City planning staff previews 12 May 20 agenda items, highlights church reuse, borrow‑pit fill plan and short‑term rental disputes

Caitlin Halcott, planning administrator for the City of Virginia Beach, briefed the City Council on 12 items that will appear on the May 20 public hearing agenda, covering subdivision variances, conditional‑use permit requests and a city application to place fill in a former borrow pit.

Halcott said the first two items involve a subdivision variance to subdivision regulation section 4.4(b) and a conditional‑use permit for a religious use on property at the southwest corner of North Great Neck Road and Millwood Road in District 8. The applicant intends to create a Parcel A that does not meet the R‑10 district’s 100‑foot minimum lot‑width requirement; Halcott said a 30‑foot Virginia Power easement reduces the calculated lot width to 35.2 feet. Redeemer Presbyterian Church is under contract for Parcel A; the applicant proposes phased development culminating in an approximately 11,500‑square‑foot, two‑story church with a 224‑seat sanctuary, 62 parking spaces at final build‑out and a decorative steeple that would exceed the 35‑foot height limit by about four feet. Halcott said the Planning Commission recommended approval with an added condition requiring any future dumpster be located away from adjacent residential properties in a staff‑approved location.

Also on the agenda, Halcott said, the City (filed) a request to modify conditions on a 19.5‑acre former borrow‑pit site at 560 Oceana Boulevard (District 6) so the city can accept material from public dredging operations and stormwater dredging. She said the city proposes no excavation, operations on an as‑needed basis and hours of 7 a.m.–7 p.m., seven days a week. Staff recommended conditions that include testing fill for contaminants, prohibiting construction debris and yard waste, installing monitoring wells, retaining vegetated berms and mature trees along certain property lines, and a limit of 40 truck trips per day. Halcott told council the Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the modification by a 9–0 vote with one abstention; speakers at the commission hearing cited flooding and potential effects on private drinking water wells.

Other items Halcott described include: - A conditional rezoning of 1549 Bradford Road (District 9) from B‑2 to conditional R‑10; Planning Commission recommended approval on its consent agenda. The proposal would demolish an existing 1955 house but retain a detached garage built in 1966; the applicant has proffered a reduced rear‑yard setback for that garage. - A conditional‑use request for a commercial kennel at 2738 Salem Road (District 2) to operate indoors for up to 10 dogs in an 819‑square‑foot detached garage; the kennel would be in the AG‑1/AG‑2 district in a high noise zone and inner facility traffic area (ITA). Halcott said the TAITACAC citizens advisory committee found the proposal consistent with the ITA vicinity master plan; the Planning Commission recommended approval on consent. - A conditional‑use request to repurpose an existing movie theater at 941 Laskin Road (District 6) as a religious assembly with an 802‑seat sanctuary; Halcott said 284 parking spaces would be provided where 160 are required. She said the Planning Commission split on a recommendation: a motion to recommend approval failed and the file moved forward as 1 for denial. Council members asked staff and the city attorney about whether a prospective tax‑exempt religious use can be considered in land‑use deliberations; the city attorney advised caution and noted state and federal law limit disparate treatment of religious uses. Council members raised traffic and loss of taxable revenue as the main community concerns. - A home‑based wildlife rehabilitation request at 6365 Colby Way (District 7) to care for birds (raptors and crows) in an attached garage; Halcott said the state Department of Wildlife Resources and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regulate the activity and the application would limit on‑site birds to two at any time; the Planning Commission recommended approval 10–0. - An automobile‑glass repair business at 5033 Cleveland Street (District 4); staff recommended interim approval with a five‑year expiration, and the Planning Commission recommended approval with a three‑year expiration to account for nearby CIP projects. - Several short‑term rental (STR) conditional‑use permit requests: a deferred request for a two‑bedroom unit at 903 Pacific Ave. (Unit A) that had two prior violations; staffs said the Planning Commission’s approval motion failed on a split vote and moved forward as a recommendation for denial. Three separate four‑bedroom STR CUPs in a 6,500‑square‑foot condominium on Second Street (units 100, 200 and 300) were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission 10–0; the applicant proposes to lease off‑site parking to meet a 12‑space requirement.

Halcott noted community meeting turnout numbers and correspondence: the Redeemer Church item drew about 14 attendees at a March community meeting and three written opposition letters; the Laskin Road reuse had 408 letters of support and 18 letters of opposition, plus 11 speakers for and 11 against at the commission hearing; the borrow‑pit item had three speakers in opposition at the commission and recommended denial.

Why this matters: Halcott’s briefing gave council an early read on contentious items likely to draw public comment at the May 20 hearing — particularly reuse of the Laskin theater, proposed religious uses, dredge‑material placement at the borrow pit and short‑term rental disputes that have produced prior zoning violations. Council members pressed staff for clarifications on traffic patterns, tax‑exempt status, neighborhood outreach and operational conditions such as parking, dumpster placement and limits on fill/hauling.

Council questions and clarifications: Council members asked staff to explain which elements of the resort strategic growth area plan apply to the Laskin Road reuse and why staff recommended approval despite the Planning Commission’s split recommendation. Halcott said the proposal retains the building’s character and is a reuse that does not trigger a site plan; she also indicated the site’s high noise and accident‑potential zoning restricts viable uses. On the borrow‑pit item, Halcott reiterated the city’s proposed limits (truck‑trip cap, monitoring wells, no construction debris) but the transcripted proposed completion date for fill activities was unreadable; council and staff agreed more technical detail would be supplied to council and the public ahead of the May hearing.

What’s next: These items will appear on the May 20 hearing agenda; several drew divergent public comment at the Planning Commission and will likely be discussed at length by council and members of the public at that hearing.