Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Chesapeake Planning Commission Public Hearing – September 11, 2024

Planning Commission — Wednesday, September 11, 2024

BodyChesapeake, Virginia

SessionPlanning Commission

DateWednesday, September 11, 2024

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:54:18

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:17

All right, good evening everybody.

0:19

The planning commission pre-meeting for September 11th, 2024 is now in session.

0:23

Welcome to our pre-meeting tonight.

0:25

Thank you for taking part in the business of our city.

0:28

First order of business uh tonight is the agenda overview discussion.

0:32

We have three applications, um, none of which are recommended for continuance.

0:38

So that's um it's a good thing.

0:40

So we'll review the items and determine placement on either the consent or regular agenda uh right now.

0:46

So the first item, uh item number one, PLNU's 2024 026, project Genesis.

0:52

Mr.

0:53

Bell, any updates for us.

0:56

Good evening, commissioners.

0:57

We do have some updates for you.

0:59

Um remember from last month we received a letter from the Navy requesting extra time to review and some lists of concerns they had with the project.

1:11

Uh we did receive a letter from the applicant yesterday um addressing most of those concerns, and we have added those as stipulations to the conditional use permit.

1:23

Um we did receive a letter from the Navy about 430 today that I believe is being distributed to as well that um could kind of goes over those same concerns and the meeting they had with the applicant.

1:35

So that's the update we have for you on that.

1:37

Um we did not receive any citizen comments on on this application.

1:42

Thank you.

1:42

So all right, commissioners, to to make sure you understand what Mr.

1:45

Bell is just talking about, we have an updated staff report in front of us that's dated September 11th.

1:52

Uh what I'd like to do, staff, if you wouldn't mind, because it's our understanding, stipulations five through nine are new stipulations that are that are being put before us.

2:03

So if staff could maybe go over those stipulations with us, I think that'd be helpful.

2:07

Yeah, be glad to do that.

2:08

So if you look at the previous letter with the naval concerns, uh I I believe the applicant and the Navy had a meeting uh in the past couple days where they address those concerns.

2:18

So uh as you said, stipulations five through nine are new ones.

2:21

And I'll kind of walk through those and summarize those for for you.

2:24

So the first concern had to deal with uh the windows on the tower and where the window placement would be, uh concerns with visibility of the base.

2:32

So as a result, stipulation number five uh states that any windows that are above the uh byright height of 75 feet shall be permitted on the east facade of the building only, uh, and that any other window locations, uh any other windows located on any other side shall require approval from the United States Navy before they are placed there.

2:51

Stipulation number six uh states that uh items located on top of the building will be limited to those by applicable uh local, state, and federal codes and regulations.

3:01

So things that you would see up here would be uh uh aircraft, warning lights, lightning rods, those types of structures.

3:08

Um but we also put a provision in here uh that the Navy could approve uh other structures that would be located on there, just anticipating that there could be things that we haven't covered with the stipulations now.

3:18

But the then the main goal here is not to have communication uh uh uh antennae uh that would uh would interfere with communications with the Navy at all.

3:28

So uh the applicant has agreed to that stipulation.

3:32

Uh there was also conversation about electromagnetic interference and uh the construction of the building and ways that that could be mitigated.

3:40

Uh so the applicant has agreed to a stipulation that it will be constructed of steel reinforced concrete, which will act as a conductive mesh that will help uh reflect the electromagnetic interference if there was any.

3:52

Uh so that stipulation has been added as number seven.

3:55

Number eight uh discusses cameras.

3:57

So uh cameras that would be located on the tower need to be directed towards the property and can't be looking outside of the subject property.

4:05

Uh and then other security cameras will be placed on the perimeter fence around the outdoor, uh along the outdoor cable turn tables, gangways, and peer to monitor shipping operations so that we have uh sight on the property at all times.

4:20

And then uh perhaps the the the biggest stipulation is number nine, which uh upon request from the Navy, uh the applicant will provide uh access to the facility for audits and inspections to ensure compliance with the stipulations as required.

4:34

So that is the update that we have for you.

4:36

Uh we are recommending approval with these stipulations that have been submitted today.

4:41

And then I guess uh one more would be the letter that we just got September 11th.

4:47

Yes, I assume staff has read digested it, feel comfortable with the stipulations here, nothing else needs to be done.

4:55

Yeah, we are not recommending any further stipulations at this time uh based off the letter that we've received.

5:00

Okay.

5:02

Thank you.

5:03

Thank you.

5:03

Commissioners, any uh questions?

5:06

While you're there, Jimmy.

5:07

Yes, sir.

5:07

Um was there any other federal coordination required specifically FAA for the controlled airspace for the airport?

5:14

Yes.

5:14

So there's a stipulation already in place that was recommended last month that requires FAA approval uh before a certificate of occupancy.

5:27

Any other commissioners?

5:29

Questions, comments.

5:34

Okay, yeah, just take take time, uh Commissioners.

5:37

You know, if you need to I I don't like springing stuff on people, especially an application like this, and some of these stipulations are quite long, but I think they're pretty straightforward.

5:47

And Jimmy, I appreciate the uh the explanation you just gave us.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Procedural███████████████████████████████████████████43%

Planning And Development███████████████15%

Transportation Safety█████████████13%

Active Transportation████████8%

Historic Preservation███████7%

Land Use and Zoning██████6%

Economic Development████4%

Legal Affairs██2%

Public Engagement██2%

Summary of Proceedings

Chesapeake Planning Commission Public Hearing – September 11, 2024

The Chesapeake Planning Commission held its regular public hearing on September 11, 2024, at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chamber. The commission acted on three items, approving two conditional use permits and continuing a vote on the citywide Trails and Connectivity Plan after extensive public debate and a split vote.

Consent Calendar

PLN-USE-2024-026 (Project Genesis): The commission unanimously approved (9-0) a conditional use permit for a 685-foot tall tower in the M-3 Waterfront Industrial District. The project aims to establish an offshore wind logistics hub. The permit includes 9 stipulations, including new conditions negotiated with the U.S. Navy just prior to the meeting covering FAA approval, electromagnetic shielding, restricted window placement, and Navy inspection rights.
PLN-USE-2024-024 (DBG Small Arms Repair): The commission unanimously approved (9-0) a Level II Home Occupation permit for a small arms repair business at 3640 Eddystone Drive. The permit is non-transferable to the applicant, requires a Federal Firearms License (FFL), and mandates strict security protocols such as locked safes, appointment-only visits, and no retail sales.

Public Comments & Testimony

Consent Items

Proponents for Project Genesis: Multiple speakers representing economic development organizations expressed strong support. Matt Smith (Hampton Roads Alliance) stated the project aligns with the Industrial Waterfront Study and will bring significant economic and employment benefits, positioning Hampton Roads as a hub for the East Coast offshore wind industry. Will Fediw (Virginia Maritime Association) stated the site is the best on the Eastern Seaboard for the facility, taking advantage of deep channels, established supply chain, and skilled workforce. Joe Josue, a South Norfolk resident and local business owner, expressed support for the economic opportunities the project will bring to small businesses in the area.

Regular Agenda (Trails and Connectivity Plan)

Linda Tindell: Opposed dedicated bike paths in rural areas, stating rural residents do not want them in their front yards. She argued the city should instead widen existing roads with two feet of asphalt to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. She expressed concern the trails plan is a pretext for expanding water and sewer utilities into rural areas for high-density development.
Jennifer Knight: Argued the Trails Plan is an urban connectivity strategy that does not belong in rural spaces. She noted the Historic Preservation Commission had not been consulted and detailed specific historic resources (homes, churches, cemeteries for Union soldiers) potentially threatened by planned widening on roads like Ballahack Road. She proposed an alternative of limiting specific rural roads to local and base traffic to create authentic rural trails.
Rogard Ross: Speaking as a citizen and member of the Bicycle and Trails Advisory Committee (BTAC), he argued the September 3, 2024 draft fails to set clear priorities or define steps to make Chesapeake's streets safer for bikers and walkers today. He cited the recent death of bicyclist Steven Shil and requested a 30-day continuance for staff to amend the plan to prioritize near-term, low-cost safety improvements such as crosswalks, lower speed limits, traffic calming, and completing already-funded projects.

Discussion Items

Trails and Connectivity Plan (PLN-COMP-2024-001):
- Staff Position: Planning Director Jimmy McNamara defended the plan as a high-level policy document akin to the Master Transportation Plan. He stated that specific designs and prioritization of projects, such as crosswalk placement and safety improvements, occur during the capital budgeting process and project development, not within the master plan itself.
- Commissioner Steiner (Pro-Continuance): Acknowledged the plan technically met the City Council's initiating resolution but argued it lacked a strategic implementation plan with clear safety priorities. He moved for a 30-day continuance to allow staff to meet with the Historic Preservation Commission and the BTAC to refine the plan’s safety prioritization and rural connectivity language.
- Chairman Gerloff (Opposed-Continuance): Argued the plan fully answered the initiating resolution and that requesting further details on priorities exceeded the commission's task. He stated staff had done a good job and the plan was sufficient for a vote.
- Commissioner Hackworth (Pro-Continuance): Emphasized the commission owed it to stakeholders to follow through on commitments to meet with them before a final vote.
- City Attorney: Noted that per state code, the Planning Commission must make a recommendation to City Council within 60 days of the initiating resolution, requiring a final vote at the October 9, 2024, meeting.

Key Outcomes

Project Genesis (PLN-USE-2024-026): APPROVED (9-0; Crews/Forbes). Conditional use permit granted for a 685-foot tower with 9 stipulations addressing FAA approval, Navy coordination, fire safety, window placement, electromagnetic shielding, security cameras, and Navy inspection access.
DBG Small Arms Repair (PLN-USE-2024-024): APPROVED (9-0; Crews/Forbes). Home occupation permit granted with strict security and operational stipulations.
Trails and Connectivity Plan (PLN-COMP-2024-001): CONTINUED (5-4; Steiner/Hackworth) to the October 9, 2024, Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Planning Department will conduct further stakeholder meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission and BTAC.
Meeting Cancellation: The September 25, 2024, Planning Commission Public Hearing was canceled by unanimous consent due to a lack of business. The meeting adjourned at 7:54 PM.

Meeting Transcript

All right, good evening everybody. The planning commission pre-meeting for September 11th, 2024 is now in session. Welcome to our pre-meeting tonight. Thank you for taking part in the business of our city. First order of business uh tonight is the agenda overview discussion. We have three applications, um, none of which are recommended for continuance. So that's um it's a good thing. So we'll review the items and determine placement on either the consent or regular agenda uh right now. So the first item, uh item number one, PLNU's 2024 026, project Genesis. Mr. Bell, any updates for us. Good evening, commissioners. We do have some updates for you. Um remember from last month we received a letter from the Navy requesting extra time to review and some lists of concerns they had with the project. Uh we did receive a letter from the applicant yesterday um addressing most of those concerns, and we have added those as stipulations to the conditional use permit. Um we did receive a letter from the Navy about 430 today that I believe is being distributed to as well that um could kind of goes over those same concerns and the meeting they had with the applicant. So that's the update we have for you on that. Um we did not receive any citizen comments on on this application. Thank you. So all right, commissioners, to to make sure you understand what Mr. Bell is just talking about, we have an updated staff report in front of us that's dated September 11th. Uh what I'd like to do, staff, if you wouldn't mind, because it's our understanding, stipulations five through nine are new stipulations that are that are being put before us. So if staff could maybe go over those stipulations with us, I think that'd be helpful. Yeah, be glad to do that. So if you look at the previous letter with the naval concerns, uh I I believe the applicant and the Navy had a meeting uh in the past couple days where they address those concerns. So uh as you said, stipulations five through nine are new ones. And I'll kind of walk through those and summarize those for for you. So the first concern had to deal with uh the windows on the tower and where the window placement would be, uh concerns with visibility of the base. So as a result, stipulation number five uh states that any windows that are above the uh byright height of 75 feet shall be permitted on the east facade of the building only, uh, and that any other window locations, uh any other windows located on any other side shall require approval from the United States Navy before they are placed there. Stipulation number six uh states that uh items located on top of the building will be limited to those by applicable uh local, state, and federal codes and regulations. So things that you would see up here would be uh uh aircraft, warning lights, lightning rods, those types of structures. Um but we also put a provision in here uh that the Navy could approve uh other structures that would be located on there, just anticipating that there could be things that we haven't covered with the stipulations now. But the then the main goal here is not to have communication uh uh uh antennae uh that would uh would interfere with communications with the Navy at all. So uh the applicant has agreed to that stipulation. Uh there was also conversation about electromagnetic interference and uh the construction of the building and ways that that could be mitigated. Uh so the applicant has agreed to a stipulation that it will be constructed of steel reinforced concrete, which will act as a conductive mesh that will help uh reflect the electromagnetic interference if there was any. Uh so that stipulation has been added as number seven. Number eight uh discusses cameras. So uh cameras that would be located on the tower need to be directed towards the property and can't be looking outside of the subject property. Uh and then other security cameras will be placed on the perimeter fence around the outdoor, uh along the outdoor cable turn tables, gangways, and peer to monitor shipping operations so that we have uh sight on the property at all times. And then uh perhaps the the the biggest stipulation is number nine, which uh upon request from the Navy, uh the applicant will provide uh access to the facility for audits and inspections to ensure compliance with the stipulations as required. So that is the update that we have for you. Uh we are recommending approval with these stipulations that have been submitted today. And then I guess uh one more would be the letter that we just got September 11th. Yes, I assume staff has read digested it, feel comfortable with the stipulations here, nothing else needs to be done. Yeah, we are not recommending any further stipulations at this time uh based off the letter that we've received. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners, any uh questions?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com