that's after our retreat.

So September 15th.

Okay.

So I'll mend my motion to September 15th then.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

So we have a motion to continue for how long?

September 15th.

September 15th.

And please prepare the vote for the continuance.

Please vote and record.

Ms.

Ritter, did you want to vote now?

Office, I'll vote yes.

Thank you.

Motion to continue PLN text 2025-010 to the September 15th, 2026 City Council meeting is adopted by a 9-0 vote.

Thank you.

Are there any unfinished business items council would like to bring up at this time?

See in none, Madam Clerk, would you please present uh new business item?

I have one.

Ms.

Ritter, please.

Thank you.

Um last week there was an initiating resolution to study what parameters, if any, we would be looking at for a data center.

And I you know, I've been struck before on staff proceeding on a very narrow basis of an initiating resolution.

So I would like to ask, after thinking about this, that the staff include whatever studies they can find on how technology advances and how those address the impacts that are seen from data centers.

And I'd like them, if possible, to draw on information available, sound studies, sound studies from older data centers and newer one, maybe based on square footage.

I just think that background information would be very helpful.

Um as we progress through looking at the possibility or lack thereof of the facility.

So I don't know if that's necessary to do, but I hope it will be included.

Mayor, Vice Mayor Ritter.

Uh, we we certainly will take sound and vibration into account when uh coming back to council with um and and planning commission with the um uh data center policy.

Okay, I want to make sure they're in the policy and not simply address with a possible application, so that can be evaluated.

So thank you.

Thanks very much.

Thank you.

If you could just follow up with the phone call tomorrow, that would be helpful because we're not sure we heard you correctly.

Okay, and then maybe in the budget, this is all business too.

If we ever get around to one if the state ever does, we might want to look at some upgrade in this remote line here.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Can you just speak on that you have a new business now?

Or yeah, it's uh I it would be under new business okay.

If it's appropriate, yeah.

I know that we're gonna be discussing on the time frame that we get our three ring binders, hopefully, work it out where we get a little bit sooner than the Thursday before the Tuesday.

I also want to ask a request that we discussed work session slides too.

Um, get in those when we just sit down before they have work session, doesn't really give us a whole lot of time to review those to formulate some really great questions.

That would be really helpful, at least for me.

Uh, if we just discuss it, I would be so appreciative.

Thank you.

Uh Ms.

Noah, do you have new business?

Yes, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, at the last meeting, Councilmember Bunn brought up um resources, mental health resources through an application that public safety was using, and we had sought funding for that through the budget, and um I think it was recommended to put it on hold to get some more information until um we can implement it across the board for all city employees, uh, Mr.

Solis.

But my understanding is by us doing that, it removed funding from the application that was being utilized by our public safety members, and now they've had to supplant that funding with additional funding.

So they've had to utilize um either grant or forfeiture money to then supplant the cost of that, and that application provides mental health resources for our public safety.

I don't think that was an intended consequence of council, so I'd like to make I guess a direction that if the June um items that are brought back on the budget, if that can be one of the items that is brought back to supplant that funding back to the application, it was already there.

Um, but I think when council said let's put it on hold until we can get some more information, it unintentionally removed it from the funding source.

So it's my understanding it is now been supplanted with forfeiture funds, but I don't think that's the intent of what council is.

I just want to make sure we are funding completely the mental health resources for our public safety members.

So, Mayor and uh council member new once.

I'd I'd like to defer to uh deputy city manager Bob Geis just to see if he has any insights on that or any clarification.

Yeah, yeah, the police department's working with what we have, so right now they're very happy with moving forward with uh forfeiture expenses and and that's a source that they can use.

So we are continuing to study it.

If the what we're doing with this pilot is to compile enough information to be able to make an informed decision if it's something that we do, in fact, want to roll out all public safety or all citywide for employees depending on the um the information received.

So, right now we we're doing a beta test, it's about two weeks old, certainly is enough to to provide the right level of uh detail of analysis, but we're working on that.

So we're working it right now.

We certainly uh when the manager gets back, we'll we'll have this further discussion, but right now it's moving forward with the funding as you identified, and we're continuing to work it.

So we're not we're not you losing anything, we're not delaying anything.

We're continuing to to gain information and the people that are on it now.

About 200 folks have signed up for it.

Is what I understand.

We're continuing to do that.

We're not gonna uh take that away from them.

We're continuing to advertise it and we're continuing to see the uh how much it um how much the folks actually use it so we're we're excited about this opportunity and what is the cost of that that forfeiture funds are covering i i don't have it off the top my head it's it's it's minimal though it's less than 200 thousand yes so we had a a wiggle room of two hundred thousand for council priorities uh in the bottom line of the budget um I don't think and council may disagree with me but I don't think the police department should be required to utilize their forfeiture funds for a service that the council is has identified as a priority so um the forfeiture funds can be utilized for um other tools and technology that they're no longer going to be getting through a ceasefire grant so or other things that uh the police department could utilize so I understand the police saying we're happy we've got money but as a council I think we made it a loud message that we want to support mental health for our um public safety members so it would be my prerogative and I don't know if it's council's prerogative that we utilize our council um funding that was available instead of the police department having to use their forfeiture money I don't think my understanding is that the city was previously covering it and then they had to pivot and utilize forfeiture money which I don't think is appropriate and I don't think that was council's intent so was it was free like we we were doing as a test for free so the next steps were going to be how we're gonna fund it I'd recommend that uh we allow budget and the team to look at how much money we had available I know council had priorities I know council exercises those priorities I think we we came to the budget pretty much net zero but I'll let the budget folks I would recommend that we let the budget folks um come back with the proposal as you recommended during the June time frame as we do the technical uh corrections to the budget and see uh how it all falls out I just want to make sure that we're not just kind of like waiting and seeing council member bun has brought it up twice and I think it's important that we are um making it a priority so I I don't feel comfortable just waiting and seeing it I want to make it as a direction that council um makes this a priority for the funding if the funding is available in June I I do object to that I think well I'd rather hear from the budget that then make the decision but we're gonna be forced to to do something without complete information I would rather wait to and if we want to vote on it we can do maybe we direct them have a work session on it and then can it can be brought to us yeah that I think that would be the budget department's uh intent.

We can certainly bring you more information I don't know if it it's enough for a work session we certainly can dispatch a remember that has update that work session would be good if we could do that so thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh any other new business uh Mr Smith yes thank you Mr.

Mayor I I would like to share in reference to uh council agreeing to support and fund Fridays that since that has been said uh I receive comments from the citizens showing interest and showing how they would like to support and I would like to thank all members of council for supporting that issue so thank you for that secondly is I went to a forum today a forumslash presentation and it was in reference to the flooding in Pughesville so I'm trying to see what I can do to help them but it would take a collaborative effort between Chesapeake and Suffolk but I don't think of the job for just one council person.

So I'm trying to see amongst us could I get one more council person that will help look into the pew's best situation situation regarding flooding.

Oh I would definitely oh I'm sorry I'm not I think uh I'm sorry Dr.

Ward uh may I suggest that you have a conversation with uh with Mr Sorry to get a handle on what's what we have done and what possibilities and then if you feel like we still need to move forward or do something different uh after that conversation.

That's fine, Mayor.

Thank you.

Uh any other new business items.

Seeing none, I'd like to go to new business.

Uh Ms.

Madison, would you please present new business item A?

PLN Use 2022-007 Pocety River Solar Cup extension, Pocety River Solar LLC applicant, Gidwood Sutton Jr., Gloria Sutton, Diane Branch, Anthony Sutton, and Jacqueline Sutton owners for time extension to June 20th, 2027, as per the Chesapeake Zoning Ordinance, Section 17-110 point B.

The property is located on the west side of Long Ridge Road across from Carolina Road in the southern Chesapeake planning area.

This item was continued by City Council June 20th, 2023.

We have a motion, please, Mr.

Whitaker.

Move approval.

Councilman Ward.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

Seeing Ms.

Ritter, do you have any discussion on this item?

No, I'm I'm voting no.

Thank you.

We've got your vote.

Other council members please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Motion to approve a time extension to June 20th, 2027 for PLN use 2022-007 is adopted by a seven to two vote.

Did you proceed, please?

PLN use 2022-008 Land of Promise Solar Cup Extension.

Land of Promise Solar LLC applicant.

Edgar and Deborah Lane owners for time extension to June 20, 2027, as per the Chesapeake City ordinance section 17-110B.

Located on the east side of Long Ridge Road, approximately two thousand feet south of the intersection of Long Ridge Road and Land of Promise Road in the southern Chesapeake planning area.

Council approved PLN use 2022-008 June 20, 2023.

A motion is in order to approve a time extension to June 20, 2027.

We have a motion, Mr.

Smith.

Move to approve.

Thank you, Miss Whitaker.

Second that.

Thank you.

Ms.

Ritter, would you like to adjoin this discussion?

Uh no, I'm voting no.

Thank you.

Any other discussion on the item?

Seeing none.

Remaining council members prepare to vote.

Vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

Motion to approve a time extension to June 20, 2027 for PLN use 2022-008 is adopted by a seven to two vote.

Thank you.

Madam Attorney, I think we do not have a closed session.

However, there is a need for language for closed session next week.

Would you please?

A motion to conduct a closed meeting on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, at 4 p.m.

in Chesapeake City Hall for evaluation of city council appointees, including the city real estate assessor, city attorney, city auditor, city clerk, and city manager as permitted by section 2.2-3711-A1 of the code of Virginia.

Thank you.

Uh motion, please, approval.

Thank you, Councilman Ward.

Councilman King.

Any discussion?

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

She already said she.

Oh, I'm sorry she didn't.

Miss Ritter, could you vote on this one?

Yes, I vote, yeah.

Thank you.

It's like talking to a ghost.

Motion to conduct closed meeting on May 26, 2026 at 4 p.m.

is adopted by a 9-0 vote.

Thank you.

This concludes our agenda items.

I'd like to call on Councilmember Bun at this time for our benefiction.

Thank you, Mayor West.

As we depart, let us be strong and courageous.

Do not be afraid or discouraged.

For the Lord, your God will be with you wherever you go.

In Jesus Christ, we pray.

Amen.

Council is adjourned.

Oh.

Who wanted data set?

Is it February?

Debbie wanted more information.

I got some good stuff.

Well, we've got a lot of people.

How does it work?

So, I don't know.

Um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, um, so, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, and all of this.

And also, you know, all.

And also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, um, um, so Oh, and all of this, and all of this, and all of this, and all of this, and all, and allow many and all of this, and all.

So, all of this, and all of this, and all.

So, I'm not allowed to.

Um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, um, so, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, And also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, um, um, um, Um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, so, um, so, um, so, um, um, so, um, um, so, um, um, so, um, um, um, And also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, um, um, so And also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, and also, um, and Hm.

Hm.

Hm.

Hm.

Hm.

Hm.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Honey, so Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

How do we stone?

Hold on, and we're not stoney, we're not stone.

Honey.

Honey.

Hold on, and we're not gonna tell you.

Hold on.

Hold on, and we're not gonna tell you.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Honey, we're not stone.

However, Honey Hm, we have to How Honeumming Honey Honey Honeyy, and Honey, we're not gonna stone.

Honey, honey.

Hold on, and we're not so good.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

How do we stone?

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on, and so on.

So, we have to have a lot of time, and I'm not going to have a lotold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on, and so on.

So, I'm not allowed to have a lot ofold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hm.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Honey, we're not stone.

Honey, Honey Honey Hm.

Hold on.

How does it all?

And we have to go.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

So, I don't know.

So, I don't know.

So, I don't know.

Oh, oh, oh, Um, um, uh, um, um, um, um, uh, um, uh, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, um, And we have to do this.

Oh, yeah.

And we have to go.

So, yeah.

So, yeah.

So, we have to go to the ground.

So, And I don't know.

So, Ire you still?

And also, and all of this, and also.

Oh, and sounds good.

Hold on.

Now, and all of this, and also, and all.

Come on, on, stone, stone, stone, stone, stone, stone, and