The Virginia Beach Planning Commission held an all-day meeting on April 9, 2026, beginning with an informal session (briefing) followed by a formal public hearing. The commission reviewed 17 agenda items, heard public testimony on several, and voted on recommendations to City Council. A key topic was a briefing on data center proliferation and the need for updated regulations, leading to a motion to send a letter to City Council.
Ladies and gentlemen. Good morning, everyone, and thank you. For this for your participation today. My name is John Cost, and I'm the chair of the G B Planning Commission. Welcome to the April 8th informed session of the Virginia Beach Committee Commission. Call this meeting to a lot. There will be some changes in the way we conduct the business today. Presentations. Right after their presentation. Speakers, we'll move to the speakers. Okay. Good. Okay. Roger back. Ms. Gatelin. And I did just want to make one point. Uh Commissioner Anderson is absent today. He's out of town for work. I just have two quick things. Um, so thank you for all of those who responded to the panic button app email. Um, for those who have heard from, I did forward that on to get you added to that system. Um, I'm waiting on confirmation when that has gone through. There is a brief training that you'll have to do, just that goes into the ins and outs of using that panic button. If there's anyone who did not respond but is interested, just let me know, and we can get you set up for that. Um other thing. So looking ahead to our May agenda, informal agenda specifically, Kathy will be giving a briefing on the planning commission city council application process in response to the request of trying to get information early and potentially looking at pushing the planning commission meeting back a week and kind of what impacts that would have. So that will be on your May agenda. That's all I have. City Council has the uh comp plan on their docket, I believe April 21st. So the potential is when we meet again in May, the new comprehensive plan will have been approved. The agenda items that we would encounter in May would have worked through the process under the existing comprehensive plan. Can you discuss for a minute how we might expect to approach things on the May docket given that circumstance? So, in my opinion, and as you mentioned, they'll already be going through the process. Staff review and analysis will have been already been completed by that point. So they will have been analyzed against the current so the 2016 comprehensive plan. Um so I would think if if an application maybe doesn't adhere to the 2016 plan, but it would be in conformance with the 2040 plan if it's adopted. I think you could be could take that into consideration. I would hesitate, and I don't think staff would um hold an application if it doesn't conform with the imagined 2040 comprehensive plan. We wouldn't hold the application to that since at the time of submit of the 2016 plan, is what would have been an effect. Um so that's how we will be evaluating it. But I think in terms of y'all's discussion, if maybe it does conform with the newer plan, but maybe not the old. I think you can factor that in, but I'd hesitate holding it to it since it was they would have been submitted prior to adoption. And since we will only get the staff report five days before the vote, that our basis for understanding really anything about these in any detail would be based on the what's still current, the 2016 plan. So if we were to formulate our opinions based on the current plan, that would not be incorrect, even though in the intervening week the city council may have adopted something new. Is that correct? Thank you, sir. Any other comments, Mr. Poolley? What is the purpose of changing the uh procedure for questioning the applicant?