Chesapeake City Council Meeting – May 19, 2026: Zoning, Public Works, and Development Decisions
Chesapeake City Council Meeting – May 19, 2026
The Chesapeake City Council held a work session at 5:15 p.m. followed by a regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on May 19, 2026. The work session covered property code enforcement and agritourism site plan review fees. The regular meeting featured a proclamation for National Public Works Week, several public hearing items including a continued rezoning, a withdrawal, approvals, and a continuance, along with new business items on solar farm time extensions and administrative matters.
Proclamation – National Public Works Week
- Mayor West presented a proclamation recognizing National Public Works Week (May 17–23, 2026). Director of Public Works Earl Sorey accepted and introduced award winners: Keith Braziel (Leadership Service), Frank Klein (Non-public Customer Service), Sgt. Chris Jancewitcz (Public Contact Customer Service), and Kevin Brookshire (Project of the Year for Fire Station #8).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Viridian Reserve North Rezoning (PLN-REZ-2025-009): Eight speakers addressed the item. Grady Palmer, representing the applicant, spoke in support, emphasizing the extension of Edinburgh Parkway and connectivity benefits. Six residents (Kurt Grizzard, Cassie Hung, Emma Debien, Brooke Spangler, Kyle Spangler, Beth Johnson) spoke in opposition, citing concerns about traffic, school overcrowding at Southeastern Elementary, loss of wetlands and wildlife, uncertainty over right-of-way acquisition, and reliance on land not yet secured.
- Bainbridge Boulevard Infill Lots (PLN-USE-2025-003): Robert Bradshaw of the Land Bank Authority spoke in support, requesting approval.
- No speakers were present for other public hearing items.
Discussion Items
Work Session: Property Code Enforcement
- Kevin Kemp, Deputy Director of Development and Permits, presented a proposal to change most zoning, building, and floodplain violations from criminal to civil penalties. The proposal also increases civil fines (first offense $200, subsequent $500) and allows half-payment before court to avoid court. Criminal enforcement remains for sign violations, land development, violations causing injury, or when fines exceed $5,000. Council members raised concerns about daily fines stacking (state code allows each day as a separate violation) and requested a written policy to ensure a reasonable grace period for compliance. The item was later continued to September 15, 2026.
Work Session: Agritourism Site Plan Review Fees
- Deputy City Manager Robert Geis and Director Jay Tate briefed council on current fee structures. State code exempts most agricultural uses from regulation, so fees are rarely applied to agritourism. Councilmember Newins suggested creating a separate fee category to incentivize agritourism, similar to other localities. The discussion was deferred to a future council retreat for further study.
Public Hearing: Viridian Reserve North (PLN-REZ-2025-009) – Continued
- The applicant proffered eight conditions, including a 43-unit limit, architectural standards, a 10-foot buffer, dedication of 3.01 acres for parkland, and road improvements. Planning Commission recommended denial. Staff recommended approval with proffers. During discussion, Councilmember Whitaker asked about school impact; Planning Director McNamara stated the projected student increase from the development is 9 students at Southeastern Elementary, currently at 120% capacity. Councilmember Smith inquired about a traffic signal at Kegman Road and Battlefield Blvd; Director Tate reported no immediate warrant for a signal. Councilmember Bunn moved to continue the item to June 16, 2026, to allow time to secure right-of-way for the Edinburgh Parkway connection. The continuance passed 8–1 (Mayor West dissenting).
Public Hearing: Scenic Heights PUD Modification (PLN-PUDM-2025-001) – Withdrawn
- The agent requested withdrawal. Councilmember Whitaker recused himself due to a personal interest. Council voted 8–0 to withdraw.
Public Hearing: Bainbridge Boulevard Infill Lots (PLN-USE-2025-003)
- Approved with stipulations (setbacks, historical paint colors, architectural review). Councilmember Whitaker expressed support for private sector investment. Vote: 8–1 (Vice Mayor Ritter dissenting).
Public Hearing: Deep Creek Area Plan (PLN-COMP-2026-001)
- Approved as revised (April 2026 version). Planner Anna Nagorniuk explained minor corrections to maps and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmembers praised the planning team. Vote: 9–0.
Public Hearing: Civil Enforcement Ordinance (PLN-TXT-2025-010) – Continued
- A continuance was requested to allow further council input after the work session discussion. Motion to continue to September 15, 2026, approved 9–0.
Unfinished Business
- Vice Mayor Ritter requested that staff, as part of a data center study, include information on technology advances, sound and vibration studies from older and newer centers, and that these be incorporated into any policy, not just application reviews.
New Business
- Councilmember Bunn asked for earlier distribution of meeting binders and work session slides.
- Councilmember Newins raised the issue of mental health resources for public safety: a pilot app was funded via forfeiture funds after council put broader funding on hold. She requested the June budget conversation include restoring dedicated funding. Staff indicated they will return with a proposal.
- Councilmember Smith updated on the Fun Friday initiative (receiving positive citizen feedback) and invited a fellow councilmember to join efforts on flooding in Pughsville, a collaborative issue with Suffolk.
- Pocaty River Solar CUP Extension (PLN-USE-2022-007): Approved 7–2 to extend deadline to June 20, 2027. Councilmembers Bunn and Ritter dissented.
- Land of Promise Solar CUP Extension (PLN-USE-2022-008): Approved 7–2 to extend deadline to June 20, 2027. Councilmembers Bunn and Ritter dissented.
Key Outcomes
- Continued: Viridian Reserve North rezoning to June 16, 2026 (8–1).
- Withdrawn: Scenic Heights PUD Modification (8–0).
- Approved: Bainbridge Boulevard Infill Lots (8–1).
- Approved: Deep Creek Area Plan (9–0).
- Continued: Civil Enforcement Ordinance to September 15, 2026 (9–0).
- Approved: Pocaty River Solar CUP Extension (7–2).
- Approved: Land of Promise Solar CUP Extension (7–2).
- Scheduled: Closed Meeting on May 26, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. for evaluations of City Council appointees (9–0).
- Council directed staff to develop a written enforcement policy for civil penalties to address daily fine accumulation concerns.
- Staff will provide further information on mental health funding for public safety at the June budget meeting.
Meeting Transcript
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.
openpublica.com