Dominion Boulevard Corridor Study and Economic Development Strategic Plan Chesapeake, Virginia March 2015 Planning for a vibrant and exciting future for the City of Chesapeake Contents
Acknowledgements ...... iv.
DW Legacy Design® Method...... v
SUMMARY...... 1
Project Background...... 2 Critical Success Factors...... 4
Implementation Strategies...... 5 Aspirational Development Standards...... 10
MARKET STUDY...... 19
Market Study Summary...... 20 Background and Objectives ...... 20 Key Findings – Economy and Demographics ...... 20 Dominion Boulevard Site Analysis...... 26 Demand Analysis...... 27 Regional Employment Center Scenario...... 29
EXISTING CONDITIONS...... 31
Existing Conditions...... 32 Existing Hydrology and National Wetlands Inventory Map...... 36 Existing Agricultural Land...... 37 Rural Development Lots...... 38 Industrial and Commercial Nodes...... 39 Recent New Development ...... 40 Public and Community Uses ...... 41 Existing Streets and Major Intersections...... 42 Regional Airport ...... 43
Public Input Process ...... 44 Summary on the Public Process ...... 44 Public Charrette #1 ...... 44 Public Charrette #2 ...... 46 Public Open House ...... 46
PLANNING FRAMEWORKS...... 49
Area Planning...... 51
Scenario Planning ...... 52
Master Land Use Plan...... 54
Transportation Master Plan ...... 98
Utilities Master Plan...... 110
Telecommunications Infrastructure Strategy ...... 125
APPENDICES...... 127
Public Charette 1...... 128
Public Charette 2...... 136
Public Open House ...... 143
Market Study ...... 146
| iii Acknowledgements
The City of Chesapeake would like to thank all of the residents and participants in the creation of this plan . The robust public involvement reflects the passion of the community in Chesapeake. City officials and staff made it a priority to listen to what the community had to say and incorporate these thoughts and passion into a framework to move the City of Chesapeake into the future . We especially wish to thank the Reverend Ellen Comstock and the staff and members of the Messiah United Methodist Church for the use of their facilities for the community charrettes and open houses .
City of Chesapeake Elected Officials Contributing
Mayor Alan P . Krasnoff Carlos Aiken Vice Mayor John de Triquet Mike Benda Joan Fowler City Council: Steven Froncillo Lonnie E . Craig David Jurgens Roland J . Davis Sam Sawan Robert C . Ike, Jr . Jay Tate Suzy H . Kelly Peter Wallace S .Z . Debbie Ritter Ed West Dr . Ella Ward Steven Wright Rick . W . West
Urban Designers and Lead Consultant City Administration James Baker - City Manager Design Workshop: Amar Dwarkanath - Deputy CIty Manager - Operations Kurt Culbertson Jan L . Proctor - City Attorney Glenn Walters Susannah Horton
City of Chesapeake Staff Advisory Team Market and Economic Study Virginia Fowler Lennie Luke RCLCO: Mary Ann Saunders Melina Duggal Steven Jenkins Earl Sorey Utilities and Transportation Ben White Bill Meyer Woolpert: Kirsten Tynch Mike Mull Planning Staff Dan Detmer Jaleh Shea Karen Shaffer Environmental Mark Woodward Steven Lambert - Project Manager Kerr Environmental Services Corp . Rebecca Benz Bob Kerr Milissa Story Curtis Hickman Jennifer White Alexis Baker Ben Umphlett
iv | DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia DW Legacy Design® Method
Design Workshop’s Legacy Design process emphasizes a deliberate approach to sustainable design solutions that is comprehensive of four Legacy categories: environment, community, art and economics . All aspects of the design process and foundational thinking for a project are captured in this document . Issues associated with the project and our client’s Critical Success Factors are defined at the outset. The design team and client define a project Vision, a problem statement and a design solution . These steps are intended to build a strong foundational story for the project that aligns the design team and client to the same Principles and Legacy Goals . DW Legacy Design® metrics are employed to ensure that the project is accountable to comprehensive Legacy Goals set at the beginning of the process .
| v The master plan presents an opportunity for Chesapeake to secure its economic future, advance its quality of life and promote stewardship for future generations. 1 Summary
Community Input:
How would you plan for the best long term outcome?
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
What is the most important strategy when planning the Study Area?
Maintain agricultural and rural qualities Create dynamic “mixed use” communities
Create more suburban style housing projects
Create parks and recreation space Leverage airport and Route 17 into jobs creating uses
Connect the study area to rapid transit
Create golf course and recreation based communities
Organize the plan around wetlands and canals I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 30 60 90 120 150
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Summary | 1 Project Background
The City of Chesapeake, Virginia is a thriving economic hub supported by excellent infrastructure. The City has identified the Dominion Boulevard Corridor (US Route 17 South) as a key strategic area for the future growth of the City . In light of ongoing and emerging development demand associated with the Veterans Bridge and Roadway Improvement Project that will be completed in 2017, the City is working to prepare a physical development plan and a strategy to maximize the economic potential of the Study Area .
The growth in Chesapeake has recently been driven by sustainable energy, startup, and logistics and distribution sectors . This study complements the Moving Forward Chesapeake 2035 Comprehensive Plan . It leverages the improvements to Dominion Boulevard and Highway 17 underway by the City of Chesapeake and works to build upon the Chesapeake 2050 Master Transportation Plan .
.Dominion Boulevard provides north-south access from North Carolina into the heart of Chesapeake and the Chesapeake Expressway . Upon the completion of the Veterans Bridge, this corridor will become more accessible from the Hampton Roads Beltway and the Chesapeake Expressway, which will create additional commercial, residential and jobs creating development opportunities . Sales and permit data suggest that the economic recovery is progressing more rapidly in the City of Chesapeake than overall in the VA Beach - Norfolk - Newport News MSA, which is a good sign for Dominion Boulevard .
Vision
The City has articulated the following vision for this important region of Chesapeake:
“An economic development physical improvements master plan that responds to and supports the policy of the City Council and the Comprehensive Plan to develop Dominion Boulevard as a ‘Major Activity Center’ that leverages the policy to establish the Raleigh - Norfolk Connector on Route 17 between Raleigh and Norfolk as a high priority corridor, the airport, the ongoing capital improvements of Dominion Boulevard and the environmental assets of this part of the City ”.
The Impetus for Creating a Master Plan
The master plan for the Dominion Boulevard Study Area presents an important opportunity for the City to secure its economic future, advance the quality of life for its residents and guests and promote stewardship of the sensitive environment that it is located in . It allows the City to balance economic needs with the desire to preserve and protect the lifestyle that makes Chesapeake unique . It enables a plan that preserves agricultural and rural lifestyles while also attracting new and exciting industries .
Value Proposition
Attracting new industries that provide well-paying jobs is imperative if the City is to continue to remain economically viable and secure . It requires the deliberate effort to attract modern “knowledge based” employers . In order to do that, the proper environment needs to be created that will attract these new employers and be attractive for the employees that will work in these new industries . The successful integration of modern urban planning principles and sustainability strategies into the planning and design of the Dominion
2 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Boulevard Study Area will provide the lifestyle and sense of place that the new employer and employee require and enable Chesapeake to be competitive . To not update current development patterns toward market based, holistic and sustainable solutions creates the risk of losing out to the competition where these lifestyles are already being promoted and developed . To continue to build out the Study Area with conventional residential communities, regardless of how marketable they currently are, would cause a negative fiscal impact to the City. Conversely, a phased approach that balances revenue producing uses with residential uses will better enable fiscal responsibility. With that in mind, a master plan and design standards have been created that will lead Chesapeake toward a new and exciting future that will be attractive to new industries, employers and employees that are seeking a more thoughtful, connected and integrated urban and community lifestyle than is currently being offered in the region .
Purpose and Intent
1 . Implement the policies and goals contained within officially adopted plans, including the Comprehensive Plan .
2 . Capitalize on existing and proposed investments in access and infrastructure .
3 . Promote Jobs / Housing balance and provide opportunities for regional employment centers that will provide adequate jobs for a diverse employment base .
4 . Improve Chesapeake’s built environment and human habitat .
5 . Connect the citizens of Chesapeake with new communications technologies .
6 . Conserve and protect the City’s natural beauty and setting, including trees, scenic vistas and cultural and historic resources .
7 . Ensure that new development conserves energy, land and natural resources .
8 . Protect water quality and the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge Area .
9 . .Encourage environmentally responsible development practices by minimizing vehicle traffic while providing for a mixture of land uses, walkability, connectivity and compact community form .
10 . Provide neighborhoods with a variety of housing types, densities and price points to serve the needs of a diverse population .
11 . Promote the greater health benefits of a pedestrian-oriented environment.
12 . Provide for orderly growth and development of suitable neighborhoods with adequate transportation networks, drainage and utilities and appropriate building sites .
13 . Save unnecessary expenditures of funds by requiring the proper initial construction of transportation networks, sidewalks, drainage facilities and utilities .
14 . Promote development patterns that support safe, effective and multi-modal transpor- tation options, including auto, pedestrian, bicycle and transit .
Summary | 3 Critical Success Factors
• Achieve consensus (especially key land owners and the City Council) on land uses and development patterns that will position the Study Area for the type of growth that will contribute economic potential and fiscal responsibility to the City.
• Enhance Chesapeake’s regional competitive advantage, image, marketability, and sense of place .
• .Recognize the Study Area’s adjacency to the Chesapeake Regional Airport and Route 17 and explore opportunities for regional employment centers .
• Promote development patterns that lead toward energy efficiency, quality of life and environmental protection .
• .Anticipate future infrastructure and transportation and technology needs and enhance multimodal connections through the Study Area .
• .Keep the magnitude of development tied to the practical availability of regional water supply, sewer capacity and infrastructure .
• .Position the Study Area effectively from an economic development and fiscal impact perspective .
• .Effectively plan for parks, plazas, civic gathering places and open space connections .
• .Develop a plan that conforms to all existing or pending local, state, and federal regulations .
• .Create an implementation plan for public improvements that tie to city budgets and provides for the greatest return on investment .
• Create an open space network that protects and provides connections to important environmental systems like the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge Area and provides a place for multiple uses such as storm water management, biodiversity and recreation .
• Reverse the trend within in the Study Area of low density suburban residential development sprawl that does not have services within reasonable walking and biking distances .
• Maximize the use of naturalized storm water management techniques to protect regional watersheds, promote environmental stewardship, create opportunities for recreation and to lessen costs for underground piping .
4 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Implementation Strategies
Fully realizing the economic potential of the Study Area will require the collective effort of city leadership, civic leaders, institutions and the community at large to “pull together” toward a common goal . Successful economic development, according to the Wisconsin Economic Development Institute, requires the creation of an implementation plan that is crafted in collaboration with public and private stakeholders throughout the region; a funding plan that meets the needs of the master plan while also expanding the sources of funding available for economic development; and performance metrics that establish benchmarks and enables progress reviews . Implementation also requires consistent land use plans, development standards, codes and ordinances that support the vision .
Several forward looking cities across the country, such as Portland, Boston, Seattle, and Austin are successfully implementing economic development plans that are oriented toward future economic, environmental and social sustainability and attracting new businesses that would help ensure adherence to their unique vision . There are also several movements afoot to help cities codify principles related to smarter growth . The reality is that to be competitive, Chesapeake needs to be enthusiastic about making the changes necessary to remain viable and to be in position to attract businesses that will lead it into the future . This involves several steps according to the review of several publications or organizations dedicated to research in this topic such as the Wisconsin Economic Development Institute (WEDI), the Portland Economic Development Strategy (PEDS), Smart Growth America, the Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC), the Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA).
According to WEDI, prospering in the new economy requires:
1 . Knowing your region’s economic function in the global economy . 2 . Creating a skilled and educated workforce . 3 . Investing in an infrastructure for innovation . 4 . Creating a great quality of life . 5 . Fostering an innovative business climate . 6 . Reinventing and digitizing government . 7 . Taking regional governance and collaboration seriously .
The Master Plan “sets the table” physically and philosophically to accomplish these requirements . It provides places for fostering an innovative business climate, and promotes new land uses, development patterns and infrastructure that will lead to a great quality of life . The project’s location next to the Tidewater Community College has the potential to contribute to creating a skilled and educated workforce – assuming that its curriculum is in alignment with the City’s vision .
However, the master plan is only one part of a successful implementation plan . Important to the success of its implementation will be the cooperation and collaboration that can be fostered and obtained between city government and contributing businesses; the various governmental agencies that will have ongoing responsibility to execute the master plan; city government with contributing institutional players such as the regional hospital and community college; and city government and property developers . As described in the BBNA Community and Economic Development Plan Guidebook, creating a forward looking and healthy economy that fosters economics, environment and culture requires innovative thinking, new attitudes, effective leadership and collaborative approaches .
Summary | 5 Funding Sources and Community Strategies
Developing potential funding strategies is critical to creating a realistic and achievable plan for the Dominion Boulevard Corridor . Below are potential funding sources that are appropriate for the Study Area .
Public Financing Alternatives: tax increment financing, which would provide the necessary gap financing to make redevelopment possible as determined by the market assessment, but allowing tax revenues to be deferred to support bonds to build infrastructure on the corridor .
Financial Incentives: public financing tools, such as TIF, business improvement districts, public investment fees, and others that will enable the city to direct proceeds from development into revitalization projects .
Joint Public/Private Development Opportunities: use of publicly owned land, contribution of the land and/or low-cost financing to make the development feasible for private developers .
Public Investment: capital projects (e.g., streetscape improvements, utlities, parks, or other community facilities) or operations and maintenance efforts that may improve the attractiveness and marketability of a corridor segment .
Local Incentives: land swaps and density bonuses .
State Programs: grants and other types of incentives to create jobs .
Other Strategies:
• Develop excellent educational facilities to attract students • Institute a beautification program • .Improve infrastructure and ensure access to broad band technology • .Develop tourism attractions and provide visitor information • Provide technical assistance to businesses • Provide business incubators • Promote entrepreneurship • Promote “cluster strategies”
Cluster Strategy
One method of enhancing implementation and attracting appropriate new industries would be to adopt a cluster strategy similar to what’s being done in Portland, Oregon . As outlined in the Portland Economic Development Strategy, their plan uses a cluster strategy as a way to organize their efforts to attract, retain, and develop like-minded and synergistic firms and businesses. The cluster strategy can be coordinated “in a manner that makes more efficient use of resources and creates synergies in otherwise unrelated activities (e.g.; coordinated training and research at local universities). In addition, in-depth knowledge of particular sectors fuels catalytic initiatives that move business development efforts beyond traditional assistance . A cluster strategy is especially critical for a market like Portland, where limited resources require selective investments in the groups of firms that demonstrate the most promise of growth” .
6 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia In addition to clustering, cities employ a variety of available financing tools and strategies to develop and support the entrepreneurial culture and industry innovation that encourages business attraction, development . An effective funding strategy according to research conducted by the PEDS should provide:
• Reliable multi-year operating support for the key initiatives in the strategy, including work supporting job growth in target industries and thriving small businesses, promoting international trade; assisting small neighborhood businesses; • A range of innovative debt products to finance the growth of existing businesses and serve as incentives for attracting firms to the city; • Investment capital for start-up and emerging businesses in target industries and those identified through economic gardening; • Strategic investment funds to jump-start new programs and facilitate collaboration among existing programs, particularly for workforce development and research and development initiatives; • Financial incentives through regulations and policies designed to promote growth within target industries and firms adopting sustainable business practices.
One study adapted from “How to Meet the Needs of Corporations in Locating New Facilities,” by Allen R . Wood, Economic Development Review, Winter 1990” proposes 10 basic things economic developers can do to meet the needs of locating a new facility:
• Make sure community leaders are ready, willing and able to assist in attracting prospective industries . • Conduct periodic labor surveys to keep tabs on the labor supply . • Have managers of local, existing industries meet with prospective industries to discuss suitable wage rates, benefits, etc. • Identify several good industrial sites that have good roads and utilities in place, or can be developed quickly . .Have local technical colleges host tours of their facilities and provide information on their services to prospective industries . • Use state government resources for financial and technical assistance available to new industry . • Communicate with federal and state elected officials about issues affecting development in the area . • Have up-to-date community information, which presents pertinent data that a company requires . • Maintain a small local development team to support prospect needs and maintain the confidentiality of the prospect’s interest. • Make sure the community attitude is attractive to industry . A good business climate will retain existing businesses and attract new ones .
Summary | 7 Summary of Action Items:
Several items will need to be acted upon to capitalize on the vision articulated in the Master Plan and to foster an exciting future for Chesapeake that includes the ability to attract new employers and to support existing employers . These include items associated with economic development, land use planning, design and engineering:
1 . Obtain full acceptance of the Master Plan and its contents by all city leaders and agencies so that it can be acted upon toward a shared vision .
2 . Seek regional partnerships that can contribute to expanding and elevating infrastructure and transportation services to the Study Area .
3 . Pursue efforts to attract LRT/BRT transit service to the Study Area; expand the Airport so that it can ship and receive freight; and reclassify Route 17 as an Interstate Highway .
4 . Conduct workshops with city leaders and agencies to promote the opportunities, areas of change and actions needed that the Master Plan proposes . Create alignment for the proposed arrangement and types of land uses; the design concepts and locations for roadway and utility infrastructure; the requirements of “Aspirational Zoning” and the proposed development standards .
5 . Conduct workshop(s) with institutional and business partners to promote the Master Plan and to find areas of shared interest that lead to coordinated efforts to execute the vision .
6 . Work with the Tidewater Community College and other regional educational institutions to align educational programs and resources with the requirements of businesses or business clusters targeted for the Study Area .
7 . Create a synergistic partnership with the Great Dismal Swamp National WIldlife Refuge Area to promote tourism opportunities, environmental and recreational linkages .
8 . Conduct a workshop with builders and developers to describe the contents of the Master Plan and the changes that will result to current requirements . Make these new requirements part of the discussions with new developers that are currently or proposing to invest in the Study Area .
9 . Create the additional codes, ordinances and guidelines required to execute the principles and vision of the Master Plan . Ideally these would be created for each Area of the Master Plan so that they respond to each’s particular vision and nuance . Making them as specific and detailed as possible will help ensure a successful outcome.
10 . Create and codify measurable goals or metrics for items such as water usage, energy usage, storm water management, jobs/housing balance, provision for parks, etc . to support the execution of the “Aspirational Zoning” principles and development standards of the Master Plan .
11 . Enact TDR and PDR policies so that execution of the Master Plan is potentially more equitable to land owners affected by the master plan and so that agricultural preservation is ensured .
8 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia 12 . Update the City’s HRSD Sewer Service Expansion Policy to replace the one-mile service area provisions with provisions that sewer service be provided only to those areas so identified for service by City Council.
13 . Extend or have plans to extend adequate utility infrastructure to Areas 3,4,5 and 6 and other areas that are to be developed using municipal infrastructure .
14 . Redesign all street cross sections and transportation standards and requirements (speeds, intersections, intersection spacing, access management, allowance for street trees, sidewalks, bike lanes, etc.) to enable “Complete Streets” as described in the Master Plan . Revise the 2050 Master Transportation Plan to conform to the location of the major streets described in the Master Plan .
15 . Expand upon the City’s existing storm water management plan to include the naturalized capture and transmission sites shown on the Master Plan as well as to include provisions for onsite naturalized storm water management that may be required above and beyond the community facilities shown on the Master Plan .
16 . Update current parks, open space and public services requirements to align with the vision and requirements of the Master Plan .
17 . Obtain land for parks and open spaces and/or adjust parks and open space requirements of new development to conform to the requirements of the Master Plan .
18 . Obtain land for the right of way for new roadways, greenways, storm water management facilities and utility infrastructure .
19 . Create the organization and funding needed to support the maintenance and management of parks, open spaces, storm water management facilities, streetscapes, and greenways .
20 . Create new or supporting branding for the Study Area that promotes its vision .
21 . Create designs and a master plan for signage and wayfinding for the Study Area (which is part of branding).
In addition to the general implementation strategies outlined above, a more complete discussion of land use and zoning implementation strategies specific to the development of the Study Area is contained in the Aspirational Development Section of this chapter and the Planning Frameworks and Area Plans chapters .
Summary | 9 Figure 2. Connecting Environmental Systems Figure 1. Capitalizing on Investment in Transportation The Great Dismal Swamp Wildlife Refuge Area, the historic The Chesapeake Regional Airport, the new tall span Herring Ditch and forested land purported to be wetlands Veterans Bridge and potential for Dominion Boulevard to create a connected framework that act as the lungs of the become an interstate highway creates economic potential. region and provides habitat, biodiversity and opportunities for recreation.
Figure 3. Preserving Agricultural Character Figure 4. Locating New Economic Centers Large segments of productive agriculture can be New economic centers take advantage of key intersections preserved so that this important part of Chesapeake’s of improved regional transportation assets and sense of place and character can be retained for the environmental systems next generations.
10 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Diagrammatic Concept - Parti The chief organizing thoughts, illustrating the ‘big ideas” of the master plan, are captured in what is often called a parti . This and the preceding page highlight the big ideas that the master plan follows . 4 Key Master Plan Concepts
• Capitalize on investment in transportation infrastructure
• Locate new economic centers to support commerce and new industries
• Protect and connect valuable environmental systems
• Preserve productive farm land and the rural lifestyle
Figure 5. Synthesis A master plan that develops Dominion Boulevard as a “Major Activity Center” that leverages investments in transportation infrastructure, one of a kind environmental assets, and the unique sense of place and character of this part of Chesapeake.
Summary | 11 Aspirational Development Standards
As part of the Implementation Strategy, creating specific development standards, plans, overlays, codes and ordinances for each Area would help ensure execution toward the vision established for the Study Area . As described later in the document, each Area of the plan has a unique theme, character, and land use orientation that will maximize its potential to deliver on the Vision and Critical Success Factors established for the Study Area . The following list provides the universally applicable development standards by which plans submitted for entitlement approval can be evaluated for their consistency with the purpose and intent of this master plan . In that regard they are “aspirational” and represent the combined checklist of principles and standards that future plans can be evaluated from . When complied with they together will ensure a successful outcome for the development of the Study Area in conformance with the City’s vision:
STEWARDSHIP PLANNING
Housing and Jobs Balance New Residential Development requires a Jobs to Housing balance ratio of 1 .5 jobs per new household as a requirement for developing new areas of the Master Plan that are currently described as Agriculture / Open Space Preservation in the 2035 Comprehensive Plan .
Natural Open Space Preservation At least 25% of each Area should be set aside for natural open space preservation, which includes the preservation of wetlands, waterways, sensitive forested lands, areas of habitat and areas used for naturalized storm water management . The open space area will ideally be aggregated and then connected into a system that enables preservation of habitat and the opportunity for residents to experience the natural environment . Some open space areas that relate to forested lands, lands that have a high likelihood of being wetlands, canals, power line easements, and proposed greenways are already established on the master plan and can contribute to satisfying the open space requirements .
Limit Development Impacts on the Natural Environment At least a 50 ft . buffer and ideally a 100 foot vegetated buffer should be established adjacent to all tidal wetlands and natural water bodies, subject to established laws, codes and ordinances. Should there be conflict with applicable laws, codes and ordinances, the more stringent buffer requirement should apply .
Enable Open Space and Agricultural Preservation Utilize Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) and Conservation Easements (CE) to promote equity to existing land owners and to enable and encourage public open space, agricultural preservation and a more compact, dense and orderly development pattern that locates roads, parks, open spaces, and community service uses in logical places within the Area being planned for development .
12 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Compact Development Promote development densities that exceed typical norms, or that are at the higher end of the range established for a particular zoning designation, on land that is suitable for development .
Housing and Jobs Proximity Encourage proximity between housing and jobs such that 50% of the jobs located within the Study Area are located within ½ mile walking distance of the equivalent 1 .5 jobs per household .
Development Character Create detailed design standards, design guidelines and form based codes for each Area that describe development type, density form and character to match the theme and character promoted for the Area as described in this master plan .
Housing Affordability: Encourage that at least 20% of new housing units be in an attainable price range and integrated into the fabric of the neighborhood .
Urban Form Buildings should front onto streets and public spaces with pedestrian friendly buildings that have access onto the street . Provide multi-story mixed use buildings where appropriate and locate parking and service in the rear of the building (alleys) and not fronted onto the primary street .
Size Neighborhoods to Walking Distance Dimensions: Utilize the ¼ mile – 5 minute walk standard as a guide to size neighborhoods .
Create Centers Create centers or nodes within each Focal or Secondary Area that are within ¼ mile walking distance of residences and include combinations of civic, retail, employment, public gathering spaces and/or parks. Size, scale and program the center to fit with the theme and character of the neighborhood that it’s located in .
Create Neighborhood Edges Use open space, environmental features, storm water facilities, greenways, major roads and major utility easements to create defined edges to the neighborhoods.
MOBILITY
Complete Streets Design and engineer all streets to include the elements associated with “Complete Streets” and include travel lanes sized for efficiency, on street parking, accommodations for bicycles, accommodations for transit, adequately sized tree lawns and street trees, adequate sidewalks, street lighting, street furnishings and naturalized storm water management .
Street Connectivity At least one street and one pedestrian connection must be made between adjacent neighborhoods at least every ¼ mile . Additionally, pedestrian or bicycle through connections should be used on cul-de-sacs . Discourage the development of gated communities with private streets .
Summary | 13 Street Block Sizes Blocks should be walkable in scale and the sum of all street lengths that make up a block should be no more than 1,800 linear feet square in urban neighborhoods and suburban neighborhoods . This will allow 450 X 450 ft . square block sizes in urban areas and 600 X 300 ft . block sizes in residential areas .
Pedestrian Network Safe and adequately dimensioned sidewalks or trails should be provided on all streets, greenways and open spaces so that they connect to each other and provide an overall connected pedestrian network .
Bicycle Network Design each street, greenway and linear park to enable bicycle infrastructure and a complete bicycle network .
Reduced Parking Footprint Provide parking sharing, reduced parking standards and preferred parking for car pool or fuel efficient vehicles. Locate parking at the side or rear of buildings, leaving building frontages facing streets free of surface parking lots .
CENTERS / WALKABILITY
Walking Distance to Transit Locate transit stops so that at least 50% of the residences are located within ¼ mile walking distance of a bus stop or ½ mile walking to a bus or light rail shelter .
Walking Distance to Community and Neighborhood Services Locate community and neighborhood services so that at least 75% of the residences are located within ¼ mile of at least one community and neighborhood service (i.e. place of worship, day care, retail, school, park, etc) in Focal Areas and Secondary Areas.
Schools Integrate schools into the neighborhood by locating elementary and middle schools within ½ mile walking distance of 50% of the dwelling units .
Access to Civic and Public Space Locate civic or passive use spaces within ¼ mile walking distance of 90% of dwelling units within a neighborhood .
Parks Provide parks (tot lots, neighborhood parks, regional parks, etc.) per the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) standards or greater.
Access to Open Space Provide access to open space (at least 1 acre in size) so that it is ½ mile walking distance from a high percentage (70-90%) of dwelling units
14 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Community and Neighborhood Gardens: Provide community and neighborhood gardens so the residents and employees have a place to grow food in a community based atmosphere . Ensure that the spaces are owned and managed by an entity that includes occupants of the project in its decision-making, such as a community group, homeowners association, or public body .
RESPONSIBLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
Stormwater Management Storm water management systems should use current low impact development (LID) principles and provide connectivity of natural and man-made existing and proposed systems, keeping and enhancing the canal system where appropriate .
Heat Island Reduction Provide shade from open structures. Use paving materials with a Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) of 29 or greater. Install open grid pavement systems. Provide shade from tree canopy within 10 years of landscape installation .
Reduce Landscaping Water Consumption Reduce water consumption for outdoor landscaping by 50% from calculated midsummer baseline case by using of captured rainwater, recycled wastewater, use of water treated by public agency specifically for non potable use (purple pipes), and use of other non potable sources (air conditioning condensate, stormwater, foundation drain water)
Preserve Heritage Trees While the City of Chesapeake does not currently have an adopted tree conservation ordinance as allowed under the Code of Virginia, Section 10 1-1. 127 1,. the preservation of “heritage trees” (those that may be individually designated by the local governing body to have notable historic or cultural interest) should be considered when appropriate. As development occurs, preservation of non-invasive trees should be a goal, given the Area’s proximity to the Great Dismal Swamp Wildlife Refuge, to the extent feasible within the requirements of Section 15 .2-961 of the Code of Virginia for achieving tree canopy requirements during the development process .
Solid Waste Management Provide space for the placement of recycling stations and compost stations within each Area .
Light Pollution Reduction Use night sky protection specifications such as those found in the standards articulated in the International Dark Sky Association Standards .
Street Trees Provide street trees at 40 feet on center average in an adequately sized tree lawn or tree pit on all streets to shade the street in Focal or Secondary development areas .
Native Plant Materials Use native, low maintenance landscape materials that are appropriate for the region .
Summary | 15 BUILDING BULK AND FORM CONCEPTS
Regional and Place Sensitive Design .Buildings should be designed to take advantage of local climate, building practices and regional culture .
Vertical Mixing of Land Uses within Buildings Vertically mixed use buildings in the Focal Areas (the walkable mixed use areas and commercial areas associated with Areas 3 and 6 in particular) is highly encouraged with multi-story buildings that have retail or office on the ground floors and office or residential uses on the upper floors.
Buildings Address the Street and Public Spaces Buildings in the Focal Areas should address the street and public spaces with doors, windows, porches and stoops creating a link with the public pedestrian environment .
Transparency at Street Level Commercial buildings (retail, office and light industrial) and mixed use buildings should have 50% transparency on the ground floor building elevation that fronts on the public realm.
Identifiable Floors Multistory commercial buildings and vertically mixed use buildings of 4-5 stories should have an identifiable ground floor sized appropriately for retail at between 16 ft. and 20 ft., upper stories that have balconies and windows and a top .
Consistent Building Edge at Street Buildings in the Focal Areas should meet the sidewalk environment without a setback and create a consistent building edge along the sidewalk .
Corner Lots Buildings located on the corner of two streets should address both streets .
Building Length Individual commercial buildings should generally be 90 feet long or less .
Rhythmic Pedestrian Scaled Facade Individual commercial buildings in the Focal Areas should use a rhythm of approximately 30 feet in width to create variations in the architecture at the street level to something more in scale with the pedestrian .
Highlighted Entry The front door of commercial buildings should be highlighted and distinguished with architectural details, awnings, furniture, lighting, signage and landscape .
Shade and Comfort Awnings and other devices that provide shade and protection from the weather should adorn the ground floor elevation of buildings that front onto public sidewalks.
High Density Residential Oriented to the Street High density residential buildings in the Focal Areas should be oriented so that doors have direct access to the street . High density residential buildings should be minimally set back
16 | Summary DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia from the sidewalk environment and promote a consistent building edge along the street . High density residential buildings should include stoops and porches along the ground floor elevation to create relationship to the street .
Medium Density Residential Oriented to the Street Medium density and low density residential buildings should front the street and include doors that have direct access to the sidewalk . Homes in the medium density residential and low density residential neighborhoods should have consistent setbacks or build to lines that create a strong relationship between the building, stoop and front porch with the street . Medium density and low density buildings should include porches and stoops at the ground floor elevation to create a relationship to the street.
Parking and Service Areas Parking for medium density residential and low density residential buildings should be primarily accessed from alleys located behind the buildings . Yard areas for medium and low density residential buildings should be kept minimal . Service areas should be located behind the building and screened appropriately .
Low Density Residential Oriented to the Street Like the other residential types, low density residential should also be oriented to the street with appropriate building setbacks . Parking for low density residential can be accommodated in the front of the lot, so long as the garage is oriented to open to the side .
Agricultural Lot Clusters Agricultural lot clusters should be organized to reduce the amount of infrastructure service and land area required for each cluster . They are intended to be dense pockets of charming houses that mimic, in spirit, clusters of agricultural buildings . The effective density of each cluster, when measuring the perimeter of the cluster, should not exceed 4 du/acre; however, the overall density should not exceed 1 dwelling unit per acres . Cars should be parked in detached garages, sheds, or shared “parking barns”, ideally, to foster an “un-suburban” appearance . Roads should be designed like country lanes . The architecture and landscape should be inspired by the rural and agricultural context, using designs that are appropriate for the climate of the region . Ideally, small vegetable gardens will service each cluster, bringing the appearance and function of agriculture into the cluster .
Summary | 17 Attracting new industries that provide well-paying jobs will enable the City is to remain economically viable and secure. 2 Market Study
Community Input:
What would have the most positive impact on Chesapeake’s future?
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
What are the most important things we can improve on as a city?
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Market Study | 19 Market Study Summary Background and Objectives Key Findings – Economy and Demographics
The City of Chesapeake is a thriving The favored quarter is a defining economic hub supported by excellent characteristic of regional growth in most infrastructure, schools and location and regions, and the Hampton Roads region driven by substantial growth of the logistics, is no exception . The favored quarter is manufacturing, sustainable energy and typically where the best paying jobs, startup sectors . The Dominion Boulevard particularly office jobs, concentrate; on Corridor Study planning effort will build upon average about 30-40% of these jobs locate the foundation established in the Moving in what RCLCO has deemed to be Metro Forward Chesapeake 2035 Comprehensive Cores, the areas of greatest job density . Plan to develop a strategy for development of the corridor . The Hampton Roads region has two distinct favored quarters: one to the southeast RCLCO researched and analyzed relevant towards the water in Virginia Beach and the demographic and economic data for the other to the north into the Peninsula (see Study Area, city, and the region . Our Figure 7). Given the size of the region, it goal was to understand the City’s past would typically only have one direction of and present population and household growth, however, due to the unique nature characteristics as well as trends or of the region with the ocean, rivers, and Site Analysis projections that could be concluded for multiple bridges, the region has grown in incorporation into the development of the multiple directions, following the water . The Dominion Study Area is outside of these • The Hampton Road’s region providesDominion long-term Boulevard favorable Corridor growth Study and Study Area Relative to the MSA and the City of Chesapeake Economic Development Strategic Plan . traditional Favored Quarters, however, as fundamentals, and the subject area is in a strong location to We considered both short- and long-term land becomes more scarce, and given the receive a fair amount of that growth.projections and opportunities .
• The study area is approximately 10Our,000 approachacres to inthis theassignmentCity of included Chesapeake. It is located southwestan of assessment the Steel of Bridge, the area’s and potential is to along the Dominion Boulevard corridor.become It isa regional east of employment The Great center and Dismal Swamp. a market analysis of the residential, retail commercial, and office/industrial markets in order to recommend market-driven impacts • The City of Chesapeake is a well-regarded place to live and do to the land plan and create a land-use .I. Itt iiss hhomeome to ttwowo ooff tthehe rregionegion’ s eemploymentmployment cocoresres busbusinessiness allocation strategy and development phasing (Greenbrier and Cavalier), and has someschedule of . Thi thes document region’s summarizes newest the and nicest housing stock. Demographic Analysis and Market and Economic Research and Analysis . The • The Dominion study area should see additionalmarket analysis development was completed as the in Summer new bridge over the Elizabeth River isof constructed,2014 . eliminating the Steel Bridge. The new bridge will have a toll. Since many bridges in The Market Study was prepared based the region are tolled, and some projected to be at a higher rate, the on the best information available at the toll should have limited impact ontime the . In desirability recognition that of themarket area conditions for new construction. may change in the future, the Master Plan should remain dynamic and flexible for new Figure 6: Virginia Beach-Norfok-Newport News • In addition, Dominion Boulevard is beingopportunities widened that tomay a arise four . lane MSA, City of Chesapeake, and Dominion divided higgyhway all the way into North Carolina. There is Boulevard Study Area speculation that at some point it will be turned into an interstate highway. All of these items are promising for the future 20 | Market Study DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia development of the area.
• The study area itself has some development at the northern end, primarily residential and retail. Throughout the study area there are large lot single-family homes. Tidewater Community College has a new facility as well as the new Grassfield High School. To the southern end of the study area is the Chesapeake Regional Airport.
Source:Google; RCLCO
6 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40 Favored QQpuarter in Hampton Roads
The Hampton Roads region has two distinct favored quarters: one The majority of employment is concentrated along major to the southeast towards the water in Virginia Beach and the other to transportation routes. Much of this density is concentrated in the north into the Peninsula. Given the size of the region, it would downtown Norfolk and directly to the east, towards Virginia Beach, typically only have one direction of growth, however, due to the unique within one of the region’s favored quarters. These dense employment nature of the region with the ocean, rivers, and multiple bridges, the areas are the region’s Metro Cores. region has grown in multiple directions, following the water.
Per Capita Income Industrial & Office Buildings Hampton Roads Region Hampton Roads Region
Peninsula Favored Quarter
10 20 South Side Favored Quarter
Figure 7: Favored Key: Per Capita Income (PCI) Quarter of Growth in MAP KEY Hampton Roads region Industrial Buildings and Per Capita Income Source: RCLCO andOffice Buildings Low Avg High ESRI Source: Co Star Source: Esri size of the area, the Study Area could begin employment base in the Hampton Roads to help shift the favored quarter towards it region is contained within these seven over time . cores . The Dominion Study Area is close 15 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40 to the Cavalier and Greenbrier Cores . See The majority of employment is concentrated Figure 8 . along major transportation routes . Much of this density is concentrated in downtown The Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News Norfolk and directly to the east, towards MSA (VA Beach MSA) is poised to see Virginia Beach, within one of the region’s moderate growth in the next 20 years (see favored quarters . These dense employment Figure 8). Many of the industries upon which areas are the region’s Metro Cores . the region has grown (military, contractors, transportation, and government) are Today, the Hampton Roads region has projected to have moderate to weak future nine established employment cores, with growth . one additional emerging . For the purpose of this analysis, we only concentrated on However, there are strong sectors of future the seven employment cores in the South economic growth that should positively side . The distinct location of each of these impact the region including Professional cores is primarily driven by access to major and Business Services, Health Services, transportation routes, the unique topography and Construction . In addition, the City of the region that divides areas seemingly of Chesapeake is working hard to bring next to each other on a map, and other employment base to the Hampton Roads catalysts such as the location of regional region within the cores most beneficial to the employment locations like Oceana Naval Air City, which includes the potential Dominion Station . Approximately 30% of the current Boulevard Corridor .
Market Study | 21 Metro Core Definitions
Today, the Hampton Roads region has nine established and other catalysts such as the location of major employment locations Metro Core Definitions employment cores, with one additional emerging. For the purpose like Oceana Naval Air Station. Detailed information about each core is of this analysis, we only concentrated on the seven employment cores located in Exhibit V-15. Approximately 30% of the current Today, the Hampton Roads region has nine established and other catalysts such as the location of major employment locationsin the Southside. The distinct location of each of these cores is primarily employment base in the Hampton Roads region is contained employment cores, with one additional emerging. For the purpose like Oceana Naval Air Station. Detailed information about each coredriven is by access to major transportation routes, the unique topography within these seven cores. of this analysis, we only concentrated on the seven employment cores located in Exhibit V-15. Approximately 30% of the currentof the region that divides areas seemingly next to each other on a map, in the Southside. The distinct location of each of these cores is primarily employment base in the Hampton Roads region is contained driven by access to major transportation routes, the unique topography within these seven cores. Map of Employment Cores of the region that divides areas seemingly next to each other on a map, Hampton Roads Region
Map of Employment Cores Hampton Roads Region
MAP KEY Industrial building Office bu ilding MAP KEY Retail building Industrial building Study Area Office bu ilding Harborview Retail building Norfolk Ind. Park Area Study Area Cavalier Harborview Port Area Norfolk Ind. Park Area Greenbrier Cavalier Virginia Beach Town Center Port Area Lynnhaven/Oceana Greenbrier Downtown Norfolk Virginia Beach Town Center Lynnhaven/Oceana Downtown Norfolk Figure 8: Map of Employment Cores in the Hampton Roads Region Source: RCLCO, CoStar Source: RCLCO; CoStar; Esri
Source: RCLCO; CoStar; Esri 21 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
21 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Household growth in the region is tied to For-sale residential both primary home development related to jobs and to retirement home growth which The for-sale residential market is slowly is less dependent upon job growth . The recovering from the Great Recession . Home region is very attractive for both groups of prices are up and inventory is down . The households given the relatively low cost of Hampton Roads region still has a large living, good schools, nice climate, amenity number of foreclosures to work through the base, and location close to the ocean . system . However, all indicators point to a continued recovery, and long-term health in Key Findings - Market the for-sale market . For-sale housing also represents a strong short-term opportunity While completing a long-term forecast for in the study area . an area over a 20+ year horizon, the current The Hampton Roads housing market has state of the market is not as critical as with been slow to recover from the recession . a development project that is slated to start After a rapid rise in median existing single- and be finished within a five-year timeframe. family home prices in the early 2000s, the However, understanding the current market hit a bottom in 2012 and only began market provides us with the opportunity to to see meaningful gains in 2013 . The volume understand where the study area fits into the of total home sales remained stagnant from region, as well as provide an understanding of 2008 through 2011, averaging 17,500 annual short-term opportunities .
22 | Market Study DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia sales . The number of total sales rose nearly net absorption . From 2000 to 2013, the 10% from 2011 to 2012 and 14% from 2012 submarket has, on average, delivered to 2013 . New home sales as a percentage 150 units and absorbed a net of 133 of total sales has steadily declined since units annually, capturing 9% of rental 2004 from 34% to 15% . Both sales pace absorption in the region . The Chesapeake and median price show clear increases submarket absorbed 418 units in 2011 and from 2012 and indicate growth and recovery delivered 523 units in 2012, both marking in the new for-sale housing market . See the highest levels in at least two decades . Figure 5 . The submarket’s capture of regional rental absorption also reached a record high of For-rent residential over 30% in 2012, though the long term trend points to future capture at around The for-rent residential market is currently 10% to 15% . Chesapeake, like much of the very strong . Vacancies are low and rents region, is experiencing healthy vacancies are increasing . There has been a lot of new and rental rates . Though the submarket development recently in the rental market in does not command rents as high as the region, so the opportunity for additional Kempsville and Lynnhaven, it is located near short-term rental many not be as strong as the more expensive areas and has room to it was a few years ago . However, long-term, grow . See Figure 11 . the apartment market should remain strong . The rental market includes both multifamily rentals as well as single-family rentals . The Chesapeake submarket and the HamptonHam Roadspton region Roads have Emhistoricallypyployment Growth experiencedLike most balanced of the United deliveries States, the Hamptonand Roads region was However, between 2020 and 2030, the growth will slow to 4,000 new significantly impacted by the Great Recession. Employment dropped, jobs annually. Their long-term projections do not take into account home sales plummeted, and commercial vacancies rose. Most of the major future recessions, but there are likely to be ups and downs in the sectors are in recovery, and the next few years should see better next 20 years. performance in most of the real estate classes. As stated earlier, the Hampton Roads TPO projections are in-line with The economic and demographic outlook for the region is projected to Moody’s projections, but slightly more optimistic. be moderate for the next ten years. Between 2010 and 2020, Moody’s projects that the MSA will add an average of 5,900 jobs annually.
Figure 9: Annual Employment Growth, Virginia Beach-
Norfolk-NewportAnnual Employment News, Growth VA-NC MSA; 1990-2040 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2040 PROJECTED 20,000 15, 000 10,000 5,000 0 -5, 000 -10,000 -15,000 -20,000 -25, 000
Office Employment Growth Total Employment Growth Excluding Military Military Employment Growth
NOTE: This Data does not include military or government empyployment Source: Moody’s Economy.com
26 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40 Market Study | 23 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-7
PERCENT NEW HOME SALES BY YEAR HAMPTON ROADS AREA 2000-2013
35,000 40.0% % NEW HOME SALES Year % New 2000 30.0% 2001 35.0% 35.0% 30,000 2002 31.0% 2003 29.0% 2004 34.0% 2005 32.0% 30.0% 2006 30.0% 25,000 2007 26.0% 2008 22.8% 2009 17.8% 25.0% 2010 16.9% 2011 15.6% 20,000 2012 16.7%
2013 15.3%
20.0%
15,000
15.0%
10,000 10.0%
5,000 5.0%
0 0.0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Resales New Sales % New
Figure 10: New and Resale Homes by Year, significant spending from outside residents SOURCE:Hampton Residential Roads DataBank Areal (2000-2011),2000-2013 Old Dominion University (2012-2013)for general merchandise, electronics, Source: Residential DataBank (2000-2011), and apparel products . Although there are Old Dominion University (2012-2013) multiple grocery stores in the north and east Exhibit II-7 half of the retail area, there exists an under E4-11982.40 Retail supply of food and beverage, health and Printed: 3/27/2014 personal care retail . It is estimated that $22 The market appears to have stabilized . million in annual sales of food and beverage Vacancy rates continue to drop and as of are spent outside of the area due to a lack 2014- Q1 were at 6 .5%, and rents have of large-scale grocery stores in the southern remained stable at approximately $13/ side of Dominion Boulevard . net net net (nnn) average rate. There was limited construction during the downturn, Office which, in turn, has allowed the market to recover relatively quickly . Retail growth is The office market is still in recovery, but tied to household growth, so as the region 2014 is expected to be better than 2013, continues to gain households, retail will grow suggesting the office market will soon be as well . in recovery as well . Vacancy rates as of 2014-Q1 were 11 .5%, and average rents Currently, the retail market, as defined by at $16.44/square foot (SF), below the a 10-mile radius around the Study Area, peak of $18.41/SF. Office growth is tied is mostly in balance relative to demand, to employment growth, and 2013 was and includes many active retail areas that challenged by sequestration which impacted provide high amenity benefit for nearby defense and government contracting residents and employees . The area, companies in the region . which includes a Walmart store, captures
24 | Market Study DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Long-term, the growth in Professional and well with only 8% vacancy rates and rental Business Services and Health Services as rates close to $5/nnn SF . The challenge well as other office-oriented employment will for future industrial is that the types of help bolster the office market. jobs that lead to industrial development (Manufacturing, Trade) are expected to The office market in the VA Beach MSA decrease . Manufacturing is expected to has only recently begun to recover from increase after the large losses from 2001- a dramatic contraction from 2008 through 2010, but Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 2011 . From 2006 to 2013, the average is expected to decrease for the foreseeable annual office absorption was only half future . Opportunities in industrial are tied the volume of office space delivered in to the obsolescence of old buildings, and the MSA . Construction activity dipped to finding niche opportunities. 150,000 square feet in 2012 (less than 10% of the highest annual completion levels At the MSA level, the industrial market had before the downturn). Net absorption was a challenging 2013 after a brief recovery close to -500,000 square feet in 2011 . The from the recession . Average industrial rents market appears to be improving, showing and occupancy appeared to bottom in 2010, a promising uptick in both absorption, at $4 .50 and 90% . The market delivered a completions, occupancy, and rent growth in total of over a million square feet of industrial 2013 . See Figure 12 . space over the two years, allowing rent and vacancy to recover to nearly 2007/2008 CITY OFIndustrial CHESAPEAKE levels . Vacancy has continued to drop from the high in 2009 . In 2013, however, the MSA The Hampton Roads region is unique in thatExhibit experienced III-5 net negative absorption . Rents
it hasCHESAPEAKE almost double SUBMARKET the amount CAPTURE of industrial OF NORFOK-HAMPTON have slipped ROADS slightly APARTMENT from $4 ABSORPTION.90 in 2010 space (96M SF) than officeCHESAPEAKE space AND (48M NORFOLK-HAMPTON SF). down to $4 ROADS .60 in REGION 2013 . The industrial market is performing relatively2000-2018
2,000 2000-2013 AVG. CAPTURE: 9% PROJECTED 40%
30%
1,500 20%
10% 1,000
0%
500 -10%
-20% Figure 11: Apartment 0 Submarket Absorption 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Capture, Chesapeake -30% and Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region; 2000- -500 -40% 2013 Source: Reis Metro Absorption Chesapeake Absorption % Capture of Region
SOURCE: REIS
Market Study | 25 Exhibit III-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-17
OFFICE ABSORPTION VS. COMPLETIONS VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC MSA 2006-2013
2,000,000 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: 450,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 900,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
Figure 12: Office Absorptions and Completions, Virginia 500,000 Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA; 2006-2013 Source: CoStar - 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(500,000)
(1,000,000) Net Absorption Completions
turned into an interstate highway . All of these SOURCE:Dominion CoStar Boulevard Site Analysis items are promising for the future development The Study Area is approximately 10,000 of the area . acres in the City of Chesapeake . It is located Exhibit V-17 southwest of the Steel Bridge, and is along The Study Area itself has some development E4-11982.40 the Dominion Boulevard corridor . It is east of at the northern end, primarily residential Printed: 3/27/2014 The Great Dismal Swamp Wildlife National and retail . Throughout the Study Area there Refuge Area . See Figure 13 . are large lot single-family homes . Tidewater Community College has a new facility as The City of Chesapeake is a well-regarded well as the new Grassfield High School. place to live and do business . It is home To the southern end of the Study Area is to two of the region’s employment cores the Chesapeake Regional Airport . The key (Greenbrier and Cavalier), and has some strengths, challenges, and opportunities for the of the region’s newest and nicest housing Study Area are provided in Table 2 . stock . Demand Analysis The Dominion Study Area should see additional development as the Veterans RCLCO completed a statistical demand Bridge over the Elizabeth River is analysis for each of the land uses . The constructed, eliminating the Steel Bridge . residential demand models are based upon The new bridge will have a toll . Since many household growth in the region, the percent bridges in the region are tolled, and some of new households likely to be either renters projected to be at a higher rate, the toll or owners, and the interest in those renters should have limited impact on the desirability or owners in locating within the City of of the area for new construction . Chesapeake, and then within the study area .
In addition, Dominion Boulevard is being The retail demand model is based upon the widened to a four lane divided highway two scenarios of household growth within all the way into North Carolina . There is the study area . Each household in the overall speculation that at some point it will be region supports approximately 85 square feet of retail . We multiplied the new households
26 | Market Study DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 13: Subject Site Location
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User by the estimated square feet of retail Community,development Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap areas contributors . While the residential they support to understand the long-term units and non-residential square footages opportunity for retail in the study area . projected to be generated from proposed new land uses do not correlate exactly The office and industrial demands are based with the market study yield assumptions, upon projected employment growth in the the Master Land Use Plan creates a region, the conversion of those employees balanced and supportable arrangement of into square feet of office/industrial, and the residential densities and non-residential capture of the square feet in the Study Area . land uses that will accommodate a regional employment center, urban core areas, and Utilizing the market analysis demand supporting open spaces, public uses, and summary data from Table 1, as well as the infrastructure . subsequent residential and non-residential Table 1: Regional Employment Scenario Demand Summary yield assumptions from Table 3 on page 29, Design Workshop created a Master Land 2014-2024 2025-2035 Use Plan for the study area that incorporates Summary of Demand urban form and design principles, tailored to For-Sale Residential 2,278 1,871 the specific land use preferences expressed during the public input workshops and For-Rent Residential 448 579 other stakeholder sessions . Because of the strong emphasis on strategic economic Total Residential 2,726 2,450 development within the study, great care was taken to factor in the market study’s Retail SF 240,319 214,722 full build-out yield assumptions for non- residential land uses . With respect to residential allocations in the Master Land Office SF 233,693 482,966 Use Plan, the yields are compatible with the market study’s yield assumptions at Industrial SF 114,859 28,273 full build-out, although the Plan advocates a phased approach, with residential Total SF Commercial 588,871 725,961 development occurring first in the focal
Market Study | 27 Strengths Challenges Opportunities
Close to Great Dismal Swamp and associated recreational opportunities High-end housing in the region is Create multiple master-planned Chesapeake is a well-regarded place water-oriented. Will need to figure communities/neighborhoods, to buy a home—the schools are good, out how to amenitize the residential appealing to a wide range of buyers leading to strong housing demand projects in the Study Area to compete and renters New Grassfield High School would be for executive housing The for-sale residential market is attractive for new residents Without associated employment starting recovery, and this area, if Residential Culpepper Landing, an actively selling development, would be difficult to build zoned for residential, would be a master-planned community with multifamily residential strong location for development the strongest sales in the region, is already selling close to the Study Area
Create new retail centers in “town center” configurations that could help For the near- and mid-term, the create a sense of community and a Will be a good location for future regional and community shopping focal point for development households, and therefore, future retail needs of residents will be met at to support it Greenbrier area, limiting need for The retail market is relatively strong Retail certain types of retail and stable—could be a good use that will be in demand in the short-term as housing is created
As Greenbrier builds out, the Widening of Dominion Boulevard and opportunity to be the “next” Land Use opening of new bridge will make the The office market is still struggling— Greenbrier—although it can be Study Area more desirable for future will not be a “leader” land use in the with today’s design standards and office Study Area without significant catalyst guidelines
The City of Chesapeake’s interest in Somewhat far off of interstate Once bridge is completed and road creating an employment center in the widened, will create a new area for Office access—a key to creating employment Study Area will help it succeed cores—will need to work on the image development for access Development is already starting to In the mid- to long-term, the health move in this direction care industry should help bolster the office market
There are not a lot of large parcels of industrial land available in the market—have enough land to be able to accommodate larger users Industrial-related employment is Industrial development in this area projected to decrease in the region could serve the general industrial Close to airport The Study Area is not as well- needs of the region positioned as other areas for some Development is already starting to All of the industrial buildings would be types of industrial development—it Industrial move in this direction new and meet the latest standards in is not on the water, does not lead to industrial building height clearance, other major cities (e.g. along I-95) and etc . does not have rail access Tidewater Community College has a new facility in the area—may be possible to work with them for training opportunities for future businesses
Table 2: Key Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities in Dominion Study Area
28 | Market Study DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Regional Employment Center Scenario
The Study Area can become an employment center of office per new employee (250 sf/employee based regional significance. It will need to have infrastructure upon local costar data and national trends), and the in place, the backing of the economic development percent captured in the Study Area based upon it community, as well as strong amenities, executive becoming an employment center, performing similarity housing, and a wide range of land uses . It will be to the Greenbiar submarket as it matures . Industrial critical to have the employment core as close to projections were based upon employment growth the interstates and northern part of the Study Area in the MSA; total square feet of industrial per new as possible . The City of Chesapeake may need to employee (500 sf/employee based upon local costar catalyze the opportunity . data and national trends); and the percent captured in the Study Area, capturing twice as much as the Deep The majority of the available commercial, industrial Creek Submarket currently captures . and office land uses should be concentrated in a mixed use “employment core” that includes retail, high The Regional Employment Center will offer density housing, parks, open spaces and community the characteristics that companies look for services such as schools, police, fire, etc. - characteristics that include an attractive streetscapes, a variety of restaurants, and For-sale and for-rent projections for the Study Area proximity to a young, talented workforce. were based upon household growth in the MSA; Companies have discovered that there is a owner/renter propensity (approximately 67% owners); business advantage to locating close to their Chesapeake’s capture of the MSA based upon capture employment base, and leading employers have of MSA new home sales from 2009-2013; apartment been following young, highly-skilled workers to absorption from 2000-2013; the potential capture urban, amenity-filled neighborhoods. Nationally, based upon the desirability of the Study Area for traditional business parks are facing high vacancy residential; as well as the availability of land . Retail rates with markets beyond the urban fringe in the projections were based upon household growth in lowest demand. Companies relocating to more the Study Area multiplied by 85 square feet of retail vibrant, walkable neighborhoods is a strong trend. per household (based upon the comparison of total By providing these types of neighborhoods and square feet of retail in the MSA compared to total environments, the Study Area should help attract households). Office projections were based upon businesses to Chesapeake. employment growth in the MSA, total square feet of
Total to $ / Unit / SF 2014-2024 2025-2035 Build Out Yield Summary 2035
For-Sale Residential $400,000 2,278 1,871 4,148 9,000
For-Rent Residential $1 30. 448 579 1,027 3,000
Total Residential 2,726 2,450 5,176 12,000
Retail SF $16 240,319 214,722 455,041 1,015,637
Office SF $18 233,693 482,966 716,659 2,500,000
Industrial SF $6 114,859 28,273 143,133 1,250,000
Total SF Commercial 588,871 725,961 1,314,832 4,765,637
Estimated Employees 1,699 2,466 4,164 14,757
Jobs to Households 0.62 1.01 0.80 1.23 Table 3: Regional Employment Center Scenario Summary Market Study | 29 The Great Dismal Swamp Wildlife Refuge Area, Elizabeth River, forests and farmlands create a unique identity for the project. 3 Existing Conditions
Community Input: What are the most important features of the Study Area that can be used to inform the plan?
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
When asked to plan a perfect development, a majority want the environmentally sensitive areas protected and development organized onto the remaining land .
79%
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Existing Conditions | 31 Existing Conditions
This strategic Master Plan advances work prepared to date including the 2035 Moving Forward Comprehensive Plan, the 2035 Land Use Plan, the 2050 Transportation Plan and the 2050 Trails Plan, adopted by City Council on February 25, 2014 .
Figure 14: The Moving Forward Chesapeake 2035 plan was adopted in February 2014
32 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 15: Chesapeake’s 2050 Master Transportation Plan
Existing Conditions | 33 Figure 16: City of Chesapeake 2050 Trails Plan
34 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 17: The regional Beaches to Bluegrass Trail Plan
Existing Conditions | 35 Existing Hydrology and National Moses Gra nd Wetlands Inventory Map y T ra il The existing hydrological patterns are important features and potential assets to Ceda r Ro leverage given the Study Area’s location G a ra d s next to the Great Dismal Swamp National s n fi o i o e h ld a Wildlife Refuge Area and the Elizabeth C River .
S
cenic Pa The National Wetlands Inventory was used y
S hillelagh Roa to identify potential wetlands in the Study r
k w
a Area . According to the inventory, most of rd y va le u the site’s forested areas are likely to contain o B d
n ashington Highwa wetlands and protect sensitive habitat and o l i e n rr o biodiversity . C omi
D
eorge W
G hedbee W There is a large portion of potential wetlands in the south portion of the site, providing a
d connection from the Great Dismal Swamp
a
o
R
Great Dismal t National Wildlife Refuge Area through the s
Swamp e
W Study Area .
7
1
y Canals line the edges of properties and a w h ig many roadways to assist with stormwater H and flood management. Some of these canals are small in scale at 1-2 feet wide, while others, like the historic Herring Ditch, Airport Wetlands (per NWI Inventory) are 20-30 feet wide . 1870 acres
Hydrology/Canals + Ditches By mapping and highlighting the hydrologic features, new development will work in concert with the hydrology of the Study Area . Although this inventory is not infallible, Figure 18: Existing hydrologic features including canals, ditches and forested land cataloged on the National Wetlands Inventory and some of the forested areas may turn out not to be wetlands, it is a starting point to identify land that is likely unsuitable for development and should be protected in its natural condition . This will provide environmental as well as recreational benefits and will promote a plan that is in character with the Study Area’s adjacency to the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge Area .
36 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Existing Agricultural Land Moses Gra nd y T ra il Agriculture shapes much of the image, character and lifestyle of the Study Area . It is something that the Community wishes to Ceda preserve as much as practical . Protecting r Ro G a r d as agricultural resources is part of a smart, s n fi o i e o l h holistic growth plan and should be taken d a C seriously in the Study Area .
S cenic Pa Small scale and large scale agricultural
y
S hillelagh Roa activity is still prevalent in the Study Area
r
k
w a in the form of large tracts of commercial
rd y va le operations and small agricultural u o B d homesteads . In all, approximately 4,000 n ashington Highwa o l i e n rr acres are currently being farmed . o C omi
D
eorge W
G hedbee Many of the large farms are concentrated W along Shillelagh Road, south of the Herring
d Ditch in the southeastern quadrant of the
a
o R
Study Area . There are also concentrations
Great Dismal t s
Swamp e of agricultural activity in the western W portion of the Study Area, along Dominion
7 as it turns to Highway 17 and near the 1
y a w George Washington Highway . Agricultural h ig H land is also found along the south side of Drumcastle Lane and follows on to both sides of West Road moving south, and again Airport Existing Agricultural Land between Number Ten Lane and Herring 3800 acres Ditch Road . Forested Land 1870 acres Mapping the land used for agriculture will bring attention to it so that a master plan Landscape Features can be created that can preserve the most FigureExisting Agriculture 19: Existing agricultural lands sensible portions of it - such as the large areas located in the southern portion of the Study Area .
Existing Conditions | 37 Rural Development Lots Moses Gra nd y T ra il Preserving a rural way of life was a value expressed by the Community . Like agriculture, it provides much of the existing Ceda character and image of the Study Area . It is r Ro G a r d why people traditionally have chosen to live as s n fi o i o e h in this part of Chesapeake . ld a C
Rural development occupies approximately S cenic Pa 20% of the Study Area . Much of the rural
y S development has occurred in 3 acre “piano hillelagh Roa
r
k
w key” lots along the north/south roads that a
rd y va le connect to Dominion such as Shillelagh u o B d Road, West Road and along George n ashington Highwa o l i e rr n o Washington Highway . Number Ten Lane C omi D and Herring Ditch Road, parallel roads eorge W
G hedbee W which intersect West Road, also have a
concentration of the 3 acre residential lots .
d
a o
R Mapping the rural lots provides guidance for
Great Dismal
t s
Swamp e how to phase in new development, where to W locate new roads and neighborhoods and
7
1 where it may be appropriate to promote long y a w h term preservation . ig H
Airport Existing Rural Residential Development 1775 acres
Forested Land 1870 acres
Landscape Features FigureExisting Rural 20: DevelopmentExisting rural residential lots in the study area
38 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Industrial and Commercial Nodes Moses Gra nd y T ra il Supporting jobs creating uses is an important part of creating a successful plan for the future of Chesapeake . The Study Ceda Area has seen recent new Industrial and r Ro G a r d Commercial development along the eastern as s n fi o i o e h portion of Dominion Boulevard . These ld a C initial areas of commercial and industrial development require nourishment in the S cenic Pa form of access, roof tops and like minded
y S uses if they are to realize their true potential . hillelagh Roa
r
k
w a
rd y va le Along the Elizabeth River, in the northern u o B d portion of the Study Area, are pockets n ashington Highwa o l i e n rr of land zoned for industrial use that take o C omi D advantage of river access and the location eorge W
G hedbee along Dominion Boulevard . The largest W concentration of commercial use is along
d the south side Dominion Boulevard between
a o
R Grassfield Parkway and Shillelagh Road
Great Dismal t s
Swamp e - serving new residential neighborhoods W in the area . At the southern end of the
7 Study Area is the Chesapeake Regional 1
y a w Airport, which creates an opportunity for h ig H light industrial and commercial uses . There are pockets of commercial properties along Cedar Road and at the intersection of Cedar Airport Business / Commercial and Dominion . 115 acres
Light Industry 660 acres By mapping these areas, the plan can best support the City’s efforts to create jobs in the region and to attach consistent uses along side of them so that their influence Figure 21: Existing commercial and industrial development throughout the grows . study area
Existing Conditions | 39 New Development Moses Gra nd y T ra il Investment in new development has been made in the Study Area and it should be acknowledged and supported . New Ceda projects are reshaping the character of r Ro G a r d this part of Chesapeake - changing it from as s n fi o i o e h primarily rural to more suburban . Although ld a C this new development is promoting quality and is supported by civic uses and new S cenic Pa infrastructure, it presents a challenge due
y S to its low density and sprawling nature . It is hillelagh Roa
r
k
w also not fiscally positive if it does not also a
rd y va le come with jobs related uses of an adequate u o B d capacity . n ashington Highwa o l i e n rr o C omi D Recent development in the area has eorge W
G hedbee consisted mostly of suburban housing W developments, mostly concentrated in the
d northern portion of the Study Area . The
a o
R largest new development of approximately
Great Dismal t s
Swamp e 200 acres, is an equestrian facility and W large lot housing . These lots are similar to
7
1 the existing rural residential in size and are y a w h approximately 3 acres . The next largest ig H development in terms of total development area is 100 acres of suburban housing in the northern portion of the Study Area in Airport between Dominion Boulevard and Cedar New Development 800 acres Road . The lots in this development are Forested Land 1870 acres smaller, generally ranging from ¼ to 1 acre . The development between Dominion and George Washington Highway is also Landscape Features comprised of 3 acre rural residential lots, New Development Figure 22: New development in the study area and this development is smaller with less than 20 lots . The remaining recent development follows the ¼ to 1 acre pattern . A common thread in all these new developments is one to two connections to the main road with a series of loops and cul-de-sacs as the roadway network, which doesn’t promote connectivity and congests the major roads .
40 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Public and Community Uses Moses Gra nd y T ra il There are a wide range of community and pubic uses located in the Study Area . Along Cedar Road, in the northern portion of the Ceda Study Area, Tidewater Community College r Ro G a r d as creates a gateway when entering the area s n fi o i e o l h on Cedar Road from the South . Across the d a C street from Tidewater Community College is the Chesapeake Center for Science and S cenic Pa Technology, the oldest career and technical
y
S hillelagh Roa school in the Commonwealth, established in
r
k
w a 1967 . Adjacent to the high school is Cedar
rd y va le Road Elementary School . Traveling further u o B d southeast along the corridor, Grassfield High n ashington Highwa o l i e n rr School is on Scenic Parkway and Dominion o C omi
D eorge W Boulevard. The last school, Grassfield
G hedbee Elementary School, is located within the W new, larger 100 acre suburban development
d on the north side of the Study Area between
a
o R
Cedar Road and Dominion Boulevard on
Great Dismal t s
Swamp e Langshire Crescent, a cul-de-sac within the W development .
7
1
y a w h ig H
Airport Schools, Civic and Community Use 327 acres
Forested Land 1870 acres
Landscape Features FigurePublic and 23: Community Public Useand community uses
Existing Conditions | 41 Existing Streets and Major Moses Gra nd Intersections y T ra il There are several major roads that provide access to the Study Area as well as a few Ceda interchanges on Dominion Boulevard . These r Ro ad existing roads and interchanges form the n G o ra o s h starting point for providing a new roadway s a fi C i e l network that connects the region together . d
S
cenic Pa
y Dominion Boulevard is a 4 lane divided rd va le S highway . It has limited access points at ou hillelagh Roa B r n k
o w
ni Cedar Road, Grassfield Parkway, Scenic
i a m y Do Boulevard, and George Washington
d ashington Highwa Highway . Dominion Boulevard, the primary l e rr o driver of this Study is currently being looked C
eorge W
G at as being converted to an Interstate
hedbee W Highway that will connect Chesapeake to Raleigh North Carolina . It is a major
d component of Chesapeake’s roadway
a o
R infrastructure focus and includes an
Great Dismal
t s
Swamp e expansion of a bridge over the Elizabeth W River .
7
1
y a w h Shillelagh Road and West Road are 2 ig H lane north south connecting roads that connect rural and suburban development to Dominion Boulevard . Scenic Parkway,
Airport Existing Intersection Grassfield Parkway and Calhoon Parkway
Existing Major Road are 4 lane divided roads that access new Network development in the northern portion of the site . Cedar Road and George Washington Highway provide additional linkages to Existing Streets Moses Grandy Trail and beyond . Figure 24: Existing streets and intersections in the study area Capitalizing on and leveraging recent investments in roadway infrastructure is key . Using existing roadways and locating new development along existing routes is also very important from a phasing and cost standpoint .
42 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Regional Airport Moses Gra nd y T ra il The Chesapeake Regional Airport is located in the southernmost part of the Study Area and provides an important opportunity Ceda to provide synergistic jobs related uses r Ro G a r d as that can take advantage of regional air s n fi o i e o l h transportation . d a C
The airport currently serves light freight and S cenic Pa private aircraft on its 5,500 foot runway .
y
S hillelagh Roa Although not currently sized for it, upgrades
r
k
w a to runway lengths to 6,000 feet would enable
rd y va le it to serve heavier freight oriented aircraft u o B d than in can now, which would magnify its n ashington Highwa o l i e n rr economic potential . o C omi
D
eorge W
G hedbee Although an economic asset, the airport W also creates impacts for new development
d due to flight paths for landing and take off as
a
o R
well as noise . The surface height restriction
Great Dismal t s
Swamp e is most stringent closest to the airport at W 169 feet . This covers a large part of the
7 agricultural land in the south . 1
y a w h ig H
Airport Conical Surface Restriction (Elevation 169 ft) Horizontal Surface Restriction (Elevation 369 ft)
Airport Features Figure 25: Airport impact areas restrict the height of new buildings
Existing Conditions | 43 Public Input Process Summary on the Public Process
Creating a visionary as well as proceed with comprehensive plans that implementable plan that is supported by promoted smart growth principals, including the community is an important part of providing a complete network of connected moving Chesapeake toward an exciting streets, open spaces, employment and future . Getting input from the citizens commercial centers and gathering spaces . of Chesapeake, especially those who There was a desire for the planning team live and work in the Study Area and are to create comprehensive storm water most affected by the outcome of this management plans that worked with the land planning process, is critical to establishing and existing canal system where it could . acceptance and to gain positive momentum . They thought that new development should Creating a plan based on public input be developed incrementally and oriented ensures that it will leave a legacy for future toward existing infrastructure and access generations; will reflect the values and along Highway 17 and should include mixed identity of the Chesapeake community; use development that provides a range of and will have lasting benefits and a strong housing opportunities, while also protecting framework from which to build on in the natural assets such as the Great Dismal future . Swamp Wildlife Refuge Area, existing wetlands, agricultural land, forested areas The public process conducted for the and canals . The Community also agreed project included focus group meetings with the notion of tying future residential with key stakeholder groups early in the development with a proportional addition of process; a series of community workshops jobs related uses . (charrettes) and public open houses that enabled the Community and Stakeholders to provide input into the extent and nature of future development and preservation Public Charrette #1 April 3, 2014 within the Study Area as the plan was being developed; and presentations The first charrette was held at Messiah conducted by the Planning Department to United Methodist Church in two sessions various community groups and stakeholder – one morning and one in the evening . At organizations as requested throughout the the charrette, the planning team presented development of the Master Plan . In addition mapping of the existing conditions of the to the charrettes, information was provided Study Area, including cultural, economic, to the public online so that those that weren’t and environmental systems, to describe in attendance could also participate . In all, how those patterns might influence where two sets of two charrettes were held that future growth might occur to best fit with and included “hands on” design and planning leverage the site’s assets . The team also exercises as well as questions formatted for discussed concepts and principles related keypad polling . The results of the keypad to how the development might perform from polling were captured and made available to a smart growth standpoint, and how land the planning team for use in its work . might be considered in terms of locating centers of mixed uses and interconnected In general, the Community acknowledged streets and areas of agricultural or that there is a need to allow for future environmental preservation . As part of growth that will have positive impacts on getting feedback, the planning team the economy, environment and lifestyle of facilitated keypad polling questions that Chesapeake . There was clear direction to
44 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia addressed the above, as well as conducted Group planning activity a planning exercise with the attendees so that their ideas about where and how Following the keypad polling, attendees development should be located in the Study were asked to break into work groups to Area could be articulated . create a hypothetical master plan for the Study Area based on what they collectively Keypad polling session thought was most important . They looked where to develop versus what areas may Several questions were asked of the be best to preserve . Although there were attendees that helped frame the Study some outliers, generally the themes were Areas strengths, weaknesses, opportunities similar from group to group which included: and issues . Questions also drilled into smart, compact growth in the northern the overriding principles and objectives areas and preservation of rural areas to that should guide the planning process the south . Also important were walkability, so that the resulting plan would meet with connections to transportation, having town community desires . and neighborhood centers, and ‘greening’ up the area . In summary, many of the attendees lived in the Study Area area and recognized Online Survey that development was inevitable . As a requirement of new growth, most wanted The same keypad polling questions were to see smart growth, environmental released through an online survey in order responsibility, preservation of rural to reach the portion of the population that character and a proportional jobs to housing was interested in giving feedback for the balance . Where development was to study but did not attend the meeting . The occur, most wanted to pursue a higher level online survey had 568 respondents . of connectivity between neighborhoods, complete streets, environmentally responsible stormwater management, compact and walkable neighborhoods and a higher level of land use integration and mix of uses within the neighborhoods and communities .
Environmental responsibility and linking stormwater management into a comprehensive system were also priorities along with recognizing the importance of the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge Area and its potential connections to open space and green space . In addition to connecting to green space, providing and adding to the amount of park space recommended by National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) standards was considered important . Citizens presented their ideas to the group and to the planning team during the first public charette.
Existing Conditions | 45 Public Charrette #2 July 1, 2014
The second series of charrettes was held 26 page 50). Agricultural preservation at Messiah United Methodist Church in was still an important part of the plan, two sessions – one in the morning and with a majority wanting to develop along one in the evening . The format for these Dominion Boulevard and leave the rest as charrettes included additional presentations agricultural and rural development parcels . of how the Planning Team considered In summary, the Community generally felt the input received in Charrette #1 and that development typologies should be incorporated it into the plan . The Planning distributed as follows (See Figure 26, page Team also discussed the results of the 50 for a map that shows the location of the market study prepared for the project by 10 “Areas”): RCLCO and the desire of the City to limit development planning to maintain a positive Regional Employment Center: job to housing balance and a favorable Areas 3,5,6 cost /revenue position for the City . A big focus of the charrettes was to determine Walkable Mixed Use Town Center: where a Regional Employment Center Areas 4,6 should be located . The discussion was facilitated with three alternative planning TND Style Neighborhoods: scenarios that positioned the Regional Areas 3,5 Employment Center as well as supportive land uses in different locations . Finally, Conventional Suburban Style the attendees were asked to provide their Neighborhoods: preferences on the most suitable land use Areas 5,6,7,9 for each Area of the plan, whether that be a Regional Employment Center, Traditional Rural Lots: Style Neighborhoods (TND), conventional Areas 7,8,9,10 suburban neighborhoods, rural lots, or agricultural preservation . Agricultural Preservation: Areas 8,9,10 Keypad polling session
As with the first charrette, most of the Public Open House November 13 & November 20, 2014 attendees were homeowners in the area, and they wanted to see a long term, The master plan along with its components, cohesive plan with development starting in such as planning framework maps, a logical place along the Corridor . When transportation maps, open space system reviewing the 3 alternative scenarios, it and land use scenarios, was reviewed by was determined that most wanted the the Community in two public open houses planning team to pursue Scenario 3, which held at Messiah United Methodist Church . positioned the Regional Employment Center Comments from the Community were of Area 3 and Area 6 of the plan (see figure documented and integrated into the final master plan .
46 | Existing Conditions DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Public Charette #2 provided an opportunity for community input on the location of a major employment center
A public open house allowed the Community a chance to see progress towards the final plans and give comments and feedback.
Existing Conditions | 47 The Master Plan promotes a dynamic mix of uses that lead toward high levels of livability, walkability and integration. 4 Planning Frameworks
Community Input:
Asked to plan a perfect development, a majority would integrate the land uses to include houses, gathering places and commercial within walking distance of each other .
68%
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Asked to plan a perfect development, a majority would link stormwater management and recreation into a big system that connects the neighborhood together with green infrastructure
77%
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Planning Frameworks | 49 M ose s Gr and y Tr ai l Area 1
C Area 2 ed ar R o ad G n ra o s o s h fi i a e C l d
y
a d w Area 4 ar h v g le i u S o c B e n H n o n o i i t n i c P g om n i D a
h r
s k Area 3
a Area 6 w
a y
e W Area 5 S g h r i l o l e e l a G el rr g o h R
C e o e b a d d e h
W
d a Futu o r Area 7 e Pleasant Grove R P ar t kw
s ay e
W Area 8 Great Dismal
Swamp Area 9
7
1
y
a w
h
g i
H
Airport Area 10
Proposed Area Boundaries
Figure 26: Proposed area boundaries break the study area into ten smaller planning areas
50 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Area Planning
In order to proceed in an orderly and cohesive way with the development and build out of the Dominion Boulevard Master Plan, and to organize the property into units of various land uses, development intensity, development density, and preservation, the Study Area was divided into 10 Sub- planning Areas (Areas).
These Areas use existing major roadways, environmental features, land ownership boundaries, and their location within the Study Area as organizing principles . Each Area will follow the basic Area planning concepts and strategies outlined later as well as what is required in existing codes and ordinances .
Implementation Recommendation:
It is recommended that Specific Plans and Form Based Codes, which further define community framework, theme, land use, and development standards, be created for each Area prior to their approval for development . As part of creating these Specific Plans and Form Based Codes, further market and economic research, as well as infrastructure service planning, may be needed to maximize the opportunities and to capitalize on new trends and technologies .
The Area Plans promote land uses that fit with their location and range from denser more urban commercial centers to traditional neighborhoods to preserved agricultural lands.
Planning Frameworks | 51 Figure 27: Scenario 1 Figure 28: Scenario 2 Scenario Planning
The market study concluded that a Regional Boulevard to create a catalyst for future Employment Center was possible for the economic development was an important Study Area which creates the inspiration for part of the planning process and discussions all of the planning decisions and strategies with the Community and Stakeholders . of the master plan . In summary, the market study proposed that 4,766,000 sq . ft . of Three scenarios were created that employment related uses such as light positioned the Regional Employment industrial, office, and commercial uses could Center and its supporting land uses (or be located in the Study Area at full build out, Focal Area as it’s described on the plan) which equates to nearly 15,000 jobs . so that they could be evaluated for their pros and cons . The Focal Areas were Most of this employment potential is to be sized to accommodate the employment located to create synergy and to organize uses available in the market study as well and cluster like-minded employers in an as to enable sufficient new residential urban campus format that offers an identity development that can support the and sense of place for the employers and employment uses, while still enabling employees . This sort of clustering and urban Chesapeake a positive revenue position . planning creates an attractive framework In addition to the Focal Areas, Secondary for companies to consider for starting or for Areas were highlighted that provided the relocating businesses . potential for more residential and supporting uses should it be desirable or necessary The location of the Regional Employment to develop to attract a regional employer or Center, along with supporting residential, employers . commercial, agricultural preservation and public and private open spaces is critical to Scenario 1 positioned a single Focal Area the success of the execution of the master on Area 3, and utilized Areas 4 and 5 as plan . Finding the right place along Dominion Secondary Areas . Scenario 2 positioned the
52 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 29: The preferred scenario, Scenario 3, creates two focal areas both adjacent to Dominion Boulevard
Focal Area on Area 6 and utilized Areas 4 and 3 as Secondary Areas . Scenario 3 promoted two Focal Areas – one on Area 3 and one on Area 6, with Secondary Areas on Area 4 and Area 5 . This scenario garnered the most support from Stakeholders and the Community because it best utilizes Dominion Boulevard and enabled more options as it related to the Regional Employment Center .
Each of the Focal Areas can develop in their own unique way, with specific focus in terms of the types of employment and commercial uses it provides . Area 3 for instance might be best served with a large mixed use core, office and retail uses and higher density residential uses that create an urban core and walkable center for Chesapeake. Area 6 might best be promoted for more light industrial uses, and office research uses that take advantage of any industrial technology, bio-technology or other technology type of industries in a campus like format . These ideas are consistent with what the Community and Stakeholders also thought these Areas should be geared toward .
Planning Frameworks | 53 Master Land Use Plan Implementation Recommendation
The settlement pattern appropriate for • Complete, or have plans to complete, the Study Area leans toward urban forms the development of an Area prior to with an organized network of connected, proceeding with subsequent Areas that gridded, multimodal streets, buildings that have similar land uses and only when front upon those streets, and centers and infrastructure extensions are available . edges that define neighborhoods and districts . The relationship between buildings, • Promote a dynamic mix of uses, streets and gathering areas should be appropriate to the general theme of Areas carefully composed so that unique places 3 and 6, that lead toward higher levels of are created . livability and integration .
At a different scale, dense pockets • Allow Mixed Use to respond to market of development should be defined by opportunities . The current plan considers preserved open spaces, creating interplay 20% Retail, 35% Office and 45% Office between settlement and preservation . Research uses in the Mixed Use portions At its highest levels, this interplay should of the plan . enable open space networks, in the form of greenways, water management systems • Promote appropriate housing densities to and linear parks, to penetrate into the urban create compact walkable neighborhoods form to create linkages to nature . And in in Areas 3,4,5 and 6 . The current plan most cases, homes and roads should front uses average densities at: HDR at 24 du/ onto open spaces so that their use and acre, MDR at 13 du/acre and LDR at 6 enjoyment is shared by all . du/acre average .
Settlement patterns and densities should be • Provide adequate community services reflective of the theme and character of the based on need for Areas 3 and 6 which, Area being planned for development . Within in general, includes an elementary school the master plan there are Areas that lean and middle school for Area 3 and an more towards urban and Areas that lean elementary school in Area 6 . The City more toward rural . Each of these should be should proactively identify sites for these expressed with an appropriate development facilities through the development review pattern . and capital planning processes . These facilities should be integrated into the Urban areas should be designed so that neighborhood designs and located within streets, parking, public spaces and dense walking distance of 50% of the dwellings . mixed use buildings create an opportunity for diverse social and economic interactions . • Create an organized grid of “complete” Rural areas should be designed so that streets, transit routes and transit stops, they promote the preservation of agriculture and greenways to enable multimodal and provide settlement clusters on smaller connectivity in Areas 3, 4, 5 and 6 . footprints that enable agriculture to continue to function . Ideally there will be very little • Plan Areas so that centers, nodes and suburban development, with homes spread edges are created and so that buildings apart in a low density patterns, so that land frame streets, greenways, canals and can be put to better use with jobs creating open spaces . uses or preserved in agriculture or open space . • Preserve and protect sensitive environmental features when planning future developments .
54 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia M ose s G r Dominion an dy Northwest T ra il Dominion Northeast
Ce d G n a r o r as R s o o f h a i a d e C l d
y
a Scenic w
gh d ar ev ul P a on Hi o t B r
n k o w
ni i a m Do y ashing
Sh e W g ille or l lagh R re Ge r o C e e oad
Whedb F utu re P d lea a sant rkwa o Grove Pa y R
t
s
e W Great Dismal
Swamp
7
1
y
a w
h
g i
H
Airport Drive
Agriculture / Open Space Forested Area
Airport Overlay High Density Residential Airport Medium Density Business / Commercial Residential
Office Low Density Residential
Office Research Institution / Government
Light Industrial / Logistics Parks / Open Space
Urban Mixed Use Conservation
Stormwater Opportunity Area
Figure 30: The Master Land Use Plan outlines the study area’s proposed development patterns
Planning Frameworks | 55 M ose s G r an dy T ra il
Ce d G ar r n R as o o s o a f i h d e a l d C
y
a Scenic w
gh d ar ev ul P a on Hi o t B r
n k
io w
n Shillelagh i a m Do y ashing
e W
g R oad or l re Ge r o C e e
Whedb
d a Futur ant Gro o e Pleas ve P R ar kw t a
s y
e W Great Dismal
Swamp
7
1
y
a w
h
g i
H
Airport
Figure 31: The proposed street network provides internal connections through the study area as well as connections to surrounding neighborhoods
56 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Proposed Streets
All the streets within the Dominion Boulevard Study • Utilize design speeds (35 mph or under ideally) that Area, in addition to complying with all existing codes, promote safety and a pedestrian friendly experi- ordinances and design standards, should be designed ence . as “Complete Streets”, which are defined by the National Complete Streets Coalition as streets that • Locate intersections at walkable intervals that are “are designed and operated to enable safe access for scaled to match the design speed of the street . Ide- all users . Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit ally, most of the major roads within the Study Area riders of all ages and abilities must be able to safely will have intersections that don’t exceed 450 - 600 move along and across a complete street ”. feet .
Conversely, incomplete streets are designed primarily • Integrate accommodations for bicycle lanes (6 feet for the car, which limit transportation choices, and do minimum) or cycle tracks into their design. not have the necessary infrastructure to comfortably and conveniently accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists • Provide adequate sidewalk space (6 feet minimum) and transit riders in a safe and context sensitive way . located behind vegetated buffers (8 feet minimum) Combined with an interconnected street grid, greenway planted with continuous and regularly spaced (40 network and transit service, Complete Streets reduce feet on center average) street trees. the demand for automobile travel for routine trips and contribute to a healthy community . • Promote the place-making context that they are located in (Urban, Suburban, and Rural). By providing a variety of street types (Highway 17, parkways, neighborhoods) there is an opportunity to • Utilize crosswalks and countdown signals at inter- provide equitable, multi-modal transportation networks sections . and connectivity through the neighborhoods, the focus areas, the City and regionally . Street design focused • Utilize street lighting that makes the road and pe- on the implementation of complete streets principles destrian environment adequately lit for safety, while along with designing streets for the appropriate speeds also protecting the night sky . promotes walkability and bikeabilty (multi-modal transportation). • Accommodate mobility for people of all abilities .
Implementation Recommendation: • Locate attractive bus shelters at regular intervals so that they create awareness and convenience The Master Plan provides recommended street (1/4 mile to 1/2 mile intervals along major streets in cross sections that integrate Complete Street design urbanized areas). elements . These sections should be used to guide the design of future streets within the Dominion Boulevard • Integrate water quality techniques such as rain gar- Master Plan . In general, the design and engineering of dens and bioswales into the design and engineer- the major streets should: ing of the landscape spaces .
• Acknowledge that, as habits change, transit rider- • Locate streets alongside planned greenways and ship of all types might increase in the future and canals so that they create an integrated system . that accommodations need to be made for that eventuality . • Provide on street parking that serve adjacent build- ings in urban and suburban areas of the plan . • Provide efficient lanes of travel and Level of Ser- vice (LOS) for automobiles (C or D) with the mini- • Utilize medians, refuge islands and “bulb-out” inter- mal amount of lanes needed to create an accept- sections to create safer crossings of major streets able LOS with lane widths of between 10 and 11 and to promote more landscaping . feet .
Planning Frameworks | 57 Ced ar Gr n R as o o s o a f h d i e a l C d
Scenic
y a d w var le gh u P Bo a
r
on k i w in
on Hi t m a
Do y Shillelagh
ashing
e W g l e R or rr o F oad C ut Ge ur e e e Ple A . Standard 2 way street d asa a nt o Gro Whedb R ve Pa B . Urban center street t rkway
s
e
W C . Linear Park Street
Great Dismal D . Parkway
Swamp 7
1
y
a E . Rural w
h
g i
H Existing major road
Existing street
Study area boundary
Figure 32: The street key map connects the proposed streets to the Airport corresponding sections (Figures 33-37)
Figure 33. A The standard 2 way street provides multi- modal options with space for pedestrians, cyclists and cars
58 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 34. B Urban center streets provide flexible extra space on the sidewalks which can be used for cafe seating or planters
Figure 35. C Linear parks along a standard 2 way street provide greenspace connections throughout the area
Figure 36. D Parkways provide important east west connections through the Study Area
Figure 37. E Rural roads with paved shoulders provide space for sharing the road with cyclists.
Planning Frameworks | 59 M ose s G r an dy T ra il
Ce d G ar r n R as o o s o a f i h d e a l d C
y
a Scenic w
gh d ar ev ul P a on Hi o t B r
n k
io w
n Shillelagh i a m Do y ashing
e W
g R oad or l re Ge r o C e e
Whedb
d a Futur ant Gro o e Pleas ve P R ar kw t a
s y
e W Great Dismal
Swamp
7
1
y
a w
h
g i
H
Airport
Parks / Open Space
Conservation / Stormwater
Forested area
Figure 38: The greenspace and public space network provides connections throughout the study area
60 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Green Space and Public Use
Open Space Design: for a district or neighborhood they should be allowed to be open and visible to the Natural or naturalized open spaces bring street (homes fronting on streets which nature into the city and provide opportunities front on the open spaces) and accessible, for recreation, clean the air and water, so their use and value is spread to all of and protect wildlife and biodiversity . They the community’s residents and so that they add value and enhance the lifestyle of create an image for the community . Except the community . Therefore, open space for in environmentally sensitive areas, open should be integrated into the design of the spaces can support appropriately designed neighborhoods and districts and promote trails and become part of the greenway recreation, passive use, social interaction network established for the Study Area . as well as environmental stewardship . In general, open space, which should make up at least 25% of the land use of any Area, includes:
• Environmental preservation areas, such as the areas shown on the National Wetlands Inventory Map and other sensitive environmental areas .
• Areas of the plan that are natural buffers between uses .
• Areas that are set aside in the plan to manage storm water in a naturalized design .
• Areas that include the canals and their buffers and the edge conditions along Old Dominion Boulevard between it and the Frontage Road .
Implementation Recommendation:
Open spaces are to be either left alone in their natural state, or planted and programmed so that they encourage habit protection, native vegetation and a naturalized appearance . Long term they should be managed so that non-native and invasive species are eradicated and support only native vegetation .
Ideally, open spaces should be connected to each other with other open spaces, linear parks, canals, and greenways . In the plan
Planning Frameworks | 61 Park Design:
Parks work with open spaces to provide All parks should be located so that they are green relief as well as places for gathering visible from the street, accessible with all and recreation . They provide space for storm modes of travel, and accessible to people of water management . Parks include larger all abilities . community parks, neighborhood parks, school parks, linear parks and greenways, The integration of environmental design and tot lots . As each Area of the plan is is strongly encouraged in the design and developed, consideration should be given engineering of park elements including to locating adequate parks at walkable using low water use techniques, reducing distances so that each household has impervious surfaces, using lighting that access to recreation and the outdoors . protects the night sky, using native plant materials, and other techniques . Implementation Recommendation: Parks should be located so that they are In general, parks should be provided at the center piece of a neighborhood or approximately 10 acres per 1,000 residents district and should incorporate design and designed to serve multiple benefits elements that create a unique identity for that include recreation, social gathering, the neighborhoods . Parks should provide passive uses, urban gardening, storm locations for public art in their design . water management and the creation of neighborhood and community identity . In Greenway and Linear Park Design: general, parks should be located within the plan, whether that be by the developer or the Greenways and linear parks connect City, based on the following criteria: neighborhoods, districts, parks, open spaces and gathering spaces . They are Tot Lots, community gardens and small an integral component of the mobility green spaces of approximately 1 acre or framework for the Masterplan and are to be less should be located within residential deliberately located within the Study Area . neighborhoods on lower traffic streets so They include multi-purpose trails, native that they are accessible to the residents of and naturalized landscaping, signage, and the neighborhood within a 2-3 minute walk or other site elements . They can be located in 650 feet . both urbanized areas as well as rural areas of the plan . They are located along major Neighborhood and School Parks of roadways, within power line easements, and approximately 5-10 acres should be located along the existing and proposed canals . so that they link neighborhoods together and are within a ¼ mile walking distance form Implementation Recommendation: residents of the neighborhoods . Ideally these parks will be located along streets that have • Integrate trail, native landscape and protected bicycle facilities so that residents storm water management into the can safely ride their bikes to the park . design of linear parks and greenways .
Community Parks of 15-35 acres and • Locate greenways and linear Parks to larger should be located to provide connect neighborhoods and districts recreational opportunities. They define to each other and to parks and open larger planning areas and are located along spaces . major roadways that have bicycle and transit facilities . They serve residents within a ½ mile walking distance dimension .
62 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 39: Minor canals handle stormwater and provide connectivity throughout the Study Area
Figure 40: Major canals can be wide and deep enough for recreational use
• Provide destinations along the way and opportunities for learning, recreation and passive activities .
• Provide a multi-purpose path of a minimum of 10 feet of a maintainable and accessible surface and a minimum of 6 feet of planted landscape space on either side .
• Provide trailheads, signage, landscape treatments, public art and monumentation that makes the greenway visible, celebrates the trailhead and enables the greenway to provide an identity for the community .
• Utilize consistent furniture, signage and element designs that tie the greenways together and integrate them into a larger system .
Planning Frameworks | 63 Ce G n d r o ar as o R s h o f a i a e C d l d
y Scenic a d ar w ev ul gh o B on P ni a
i r
on Hi m k t
Do w a y ashing Shillelagh
e W l e g rr o or C Fu e tu d r Ge e e R a Pl o ea oad R s an t t G Whedb s rov e e Parkway
W
7 1
Great Dismal y
Swamp a w
h
g i
H
Class I - Separate pathway Airport from road Class II - Bike land on road
Class III - Paved shoulder
Figure 41: The trails system creates a network of varying trail types through the study area (Figures 42-43)
64 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 42:. Class I multi-use trail can accommodate a range of activities and comfortable passing widths
Figure 43: Class I trails through the rural and forested areas provide non- motorized access throughout the study area.
Planning Frameworks | 65 M ose s G r an dy T ra il
Ce d G ar r n R as o o s o a f i h d e a l d C
y
a Scenic w
gh d ar ev ul P a on Hi o t B r
n k
io w
n Shillelagh i a m Do y ashing
e W
g R oad or l re Ge r o C e e
Whedb
d a Futur ant Gro o e Pleas ve P R ar kw t a
s y
e W Great Dismal
Swamp
7
1
y
a w
h
g i
H
Airport Parks / Open Space
Conservation
Stormwater
Forested Area
Figure 44: Stormwater and conservation network
66 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Stormwater Management Implementation Recommendation:
The Study Area’s location adjacent to the The stormwater management strategy for Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife the Study Area follows simple ideas that Refuge Area, along with its position relative together create a naturalized network of, to the Chesapeake Bay watershed provide ideally, low technology water management the regulatory and philosophical impetus techniques that manage storm water close to use storm water management practices to where it falls; maximizes infiltration and that not only appropriately manage storm reduces water runoff; uses the buildings, water to a high level of water quality, but yards, streets, parks and open spaces in a to use storm water management as a part connected and distributed network of high of the theme, character and lifestyle of the connectivity; and reduces the amount of community . underground pipes used for distribution networks in favor of exposed vegetated The Dominion Boulevard Study Area is systems . The system provides water in typically low lying land . It has many management at the lot, the neighborhood agricultural canals that have been used and community scale and offers the to manage storm water from the fields. developer of future property in the Study One of the canals, the “Herring Ditch” is Area choices in technologies and methods . of historical significance and transverses the site in an east west direction before In general, storm water management in the turning north toward the Elizabeth River . Dominion Boulevard Study Area should Another significant ditch follows Shillelagh operate at the following scales: Road . The site has many forested areas that are described on the National Wetlands At the Building Inventory Map as having a high potential for The design of the building can contribute being wetlands . New developments in the to reducing the amount of water to be Study Area have created new canals, ponds managed by capturing water in above or and lagoons that manage post development below ground cisterns which utilize captured storm water. Finally, a significant power line water for site irrigation or other building easement bisects the northern portion of the uses . Study Area . On the Lot All of these site features, along with the Rain gardens and infiltration basins can responsibility to provide additional open manage roof water and allow it to infiltrate space and appropriate storm water Best into the ground . Reducing the amount of Management Practices (BMPs), provide irrigated landscape and lawn also benefits an opportunity to create a connected open an overall water management approach . space system that utilizes naturalizing water A series of lots can provide connected management techniques of various types infiltration basins that provide a naturalized and scales that integrate opportunities for landscape amenity . Finally, reducing the recreation, water management and habit amount of impervious surfaces in driveways protection . This integrated system, along and parking lots contributes greatly to with complete streets and pedestrian reducing the amount of potential runoff . oriented centers, can provide a backbone Using permeable paving systems also framework that contributes to the provide water quality and contribute to community’s health, identity, sense of place reducing heat island effects . and pedestrian and bicycle mobility system .
Planning Frameworks | 67 In the Parking Lot overall greenway network and provide an Reducing the amount of impervious surface additional place for trails . contributes greatly to reducing the amount of site area needed for water management . All of the above strategies, once connected Using permeable paving techniques are and celebrated, will provide a landscape for becoming more and more cost effective, the project that promotes habitat; provides a especially when one considers the savings greenway network that links neighborhoods in site area that can be provided . The to each other; and establishes an ethic for landscape of the parking lot can become the project that is consistent with the vision part of the water quality system as well . The for the project . use of rain gardens between rows of parking lots and within the parking islands creates a The street and greenway cross sections softening landscape while doubling up the provided for the Master Plan describes use of the space for water management and the location of stormwater management beautification. Edges of parking lots can be landscapes . The Master Plan also describes used for larger infiltration basin landscapes. locations where canals and forested areas should be protected and preserved . The In the Street Master Plan also locates open space areas Reducing the amount of pavement within the districts and neighborhoods that contributes to reducing the amount of water are available for use for neighborhood that needs to be managed . Locating canals, scaled water management ponds or bioswales and infiltration trenches as part landscapes . of the roadway edges provides water quality management next to the roadway, while Each developer within the project will also providing an interesting and naturalized be responsible for managing its post landscape for the street . This naturalized development water “on site” and within the system can also reduce the size or amount distribution networks provided within the of costly pipes located under the ground . streets . The large neighborhood scaled water management areas may be used to Within Parks and Open Spaces offset onsite management subject to policies The parks and open spaces of the district established by the City of Chesapeake and or neighborhood can be planned for any other laws applicable to stormwater both recreation and water management . management . Neighborhood or community scaled ponds, canals, constructed wetlands and bio- retention areas can be located to serve a sub watershed .
Within Powerline Easements With the permission of the easement right of way holders, the large power line easements that traverse the Study Area can be used for water quality BMP’s and along with trails, can become part of the master plan’s greenway network .
The Existing Canals As much as possible, neighborhoods and roadways should align with the existing canals so that they can be used within the Example of rain garden within street used for water quality
68 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Example of rain garden next to street used for water quality Example of cisterns capturing rain water from building roof
Example of rain garden within street used for water quality Figure 45: Canals designed as recreation systems and storm water management
Planning Frameworks | 69 M ose s G r an dy T ra il
Ce d G ar r n R as o o s o a f i h d e a l d C
Scenic y a d w var le gh ou B P n a io r
in k on Hi w t m
Do a y
ashing
e W
g
or el Ge rr o C e e
Whedb
d a o Futu nt Gr R re Pleasa ove Pa t rk s wa
e y W Great Dismal
Swamp Shillelagh
7
1
y a
w R
h oad
g i
H
Airport
Figure 46: Transit routes provide another layer of connectivity through the study area
70 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Transit
As part of anticipating growth in ridership and accommodating all modes of travel as part of creating Complete Streets, transit accommodations should be considered in the design of the street and community framework . Planning to accommodate transit includes:
Planning bus routes that link residents with jobs, community and shopping related uses within an Area so that it becomes a viable transportation alternative to using the car .
Anticipating the possibility that light rail service or bus rapid transit service (BRT), that connects Chesapeake with the region, may become feasible .
Making provisions for rail stops at the allowed intersections on Dominion Boulevard and link bus, bike and pedestrian service to those stops .
Considering that with higher densities, internalized street car service, such as in Portland, Oregon, may become a viable option within the denser more urban districts of the plan .
Creating an adequate routing matrix that generally includes ½ mile spacing on most routes, ¼ mile route spacing in the urban areas and 1 mile spacing in the rural areas .
Having safe, well signed and attractive bus stops every 600 to 1200 feet along the route and has bus shelters, with covered shelters, seating, signage and plaza space every 1200 feet in denser areas of the plan .
Starting with a simple area loop and thinking about logical city wide/regional connections in the future .
Planning Frameworks | 71 Land Use Categories
Compact, walkable neighborhoods with and conservation network provides employment creating uses close by attracts desirable amenities for housing and new residents and new employers . Linking employment opportunities . each of these to a greenway, open space
M M ose ose s G s G r r an an dy dy T T ra ra il il
Ce Ce d d G ar G ar r n R r n R as o o as o o s o a s o a f f i h d i h d e a e a l l d C d C
y y
a a Scenic Scenic w w
gh d gh d ar ar ev ev ul P ul P a a
on Hi o on Hi o r
t B r t B k
n k n w
io w io
n Shillelag n Shillelagh a i a i
m m y Do y Do ashing ashing
e W h e W g R g R l oad l oad or e or e rr rr o o Ge C Ge C e e e e
Whedb Whedb
d d a a Fu Fu o ture Pleasant Grove o ture Pleasant Grove R P R P ar ar t kw t kw
s ay s ay
e e
W W Great Dismal Great Dismal
Swamp Swamp
7 7
1 1
y y
a a
w w
h h
g g i i
H H
Airport Commercial Retail Airport High Density Residential
Medium Density Office Residential
Office Research Low Density Residential
Light Industrial/Logistics
Urban Mixed Use
FigureEmployment 47: Based Employment Uses based uses have Figure 48: A mix of housing types provide central nodes in Areas 3 and 6 many options potential residents
M M ose ose s G s G r r an an dy dy T T ra ra il il
Ce Ce d d G ar G ar r n R r n R as o o as o o s o a s o a f f i h d i h d e a e a l l d C d C
y y
a a Scenic Scenic w w d gh d gh ar ar ev ev ul ul P o P a a
on Hi o on Hi B r
t B r t n k
n k io w
io w n
n Shillelagh i Shillelagh a i a
m om y Do y D ashing ashing
e W e W
g R g R el oad el oad rr rr o o Geor C Geor C e e e e
Whedb Whedb
d d a a Fu Fu o ture Pleasant Grove o ture Pleasant Grove R P R P ar ar t kw t kw
s ay s ay
e e
W W Great Dismal Great Dismal
Swamp Swamp
7 7
1 1
y y
a a
w w
h h
g g i i
H H
Airport Airport Agriculture Preservation
Figure 49: The parks and open space tie the Figure 50: Preserving agricultural land and the rural study are together in a green network character of the study area is a key component of this planning effort
72 | Planning Frameworks DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia M ose s G r an dy T ra il
Ce G d r n a as r s o R f o o i h a e a d l d C
Scenic y a d w var le gh ou B P n a io r
in k on Hi w t m
Do a y
ashing
e W
g
or el Ge rr o C e e
Whedb
d F a uture Pleasant Grov o e Pa R rk w t ay
s e
Great Dismal W
Swamp
7
1
y a
Shillelagh w
h
g i
H
R oad
Airport
Figure 51: The overlap of the employment, retail/mixed use and recreation centers create a vibrant, walkable community
Planning Frameworks | 73 Settlement patterns and densities should be reflective of the theme and character of the Area being planned for development. 5 Area Plans
Community Input:
When asked about the plan, a majority want to consider a longer term vision that includes all of the Areas .
55%
Source: Survey 2 results, July 2014
What are the most important strategies when planning the Study Area?
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Area Plans | 75 Area 1: Dominion Northwest - an opportunity to connect to the river
Size: 270 gross acres New Land Uses in Area Plan: Existing Conditions: The Master Plan recognizes that future redevelopment Access – Area 1 is accessed off of is possible and desirable if done to take higher Dominion Boulevard . The length of the and better advantage of the sites location along Veterans Bridge may make access difficult. the Elizabeth River and to work with the sensitive environmental conditions that exist in the Area, but the Current Land Use – Industrial land uses actual type and amount of land use is to be determined are located adjacent to the Elizabeth River . in the future . For now, the 2035 Comprehensive Plan Suburban style residential neighborhoods designations will remain . are located along Moses Grandy Trail . The Area currently provides employment to the region . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Environmental Features – Much of the land is forested and described on the National • Suburban Mixed Use Wetlands Inventory map . The Elizabeth • Low Density Residential River wraps around the Area on the northern boundaries .
Utilities – Water and Sewer are available to Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): portions of the Area . 1 Existing residential development with river frontage
Opportunity: 2 Opportunity site for potential redevelopment in the future
Given the location along the Elizabeth 3 Sensitive environmental and forested area preserved River and assuming there will be adequate access, Area 1 could be considered in the future for redevelopment into industrial or Other Considerations: light industrial uses that take advantage of the river access, or higher density mixed • The Area is very sensitive from an environmental standpoint use development that uses the river as an and requires careful planning and design in order to create an amenity . This Area is not a major focus of appropriate fit between new development and the low lying the master plan . land . Adherence to the Aspirational Zoning principles is highly encouraged if this Area is to be redeveloped . Threat:
Degraded access, as well as the impact that the previous land uses might have in terms of environmental clean-up creates potential problems for this property to be redeveloped into higher and better uses .
76 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 52: Area 1 location 2 3
3 2 d r a v le u o B n io in m o D 1
Suburban Mixed Use
Low Density Residential
Cedar Road
Figure 53: Area 1 enlargement
Area Plans | 77 Area 2: Dominion Northeast - An opportunity to connect to the river
Size: 337 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Conditions: The Master Plan recognizes that future redevelopment is possible and desirable Access - Area 2 is accessed off of Dominion if done to take advantage of the sites Boulevard and Cedar Road . The new location along the Elizabeth River, but the Veterans Bridge may affect access . actual type and amount of land use is to be determined in the future . For now, the Land Use – Industrial land uses are located 2035 Comprehensive Plan designations will along the Elizabeth River . The Tidewater remain . Community College and retail uses occupy much of the Cedar Road frontage . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Environmental Features – Much of the land appears on the National Wetlands • Light Industrial Inventory map . The Elizabeth River wraps • Institution / Government around the northeast boundary which, like • Regional Mixed Use Area 1, creates interesting redevelopment • Conservation possibilities .
Utilities – Water and sewer are available to Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): portions of the Area
1 Potential sites for future redevelopment . Opportunity: 2 Sensitive low elevation forested areas preserved . Portions of Area 2 could be considered in the future for redevelopment into water 3 Tidewater Community College based industries or higher density mixed use developments that uses the River as an amenity . Other Considerations:
• The Area is very sensitive from an environmental standpoint Threats: and requires careful planning and design in order to create an appropriate fit between new development and the low lying Like Area 1, access may be limited due land . Adherence to the Aspirational Zoning principles is highly to the length of the Veterans Bridge . encouraged if this Area is to be redeveloped . The potential for wetlands may also limit development, and the current land uses may require environmental clean up before they can be redeveloped .
78 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia d Figure 54: Area 2 r a location v le u o B n io 1 in m o D 1
2
Cedar Road 3
y a w rk a P Light Industry / Logistics n o o h Regional Mixed Use a C Conservation
Low Density Residential
Institution / Government
Office
Figure 55: Area 2 enlargement
Area Plans | 79 Area 3: Shillelagh North - Chesapeake’s new gathering place
Size: 1,120 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Non Residential Uses Urban Mixed Use 725,062 bldg . sq . ft . Access - Area 3 is accessed from Dominion Business Commercial 383,663 bldg . sq ft. . Boulevard, Cedar Road and Cahoon Office 405,879 bldg . sq . ft . Parkway. Shillelagh Road and Grassfield Parkway extend through the Area and Residential Uses provide the backbone of the circulation High Density 846 units network. Grassfield Parkway creates Medium Density 1019 units an important intersection on Dominion Low Density 703 units Boulevard . Open Space Uses Existing Land Use - The predominant Parks 72 acres existing land use is agriculture and low Natural Open Space 111 acres density rural subdivisions . A Walmart Storm Water Management 76 acres Shopping Center with ancillary uses occupies the northeast corner of the Area . New multi-family development has been developed south of the Walmart . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Environmental Features – Much of the land • Regional Mixed Use is in agricultural use . There are patches • Business Commercial of forested land and land that is on the • Institution / Government National Wetland Inventory Map . A power • Low Density Residential line runs diagonally through the lower • Agriculture / Open Space southwest corner. A golf course flanks the eastern boundary and a canal and water quality pond flank the western boundary Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan):
Utilities – Water and sewer are not available 1 Walkable Mixed Use Center creates gateway on Dominion . to most of the Area
2 Commercial and Office Core creates opportunities for jobs Opportunity:
3 Given access to Dominion Boulevard Attractive higher density housing surrounds a central park and the location near Cedar Road, Area 3 is primed for a near term “Gateway” 4 Greenway network also conveys storm water development . It should support the highest levels of development intensity and mix of 5 Natural stormwater management connects open space uses and be positioned so to promote jobs creating uses and mixed uses . 6 Medium and low density housing in traditional neighborhoods
Threats: 7 Preserved Agriculture transition retains rural character
Allowing more suburban development 8 Neighborhood retail provides walkable destination would limit the potential of this Area of the master plan to contribute to Chesapeake’s economic future . 9 Sensitive forested land protected to provide open space
80 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia C ed ar Ro ad
rd va le ou B n G io r in a ss 2 om fi D ie ld P ahoon Pkwy a C r k w Urban Mixed Use Center a y Figure 56: Area 3 1 5 Parks / Open Space location Stormwater Management
Conservation
9 Low Density Residential 5 9 S Medium Density Residential c e n
i c High Density Residential
P a
r k Business / Commercial w
a y Office 3 3 Forested Area
Agriculture / Open space 4 Vincek Way
5 8
6 6 9
S hillelagh Road
7 9
Future Pleasant Grove Parkway
Figure 57: Area 3 enlargement
Area Plans | 81 Area 4: Dominion North - Neighborhoods oriented to New Mill Creek
Size: 556 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Non Residential Uses Business Commercial 87,529 bldg sq ft. . Access - Area 4 is accessed off of Dominion Boulevard along the south boundary at the Scenic Parkway intersection and off Residential Uses of Moses Grandy Trail on the eastern High Density 326 units boundary . Cedar Road extends through the Medium Density 81 units Area . Low Density 124 units
Land Use - The predominant existing land Open Space Uses use within the Area is agriculture and Parks 14 acres suburban style subdivisions . Natural Open Space 17 acres Storm Water Management 8 acres Environmental Features – some of the land is in agricultural use . The Lindsey Canal runs along the northern boundary, which 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: ultimately connects into the Elizabeth River . • Regional Mixed Use Utilities - water and sewer service is • Business Commercial available • Low Density Residential
Opportunity: Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): Given the access to Dominion Boulevard and the location near Cedar Road, the 1 Neighborhood retail provides walkable destination Area is primed for near term development that would include both residential and 2 The park provides open space connection to the canal commercial uses that fit within the existing available land areas as well as the 3 Greenway network within the power line easement character of the existing neighborhoods . New development can take advantage of 4 Existing stormwater pond the Lindsey Canal as well as the Scenic Parkway intersection . 5 Greenway network along Lindsey Canal and New Mill Creek
Threat: 6 Residential neighborhoods oriented toward Mill Creek Given its dimension and location, this Area is best suited for residential and 7 Existing residences limited commercial (retail) development. Promoting density will maximize the benefit of developing Area 4 and will lessen the Other Considerations: need to develop agricultural land located within other Areas . The Lindsey Canal, if not • Orienting new development to the Lindsey Canal will add to its protected, will not create the environmental value and provide recreational connections for its residents . and economic value it could .
82 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia
Parks / Open Space
Stormwater Management
Conservation
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential M o s es High Density Residential G Figure 58: Area 4 r an location Business / Commercial dy Trail Institution / Government
Agriculture / Open space
ek re C ill 7 M w e N
Cedar Road
5 1 vard 7 le ou B n io 2 in om D S
c
e
n
i c 4 S
P 3 6 hillelagh Road
a W
r
k
d a o R t s e
w
a
y
ay kw ar P on ho Ca F u tu re P le asa nt G rove Par kway
Figure 59: Area 4 enlargement
Area Plans | 83 Area 5: Scenic Parkway North - Traditional neighborhoods around a central park
Size: 880 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan: Existing Condition: Residential Uses Low Density 290 units Access - Area 5 is accessed from Scenic Parkway, which runs north to south through Open Space Uses the Area and Drumcastle Lane which Parks 20 acres to Shillelagh Road . Eventually, it will be Storm Water Management 17 acres accessible from Pleasant Grove Parkway .
Land Use - The predominant existing land use is low density rural subdivisions . New development is occurring along Scenic 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Parkway and includes the Grassfield High School, some light industrial, office uses • Regional Mixed Use and residential uses . An equestrian oriented • Institutional / Government development occupies a prime position • Agriculture / Open Space along Dominion Boulevard . Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan):
Environmental Features – There are small 1 Access will eventually be from Pleasant Grove Parkway . patches of forested land shown on the National Wetland Inventory Map . A power The park provides central green space adjacent to the high line runs diagonally through the center of the 2 school and within walking distance to single family homes . Area . The Herring Ditch canal runs north to south through the western end of the Area . 3 Using the powerline easement as a greenway connection Utilities - The Area is partially served by allows for continuity in the green space network . water and sewer 4 Grassfield High School. Opportunity: 5 Existing master planned development . Over time, the Area could support more housing density than currently being 6 Existing rural lot development developed – especially as it relates to the rural lots that are being developed - so that 7 Storm water management next to power line easement larger and more manageable agricultural lands could be preserved elsewhere in the Study Area . Other Considerations:
Threat: • In the future, and based on the success and rising land values with the development of Area 3 and Area 6 as mixed The pressure to continue with suburban use centers and the evolution of Dominion Boulevard as an or quasi rural development is great, which Interstate Highway, the low density development pattern, would limit the amount of area designated equestrian facility and agricultural land may be pressured to for agriculture preservation . redevelop into a higher and better use . This Area should be phased later in the process of developing the Study Area to preserve its potential .
84 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia
Parks / Open Space
Stormwater Management
Conservation
Low Density Residential
High Density Residential
Figure 60: Area 5 Business / Commercial vard location Institution / Government le ou B Agriculture / Open space n io in Office om D
S
c
e
n
i c
P
4 a
r
k
w
a
y
2 3
5 6
est Road 7 W Lane castle Drum
Future P l 1 easa nt G rov e Parkway
Figure 61: Area 5 enlargement
Area Plans | 85 Area 6: G. W. Highway - A new center of industry for the region
Size: 887 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Non Residential Uses Urban Mixed Use 926,705 bldg . sq . ft Access - Area 6 is accessed off of George Business Commercial 370,778 bldg . sq . ft . Washington Highway and Dominion Office Research 963,120 bldg . sq . ft . Boulevard, which are two major components Light Industrial / Logistics 1,190,941 bldg . sq . ft . of the roadway infrastructure that connects
the City to North Carolina . Wheedbee Residential Uses Corell Lane connects to the Great Dismal Medium Density 927 units Swamp Trail . Low Density 356 units
Land Use - The predominant existing land Open Space Uses uses are agriculture, low density rural Parks 27 acres subdivisions and suburban subdivisions . A Natural Open Space 12 acres borrow pit is located in the center . Storm Water Management 99 acres
Environmental Features – Much of the land is in agricultural use . The George Washington Canal runs along the West Boundary . A major power line easement 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: runs along the north eastern boundary . • Regional Mixed Use Utilities - Water and sewer are not available . • Business Commercial • Agriculture / Open Space Opportunity:
Given the access to Dominion Boulevard Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): and George Washington Highway, as well as the potential that the Pleasant Grove 1 Mixed Use core at Highway 17 and Pleasant Grove Parkway Parkway will someday provide, the Area is primed for a “gateway” development Employment uses surround the Mixed Use core that would include both residential and 2 jobs creating uses . This Area can support some of the highest levels of development 3 Freeway Oriented businesses and commercial intensity and mix of uses and be positioned so that it absorbs as much of the potential 4 Borrow pit converted to water management and central park market for jobs creating uses as possible . 5 Preserved canals create greenway network Threat: 6 Traditional Neighborhoods of varying densities The greatest threat to Area 6 and its role within the master plan is for it to not realize 7 Preserved Agriculture its potential as a dynamic, jobs creating, regional employment center . 8 Commercial at entrance to Great Dismal Swamp
9 Existing Rural Subdivision Land Usage in Plan:
86 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia
F u t u r e 2 P
l e
a
s 6 a Figure 62: Area 6 n t 2 location G
r
o
v
e
P
a
2 r
k
w
a
5 y
6 ominion Boulevard 2 D 1
3 4 ashington Highway 6
eorge W Urban Mixed Use Center
G Parks / Open Space
2 Stormwater Management Conservation
Low Density Residential
e n Medium Density Residential a L ll e High Density Residential rr 8 o C 9 Business / Commercial e e b d Light Industrial / Logistics e h W Office Research
Forested Area 7 ighway 17 Agriculture / Open space H
Figure 63: Area 6 enlargement
Area Plans | 87 Area 7: West Road - Preserving agriculture & rural lifestyle
Size: 921 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Residential Uses Rural Cluster 180 units Access - Area 7 is located adjacent to Dominion Boulevard but does not have an Open Space Uses existing intersection on that roadway . The Agriculture / Conservation 445 acres Area currently is accessed off of West Road that extends from the north through Area 5 . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Land Use - The predominant existing land use is large patches of productive agriculture • Agriculture / Open Space and low density rural subdivisions along the • Conservation Herring Ditch . • Government / Institution
Environmental Features – Most of the land is in agricultural use . The Herring Ditch Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): provides an interesting environmental feature and potential amenity . 1 Existing productive agricultural lands are preserved
Utilities - water is available to portions of the 2 Existing rural lots Area . Sewer is not available
Opportunity: 3 Existing City training facility
Given the large proportion of pure 4 Crossroads are perfect for farm stands or neighborhood retail . agricultural use, this Area is primed for Agricultural Preservation, which includes a 5 The Herring Ditch provides a greenway connection that links provision to cluster any new development to the east and to the north . and to avoid the allowance for 3 acre lots that do not promote agricultural preservation Other Special Considerations: or character . • Creating new standards and requirements for rural development Threat: enhance the community’s ability to preserve agriculture and a rural way of life . It is recommended that development be Unless a program for developing in consolidated into small clusters that preserve land rather than Agricultural land is developed that clusters allowing for large lots that don’t effectively support agriculture development on a smaller footprint, this as described in “Rural by Design: Maintaining Small Town land will most likely become 3 acre lot Character” by Arendt, Brabec, Reid and Yaro published by the subdivisions that do not effectively support American Planning Association 1994 . agriculture .
88 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Fu ture P leasa nt Gr ove P arkw 4 ay
Figure 64: Area 7 location 2 5 1
1
4 3
7
1
y
a
w
h
g i
H 2 1
est Road
W
Figure 65: Area 7 enlargement
Area Plans | 89 Area 8: Scenic Boulevard South - Preserving Forested Land and Agriculture
Size: 1067 Gross Acres New Land Usage in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Residential Uses Rural Cluster 82 units Access - Area 8 is currently accessed off of West Road from the north . It is assumed Open Space Uses that an extension of Pleasant Grove Agriculture / Open Space 840 acres Parkway will also provide access in the future . The Herring Ditch Road bisects the Area and runs along the Herring Ditch canal . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Land Use - The predominant existing land use is agriculture and low density rural • Light Industrial subdivisions . The Area sits just north of the • Agriculture / Open Space Regional Airport .
Environmental Features – Much of the Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): land is forested land and on the National Wetland Inventory Map . The Herring Ditch is a predominant feature through the center of 1 Preserved productive agriculture the Area .
2 “Preserved Forest” - preserving forested land promotes Utilities - Water and sewer is not available bio-diversity and recreation while acting like the lungs of the community Opportunity: 3 Crossroads are perfect for farm stands or local retail . Given the predominance of productive agricultural land, land designated on the National Wetlands Inventory Map, its 4 Greenway connections through forest location along the Herring Ditch and its location adjacent to the regional airport, the Area is best suited to remain in agriculture Other Special Considerations: and conservation . Any development allowed should be clustered in order to preserve • The large forested area creates a unique opportunity for agriculture and not allowed to be developed Chesapeake to promote environmental stewardship and to into 3 acre lots . provide a place to promote bio-diversity and recreation . This large forested land extends, in spirit, the Great Dismal Swamp Threats: into the Study Area and retains the benefit of important water management and air quality features for future generations . Unless a program for developing in Agricultural land is developed that clusters development on a smaller footprint, this land will become 3 acre lot subdivisions that do not support agriculture .
90 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia 3
F ut ur e P 1 le as an t G rov e P ark way Figure 66: Area 8 location
2
Forested Area
4
est Road
W
Figure 67: Area 8 enlargement
Area Plans | 91 Area 9: Shillelagh South - Preserving agriculture & a rural lifestyle
Size: 1,130 Gross Acres New Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Residential Uses Rural Cluster 198 units 99 acres Access - Area 9 is accessed off Shillelagh Road, which extends south through Area Open Space Uses 3 . The Area touches on Washington Drive Agriculture / Open Space 1,037 acres along the Eastern boundary .
Land Use - The predominant existing land 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: use within the Area is agriculture and low density rural subdivisions . A suburban • Agriculture / Open Space subdivision is accessed off of Shillelagh Road outside the southern boundary of the Area . Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): Environmental Features – Much of the land is in agricultural use . There are patches of 1 Existing productive agricultural lands are preserved, which is forested land that is on the National Wetland compatible with the Airport’s conical and horizontal surface Inventory Map . A power line runs diagonally restrictions through the upper Southeast corner of the Area . The Area resides at the northeast end 2 Sensitive forested areas are preserved of the regional airport and is impacted by flight paths. The Herring Ditch canal extends into the Area from the East . There is also a 3 Crossroads are appropriate for farm stands or other retail major drainage canal along Shillelagh . 4 Existing rural lots Utilities - Water and sewer is not available Other Special Considerations: Opportunity: • Creating new standards and requirements for rural development Given the location at the end of the Airport enhance the community’s ability to preserve agriculture and runaway, the distance away from Dominion a rural way of life . It is recommended that development be Boulevard, and the large proportion of consolidated into small clusters that preserve land rather than viable agricultural use in large tracts, this allowing for large lots that don’t effectively support agriculture Area should be considered as Agriculture / as described in “Rural by Design: Maintaining Small Town Conservation . Character” by Arendt, Brabec, Reid and Yaro published by the American Planning Association 1994 . Threats:
Unless a program for developing in Agricultural land is developed that clusters development on a smaller footprint, this land will become 3 acre lot subdivisions that do not support agriculture and are in conflict with the airports conical and horizontal surface restrictions .
92 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia way Future Scenic Park
Future Pleas Figure 68: Area 9 ant G rove location Pa 3 rkw ay
S 1 1 hillelagh Road 3
3
3 4
1 2
4 1
Figure 69: Area 9 enlargement
Area Plans | 93 Area 10: Airport Drive - An opportunity to capitalize on the Regional Airport
Size: 901 Gross Acres Land Uses in Area Plan:
Existing Condition: Non Residential Uses Light Industrial / Logistics 6,870,000 bldg .sq ft. . Access - Area 10 is accessed off of West Road . A farm road has been created that Open Space Uses links Dominion Boulevard to Airport Road in Agriculture / Conservation 221 acres anticipation of future development .
Land Use - The predominant existing land use is Agriculture . 2035 Comprehensive Plan Designations: Environmental Features – Much of the • Light Industrial land is in forested and /or land that is on the National Wetlands Inventory Map . Agricultural is located on the southern boundary . Features of the Proposed Area Plan (see plan): Utilities - Water and sewer is not available
1 Leveraging the proximity to the airport and Highway 17, this Opportunity: 230 acre opportunity area has the potential to become a Light Industrial / Logistics hub . Given the adjacency to Dominion Boulevard and the location near the Airport the Area 2 This 450 acre property is also slated to become a Light can support industrial uses, logistics, the Industrial / Logistics hub transfer of goods, and uses that support airport functions . There is a 230 acre sized 3 Potential access to the regional airport from Highway 17 parcel that is currently in agricultural use that may be able to support some of this vision . Other Special Considerations:
• This Area presents a great opportunity to capitalize on the Threat: location adjacent to the regional airport - especially if the airport undergoes expansion to allow for larger freight oriented aircraft . Thoughtful planning is needed to develop It will be important to locate any new development so that the this Area to minimize the impact on wetlands large an important forested land, which potentially could include and forested areas . wetlands, is not compromised .
94 | Area Plans DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 70: Area 10 location
3
2 7 1
y a
w
h
g i
H
d
a
o
R
t
s
e
W 1
Figure 71: Area 10 enlargement
Area Plans | 95 With a collaborative design process, the design and engineering for the project can promote health and environmental stewardship. 6 Infrastructure Strategy
Community Input:
What is the event that should trigger the development of an area?
Source: Survey 2 results, July 2014
Walking and biking trails are important to 62% of the Community .
62%
Source: Survey 1 results, April 2014
Infrastructure Strategy | 97 Transportation Master Plan Speed and Road Configuration
Dominion Boulevard is an Urban Principal Arterial maintained by the City of Chesapeake . The speed limit along Dominion Boulevard is posted at 45 miles per hour (mph) south of Cedar Road through most of the study area. Dominion Boulevard currently has three (3) sig- nalized intersections and one (1) unsignalized intersection in the study area. They include: Dominion Boulevard and Cedar Road/Moses Grandy Trail Dominion Boulevard and Grassfield Parkway Dominion Boulevard and Scenic Parkway Dominion Boulevard and George Washington Highway (unsignalized)
The intersections on the East and West sides of Dominion Boulevard within the study area are the following: Cedar Road and Cahoon Parkway Grassfield Parkway and Cahoon Parkway Shillelagh Road and Cahoon Parkway Drumcastle Lane and West Road Moses Grandy Trail and Cedar Road Cedar Road and Scenic Parkway
The studied base condition was based upon the year 2050 forecasted lane configuration from the City’s Master Transportation Plan . The base condition roadway network consists of the configuration in the table below: Limits Corridor Number of Lanes South of Cedar Rd Dominion Blvd. 8 East of Dominion Blvd 6 Cedar Rd South of Moses Grandy Trail 2 West of Dominion Blvd Moses Grandy Trail 4 East of Dominion Blvd Grassfeld Parkway 4 South of Dominion Blvd. Shillelagh Rd. 2 South of Dominion Blvd. Scenic Parkway 4 South of Dominion Blvd. West Rd. 2 South of Cedar Rd. Cahoon Parkway 4 North of Dominion Blvd. George Washington Hwy. 4
Table 4: Existing roadway network configurations
Existing Traffic Volumes
The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes for the study area were provided by the City of Chesapeake and obtained from other publicly available sources. No traffic counts were done in conjunction with this study. Background traffic data is shown in the following table. The traffic volumes were grown to the current year 2014 utilizing a 3 percent growth rate per year and grown 1 percent per year to the 2034 studied year, which was provided by the City of Chesapeake Traffic Engineering Department.
98 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Limits Corridor 2014 ADT 2034 ADT South of Cedar Rd Dominion Blvd. 11,990 14,630 East of Dominion Blvd 26,160 31,920 Cedar Rd South of Moses Grandy Trail 6,980 8,517 West of Dominion Blvd Moses Grandy Trail 13,080 15,960 East of Dominion Blvd Grassfeld Parkway 7,440 9,078 South of Dominion Blvd. Shillelagh Rd. 2,530 3,087 South of Dominion Blvd. Scenic Parkway 5,220 6,369 South of Dominion Blvd. West Rd. 3,220 3,929 South of Cedar Rd. Cahoon Parkway 10,360 12,641 North of Dominion Blvd. George Washington Hwy. 4,560 5,564
Table 5: Average daily traffic for key intersections
The ADT volumes are slightly higher on the northern end of the study area, since some development has already occurred around Cahoon Parkway, Grassfield Parkway, and Scenic Parkway . A residential development is located off of Cahoon Parkway along with Cedar Road Elementary School. Development along Grassfield Parkway consists of a Wal- Mart, Applebee’s, and a few other retail stores. Grassfield High School is located along Scenic Parkway .
Existing Level of Service
According to the Highway Capacity Manual 2010, a two-lane highway operates at an acceptable capacity at 3,200 passenger cars per hour (pc/h) for two directions. Multilane highways with flow rates over 1,400 passenger cars per hour per lane (pc/h/ln) result in speeds below the highways free flow speed. Level of Service (LOS) is used to categorize the segments of the corridors . LOS ranges from A through F and is determined by the density along the roadway. A roadway with a higher density will cause the free flow speed to decrease which will lower the LOS . The table below describes the existing level of service based on density for the corridors located in the study area .
Limits Corridor LOS South of Cedar Rd Dominion Blvd. A East of Dominion Blvd N/A Cedar Rd South of Moses Grandy Trail A West of Dominion Blvd Moses Grandy Trail B East of Dominion Blvd Grassfeld Parkway A South of Dominion Blvd. Shillelagh Rd. A South of Dominion Blvd. Scenic Parkway A South of Dominion Blvd. West Rd. A South of Cedar Rd. Cahoon Parkway A North of Dominion Blvd. George Washington Hwy. A
Table 6: Existing level of service at key intersections
Infrastructure Strategy | 99 The base model was developed by Parsons Brinkerhoff for the previous phase of the Do- minion Boulevard/Route 17 improvements project . The following table represents the inter- section level of service based upon the projected 2034 volumes and the Parsons Brinkerhoff Synchro model . The signalized intersections that have available turning movement data are shown in the following table with corresponding LOS as determined by modeling the traf- fic volumes in Synchro. The LOS of a signalized intersection is based upon the amount of delay vehicles will experience at the intersection. Intersection LOS ranges from A (free flow) through F (forced flow-jammed). The goal is to obtain a LOS D or better within the project area .
Intersection PM Peak Hour LOS Dominion Blvd. & Cedar/Moses Grandy Trail C Dominion Blvd. & Grassfeld Pkwy. B Dominion Blvd. & Scenic Pkwy. C Dominion Blvd. & George Washington Hwy. A Cedar Rd. & Cahoon Pkwy. E Moses Grandy Trail & Cedar Rd. B Table 7: Level of service for key intersections
Trip Generation
The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition was used to calculate the anticipated trips generated from the different land uses proposed within the 4 areas based on the proposed development plan and are summarized in the table below . Internal and pass-by trip reduction factors were considered for this develop- ment . The ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition provides a multi-use development trip generation and internal capture summary worksheet to assist in calculating the internal capture rate . The internal capture rates utilized range from 0 percent to 27 percent depend- ing on the particular area land uses .
Trip Generation Summary Average Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Area Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total 1 2,331 2,331 4,662 561 115 676 144 509 653 2 4,274 4,273 8,547 1,028 211 1,239 264 934 1,198 3 18,795 18,789 37,584 1,754 681 2,435 1,008 1,771 2,779 4 2,951 2,949 5,900 113 271 384 294 182 476 5 3,796 3,794 7,590 122 463 585 472 256 728 6 23,173 23,167 46,340 3,242 1,304 4,546 1,411 3,113 4,524 7 857 857 1,714 34 101 135 113 67 180 8 391 390 781 16 46 62 52 30 82 9 943 942 1,885 37 112 149 125 73 198 10* 7,667 7,667 45,334 1,781 243 2,024 256 1,878 2,134 Totals 65,178 65,178 130,337 8,688 3,547 12,235 4,139 8,813 12,952
Table 8: Trip generation summary
100 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia *Area 10 is considered as an opportunity area and has only been analyzed for 2 .2 million square feet of industrial space rather than 6 .8 million square feet . As development occurs the impact to the roadway network should be closely monitored . Once the 2 .2 million square feet have been realized, each new development impact should be analyzed, and associated improvements needed incorporated into the Master transportation plan
Figure 72: Internal capture for each area
Infrastructure Strategy | 101 Trip Distribution
Based on current traffic patterns and the planned changes with the study area, the following scenario was developed to project how traffic would flow to and from the proposed areas. The following table summarizes the proposed distributions .
Directional Distribution
Approach/Departure Direction Primary Trip Distribution From/To the NORTH 35% From/To the SOUTH 20% From/To the WEST 15% From/To the EAST 30% Total 100%
Table 9: Trip distribution
Projected Volumes
Using the distributed volumes and the available average daily traffic (ADT) volumes available for the roadways within the project area, required roadway lanes were developed . The existing ADTs were projected to 2034 using a 1% growth per year factor to account for background traffic growth outside of the project area.
The following table shows the anticipated 2034 Total ADT volumes .
102 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Grandy Trail Dominion Dominion Dominion Dominion Dominion Dominion Dominion Dominion Cedar Rd Cedar Rd North of South of South of South of South of South of South of South of West of East of East of Moses Limits Blvd Blvd Blvd Blvd Blvd Blvd Blvd Blvd Cahoon Pkwy Shillelagh Rd Scenic Pkwy Grandy Trail Washington Grove Pkwy Grass Dominion Cedar Rd Pleasant West Rd George Moses Street Pkwy Hwy Blvd f eld 11,990 26,160 10,360 13,080 2,530 7,440 4,560 3,220 5,220 6,980 2014 N/A ADT 14,630 31,920 12,641 15,960 3,087 9,078 5,564 3,929 6,369 8,517 2034 N/A Area 1 1,399 932 699 Area 2 Projected 2034 Traffic Volumes 1,709 4,060 1,282 14,094 10,336 10,805 Area 3 1,879 7,517 4,228 4,697 5,638 2,950 1,180 1,180 1,180 1,180 Area 295 295 4 4,175 1,518 3,795 1,518 3,795 Area 380 Trip Generation 5 19,463 Area 6 9,268 4,634 9,268 9,268 Area 7 1,714 857 343 171 171 857 257 Area 8 781 391 156 391 117 78 78 Area 9 1,885 943 377 189 189 283 Area 10 15,334 15,334 7,667 3,067 1,533 1,533 2,300 13,306 67,811 53,288 17,844 20,622 24,948 34,656 14,394 17,530 21,264 27,716 2034 Total
Table 10: Projected traffic volumes
Infrastructure Strategy | 103 The 2014 and 2034 ADT volumes that are N/A means that no background traffic data could be found on these roadway segments and therefore no volumes were utilized other than the trip generation volumes. The projected traffic volumes where distributed across the proposed roadway network based upon the land use patterns, and modeled . The anticipated Level of Service was determined utilizing the 2034 projected ADT volumes, and are shown in the following table .
Projected 2034 Build Capacity Analysis Limits Corridor LOS South of Cedar Dominion Blvd C East of Dominion Blvd N/A Cedar Rd South of Moses Grandy Trail A West of Dominion Blvd Moses Grandy Trail C East of Dominion Blvd Grassfeld Pkwy A South of Dominion Blvd Shillelagh Rd C South of Dominion Blvd Scenic Pkwy B South of Dominion Blvd West Rd C South of Dominion Blvd Pleasant Grove Pkwy C South of Cedar Rd Cahoon Pkwy B George Washington Hwy B
Table 11: Projected build capacity
The following table represents the intersection level of service based upon the projected 2034 build volumes and the Parsons Brinkerhoff Synchro model .
Intersection 2034 PM Peak Hour LOS Dominion Blvd & Cedar/Moses Grandy Trail D Dominion Blvd & Grassfeld Pkwy D Dominion Blvd & Scenic Pkwy D Dominion Blvd & Pleasant Grove Pkwy D Dominion Blvd & George Washington Hwy D Cedar Rd & Cahoon Pkwy D Moses Grandy Trail & Cedar Rd D
Table 12: Projected level of service
104 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 73: Intersection level of service
Infrastructure Strategy | 105 The volumes generated for the proposed land use scenarios are expected to generate ac- ceptable levels of service at all of the studied intersections . Dominion Boulevard and George Washington Highway is signalized in the build scenario .
Recommendations
Based on the ADT projections and the design hourly volumes for 2035, recommendations were developed for the roadway functional classification and typical section.
Transportation Network Proposed Functional Number of Street Classifcation Lanes Dominion Blvd Principal Arterial 8 Cedar Rd (East of Dominion) Arterial 6 Cedar Rd (South of Moses Grandy) Collector 4 Moses Grandy Trail Local Road 4 Grassfeld Parkway Arterial 4 Shillelagh Rd Local Road 2 Scenic Parkway Arterial 4 West Rd Local Road 2 Pleasant Grove Parkway Arterial 4 Cahoon Parkway Collector 4 George Washington Highway Arterial 4 Interior Area Roads Local Road 2
Table 13: Roadway functional classifications The road sections listed all correspond to the 2050 Transportation Plan except Cedar Road south of Moses Grandy Trail . Based on the expected growth it is recommended that Cedar Road south of Moses Grandy Trail be four (4) lanes instead of two (2). This will allow for better traffic flow through the study area. The graphic illustrates the proposed number of lanes.
The following are anticipated intersection geometries for each studied intersection (Dominion Boulevard is assumed the north/south roadway within these descriptions):
Dominion Blvd . & Cedar/Moses Grandy Trail • No changes recommended .
Dominion Blvd. & Grassfield Parkway • Four through lanes in each direction on Dominion Blvd . • Northbound right turn lane • Dual southbound left turn lanes • Dual left turn lanes and a single right turn lane on Grassfield
Dominion Blvd . & Scenic Parkway • Four through lanes in each direction on Dominion Blvd . • Northbound right turn lane (operates as a free movement) • Southbound right turn lane
106 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Figure 74: Functional classifications
Infrastructure Strategy | 107 • Single northbound left turn lane • Dual southbound left turn lanes • Scenic north of Dominion is dual left turn lanes and two through lanes with a shared right turn lane • Scenic south of dominion is dual left turn lanes, two through lanes and one right turn lane (operates as a free movement)
Dominion Blvd . & Pleasant Grove Parkway • New signalized intersection • Four through lanes in each direction on Dominion Blvd . • Single northbound and southbound left turn lanes • Single northbound right turn lane • Single southbound right turn lane (operates as a free movement) • Two eastbound and westbound through lanes • Single eastbound and westbound left turn lanes • Single eastbound right turn lane • Single westbound right turn lane (operates as a free movement)
Dominion Blvd . & George Washington Highway • Proposed signalized location • Two through lanes in each direction on Dominion Blvd . • Single northbound left turn lane • Single southbound right turn lane • Dual eastbound left turn lanes • Single eastbound right turn lane
Cedar Road & Cahoon Parkway • Remove the split phasing from the signal and provide standard NEMA phasing (8-phase) • Three through lanes in each direction on Cedar Road • Dual left turn lanes in each direction on Cedar Road • Dual eastbound right turn lanes • Dual northbound left turn lanes • Single northbound right turn lane (operates as a free movement) • Single north and southbound through lanes • Single southbound left and right turn lanes .
Moses Grandy Trail & Cedar Road • Two through lanes in each direction on Moses Grandy Trail • Single eastbound left turn lane • Dual westbound left turn lanes
The studied intersections should be evaluated with each stage of construction to ensure the proper amount of turn lane storage and level of service is maintained including retiming of the existing signal corridor . The intersection of Dominion Boulevard and George Washington Highway should be monitored closely for possible signalization .
108 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia The following table details the roadway improvements needed and estimated construction costs associated with the improvements .
Main Throughfare Roadway Existing Proposed Estimated Contingency Total Cost Cross-Section Cross-Section Cost 20% Dominion Blvd 4-Lane 8-Lane $3,960,000 $792,000 Miscellaneous Turn Lanes $529,000 $105,800 Signalization Improvements $1,100,000 $220,000 Shillelagh Rd 2-Lane 4-Lane $7,590,000 $1,518,000 Cedar Rd (East of Dominion) 4-Lane 6-Lane $1,500,000 $300,000 $43,777,530 Cedar Rd (South of Moses Grandy Tr) 2-Lane 4-Lane $2,390,850 $478,170 Scenic Pkwy 2 & 4-Lane 4-Lane $4,231,425 $846,285 George Washington Hwy 2-Lane 4-Lane $7,590,000 $1,518,000 Pleasant Grove Pkwy - 4-Lane $7,590,000 $1,518,000
Table 14: Estimated cost summary table
The above estimated costs are only construction costs based on widening the existing facilities to include a concrete median, curbed roadways, and bike lanes. Right-of-way, engineering and inflation costs are not included in the estimate. The internal connector roads associated with each Area were not evaluated during the analysis. The existing cross-sections listed are based on the 2050 Chesapeake Transportation Plan and the recommendations of this study.
Proposed frontage roads shall be considered with caution. If the roads are in too close proximity to a high traffic volume intersection then queues have the potential to back up into the upstream or downstream intersection. There should be a minimum of 650 feet from any intersection to a frontage road. If a frontage road is less than 650 feet from a near-by intersection then access shall be restricted to right-in/right-out only. The current study’s plan follows a minimum of 650 feet spacing from a high traffic volume intersection.
The proposed locations of future signal locations shall be determined by the land developer by completing a traffic impact study for any development generating greater than 100 primary trips in the peak hour or at the request of the City. Spacing of signals shall be no less than ½ mile unless authorized by the City. The potential locations of traffic signals are Dominion Boulevard and George Washington Highway, Scenic Parkway and Shillelagh Road, Shillelagh Road and Pleasant Grove Parkway, and West Road and Pleasant Grove Parkway.
The future Pleasant Grove Parkway will be a limited-access arterial with a 45 mph design speed and on-street parking is not allowed. Access points along the parkway should be limited and will in most cases require a traffic signal at these intersections.
There are many resources available for fnancial support to help build the infrastructure that is needed. Outside of raising city taxes the city could allow TIF’s (Tax Increment Financing). This is a method to allow developers to use their future gains to pay for infrastructure improvements. There is also the Virginia Economic Development Incentive Grant Program, Revenue Sharing Funds available from VDOT, and Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Funds. All of these funding sources could help to provide fnancial support to the infrastructure upgrades needed to support the anticipated development along the Dominion Boulevard corridor.
Infrastructure Strategy | 109 Utilities Master Plan EXISTING CONDITIONS
Sewer System
Based on City GIS information, the existing gravity sewer through the Dominion Corridor is relatively new, with the majority of the pipe and manholes having been installed in the 1990’s and 2000’s. Sizes range from 8” – 18” and are comprised of several different materials including ductile iron, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and truss pipe. Service is primarily confned to the northern most section of the Corridor and the northwest side of Dominion Boulevard. Gravity sewer extends as far south as Drumcastle Lane and Scenic Parkway. The remainder of the Corridor is served by private septic systems, including the Airport.
LF of pipe = approximately 65,000
# of manholes = 324
The existing gravity sewer system is served by fve (5) pump stations; Pump Station #’s 235, 238, 248, 260, and 261. The capacity of the existing pump stations range from an operating volume of 398 gallons at Pump Station 238 to an operating volume of 2,104 gallons at Pump Station 261.
Existing Pump Station Capacity
Pump Station Number Maximum Flow, Qavg, GPD
235 116,500
238 218,800
248 184,300
260 475,200
261 501,900
Table 15: Existing pump station capacity
The existing force mains serving the pump stations range in size from 6” – 12” and are comprised of ductile iron or PVC pipe. The force mains serving each pump station connect directly to an existing Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD) Interceptor Force Main. HRSD’s existing force main runs through the northern section of the Corridor along Cedar Road. This existing HRSD force main is comprised of 18” and 24” pipe and conveys flows to the Nansemond and Atlantic Treatment Plants.
The majority of the area surrounding the existing pump stations is already developed. The existing pump stations have some capacity to support the large amount of economic expansion planned in this study. Additional pump stations and the infrastructure to convey flows may be required to accommodate future growth.
110 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia HRSD/water connection City of Chesapeake - Dominion Corridor City of Chesapeake - Dominion Corridor Existing Sanitary Sewer Conditions Existing Sanitary Sewer Conditions Existing HRSD line
Existing water line
Proposed HRSD line
MOSES GRANDY Proposed water line
238 CEDAR Study area DOMINION 238 DOMINION 248 CEDAR 260 Figure 75. Regional view of existing and proposed sewer DOMINION system and main connections for the study area City of Chesapeake - Dominion Corridor 235 City of Chesapeake - Dominion Corridor DOMINION Existing Sanitary Sewer Conditions Existing Sanitary Sewer Conditions
DOMINION 248
260 261 MOSES GRANDY
238 CEDAR
DOMINION 238 DOMINION 248 CEDAR 260 235 DOMINION SHILLELAGH
NUMBER TEN 235 DOMINION DOMINION
DOMINION 248
260 261
HERRING DITCH
235
SHILLELAGH SHILLELAGH NUMBER TEN DOMINION
WEST 261 HIGHWAY 17 HIGHWAY
HERRING DITCH
SHILLELAGH
261 WEST
WEST HIGHWAY 17 HIGHWAY
AIRPORT WEST Legend )" City Pump Station Legend Legend Water Lines AIRPORT NUMBER TEN )" City Pump Station Gravity Sewer - City Water Lines )" City Pump Station NUMBER TEN Force Main - City Legend Gravity Sewer - City Force Main - City HRSD Service Area Boundary HRSD Force Main )" City Pump Station HRSD Force Main HRSD Service AreaHRSD Boundary Service Area Boundary Pump Station ServiceHRSD Service Area Area Boundary Boundary Pump Station Service Area Boundary Dominion CorridorPump StudyStation Service Area Area Boundary Pump Station Service Area Boundary Dominion Corridor Study Area Dominion Corridor Study Area Water Dominion Corridor Study Area Water Water Water
Figure 76. The service areas in relation to Dominion Figure 77. Existing sewer and water 00.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 00.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 ³ ³ Miles Boulevard. Miles 00.25 0.5 1 1.5 2 ³ Miles 00.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 ³ Miles Infrastructure Strategy | 111 Water System
The existing water infrastructure through the Dominion Corridor generally follows the same alignment as the sewer system. Based on City GIS (geographic information system) information, the majority of the transmission and distribution lines were installed in the 2000’s and range in size between 4” – 24”. The majority of the lines are comprised of ductile iron and PVC pipe with a few lines being comprised of cast iron pipe. There is approximately 101,000 linear feet of active pipe within the Corridor. Service is primarily confned to the same areas where sewer service is available. There is an existing 8” line that serves a City training facility that runs down George Washington Highway and enters the Corridor along Number Ten Lane. The remainder of the Corridor is served by private well systems, including the Airport.
The major transmission mains currently serving the area within the Corridor are located along Dominion Boulevard and Cedar Road and range in size from 16” – 24”. There is also a 16” and 12” transmission main loop that runs down Grassfeld Parkway from Dominion Boulevard and connects to Cedar Road at the Cahoon Parkway intersection. A 16” transmission main extends south on Scenic Parkway from Dominion Blvd. CORRIDOR PLAN - PROGRAM PROJECTIONS
Sewer System
Based on the market research study performed by RCLCO, Areas 3, 4, 5 and 6 were determined to be able to support economic growth.
Design Workshop provided Woolpert with Program Allocations which included square footage projections for Retail, Office and Industrial space and number of projected units for Residential space. From these allocations, flows for each Area were generated using the guidelines and requirements set forth in the Regional Technical Standards (RTS).
Chesapeake’s existing pump stations were used as a comparison point for projecting approximate pump station size throughout the Corridor. The largest existing pump station within the Corridor is Pump Station 261, with capacity of 500,000 gallons per day (GPD).
For this report, it was assumed that the flows produced by the projected development throughout the Corridor would be handled with new infrastructure and new pump stations. However, existing pump stations have some capacity for increased flow. If pump stations similar in size to existing Pump Station 261 are built, then the flows generated by the Program Allocations may require construction of fve new pump stations in the targeted development areas.
Through several internal discussions and close coordination with HRSD personnel, Chesapeake Utilities and HRSD have agreed upon the installation of a new HRSD Interceptor Force Main through the Dominion Corridor. The conceptual alignment of the Interceptor Force Main will follow a primary right-of-way through the corridor. The future Interceptor Force Main will connect to existing HRSD infrastructure at Cedar Road on the north western side of the Corridor and on Battlefeld Boulevard, east of the Corridor. The connection east of the corridor will be made at either the Hillwell Road or Hillcrest Parkway intersection. The future alignment through the Corridor will depend on the magnitude of development and need for easements or right-of-way acquisition. Alignment options can be seen on fgure 73. In the past, flows have been modeled by HRSD to connect to the existing interceptor system at Hillwell Road. HRSD’s main requirement is that the future interceptor
112 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia follows a designated transportation corridor that is wide enough to ultimately accommodate up to two HRSD pipelines. Additionally, some portions of the HRSD system can be designated simply as transmission lines rather than as interceptors. Transmission lines are pipelines that flow through an area but are not intended to provide service to the area through which they flow.
Force main pipe sizes for the new pump stations within the Dominion Corridor were assumed to be the same size as equivalent existing pump stations. When possible, these force mains will manifold together prior to connecting to the proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main or an existing force main. The exact location and size of future Pump Stations and Force Mains will be determined as development progresses throughout the Dominion Corridor. For the purposes of this report, location, size, and length of all sanitary sewer infrastructure has been approximated based on the projected Program Allocations and preliminary layout of proposed development.
Existing water main
Existing intermediate water transmission main Proposed water main
Economic Development Proposed water transmission Catalyst Area main
Proposed intermediate water transmission main
Economic Development Catalyst Area - proposed water transmission main Study area
Figure 78: Overall existing and proposed water system and main connections for the study area
Infrastructure Strategy | 113 Water System
Based on the market research study performed by RCLCO, Areas 3, 4, 5 and 6 were determined to be able to support economic growth.
Design Workshop provided Woolpert with Program Allocations for Scenario 3, which included square footage projections for Retail, Office and Industrial space and number of projected units for Residential space. Fire Flow requirements were referenced from the Chesapeake Public Facilities Manual. Domestic (non-fre) flows were estimated using American Water Works Association (AWWA) criteria.
The proposed development in the four study areas is expected to add approximately 1,300 gpm of average daily water consumption, with a peak demand of approximately 3,622 gpm. The hydrants located near each of the development areas were assessed individually. Existingf re hydrant capacity information was provided by the City and was assumed to be fully available, meaning all available flow could be allocated to the development identifed in the market research study.
In order to effectively provide water service to the proposed development within the Dominion Corridor, a new water transmission main is recommended. This transmission main will follow the same alignment through the Corridor as the proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main. Connection to existing water infrastructure will be made at either the Hillwell Road or Hillcrest Parkway intersections along Battlefeld Boulevard. A model analysis of this proposed transmission main is required to evaluate the impacts of this main and the proposed water infrastructure on system pressure, reliability, and flow. The model will also need to be used to evaluate water age to avoid extended travel times that degrade water quality.
The exact location and size of future water infrastructure will be determined as development progresses throughout the Dominion Corridor. For the purposes of this report, location, size, and length of all water infrastructure has been approximated based on the projected Program Allocations and preliminary layout of proposed development.
Opportunity Site - Area 10
In addition to the Program Allocations projected for Areas 3-6, Area 10 was identifed as an “opportunity site” and able to support industrial development due to its proximity to the airport. This site’s potential for development independent of the rest of the corridor required a separate analysis.
Sewer
Since Area 10 is separate from the bulk of the Program Allocations in Areas 3-6, a separate pump station will be required to convey sewer flows to the proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main. Based on the Program Allocations generated by Design Workshop for Area 10, an average daily flow of 408,000 gallons is estimated though 600,000 gallons per day may be generated by full build-out. This amount of flow would require a pump station similar in size to the City’s existing pump station number 261.
Water
In order to provide water service to Area 10, a water main would need to be installed from the proposed water transmission main and down West Road to Area 10. Design Workshop’s Program Allocations for this area indicated that the area would only include light industrial development. Due to the low domestic water consumption volumes
114 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia typically associated with light industrial space, Area 10 is expected to require approximately 440 gpm of average daily water consumption, with a peak demand of approximately 2,457 gpm. However, if a business with high water demand locates in this area (such as a hotel or brewery), demand would be much higher. Besides domestic demand, adequatef re flow for light industrial uses will influence the water system requirements.
The volume of water required will ultimately be determined based upon proposed building size and use. The wide variations inf re flow needs for this land usage category preclude even preliminary sizing of water lines for fre flows. For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that water for daily consumption will be provided from a distribution main. It is possible on-site storage tanks or a City owned elevated storage tank may be desirable to provide consistent system pressure and adequate fre protection, although tanks sometimes present water quality challenges. As more information on potential uses for the site becomes available, this approach may be revised.
Existing HRSD force main
Proposed HRSD force main
Proposed City pump station
Proposed City force main
Proposed gravity sewer
Economic Development Catalyst Area Proposed City pump station
Economic Development Catalyst Area- Proposed city forced main
Study Area
Figure 79: Overall existing and proposed sewer system, pump stations, and main connections for the study area
Infrastructure Strategy | 115 IMPLEMENTATION OF UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
Overall Corridor Concept
Installation of the proposed utility infrastructure within the Dominion Corridor will generally progress as development progresses. However, installation of key infrastructure components will be required in the early stages of Corridor development. The proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main and water transmission main will serve as the backbone for the future development outlined in the Program Allocations. These lines should be installed during construction of the new proposed roadways. It is recommended that sufficient space be allotted within the right-of-way for the built-out water and sewer infrastructure capacity needs. Model analysis of the proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main and water transmission main may dictate that a smaller pipe be installed initially while development progresses.
Funding Strategies
In years past, the traditional strategy for implementation of utility infrastructure in support of economic growth and development throughout the City results in the burden of the cost and installation of the infrastructure being that of the developer. This infrastructure is typically installed as development expands and sizing is coordinated with the City. Sewer and water infrastructure within the right-of-way would then be publicly owned and maintained.
In support of future development throughout the Dominion Corridor, the City will install the major transmission water main and HRSD will install their proposed Interceptor Force Main. These lines will serve as the backbone for future development growth. Implementation of the remaining utility infrastructure can be funded in a number of ways. The traditional method of the developer installing all required utility infrastructure is still the current policy. However, in order to generate interest amongst private investors, a new strategy for the Corridor may need to be adopted. This will be an ever-changing strategy that will adapt to bring investors to the Corridor. Strategies would include identifying cost sharing opportunities between the City and the developer. One area of cost sharing could be accomplished on the intermediate infrastructure located between developments and the major transmission/interceptor lines. Another area of cost sharing could be on the upsizing of pipe. Here, the City would size the new infrastructure to not only meet the demands of the proposed development, but also future growth that would be supported by this infrastructure. In these scenarios, the full burden of cost would not fall solely on the Developers in hopes that this will generate interest throughout the Corridor. Another option would involve the City installing infrastructure in advance of development. Funds could then be recouped through Pro Rata payments from the developers. This option may prove most appealing in the developers eyes due to the fact that their up front utility costs may be signifcantly minimized to just their site and connection fees.
Traditionally, it has been uncommon for the City to install utility infrastructure at its own expense in support of development activities. Implementing these new strategies will require acceptance from City Council as well as a philosophical change in the way development has been handled in the past. Strategies will need to be flexible to adapt to the economic landscape and demand as development progresses through the years.
PROJECTED UTILITY SYSTEM COSTS
116 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Sewer
In order to estimate what new sewer infrastructure would be required to serve Areas 3-6, location and size of existing sewer infrastructure was reviewed. The majority of the area surrounding the existing pump stations is partially developed. The existing pump stations have a signifcant amount of capacity to support the large amount of economic expansion planned in this study. Area 4 is already served with sewer by pump stations 235 & 248. Areas 3 and 5 are partly served with existing pump stations 260 and 261. Additional pump stations and the infrastructure to convey flows will be required to accommodate future growth.
For estimating pipe lengths, diameters and number of connections within the residential acreage, an existing adjacent subdivision was analyzed. Pipe length and size data was collected from the City-provided GIS database and was equated to the acreage of the existing subdivision. Pipe lengths outside of residential allotments and surrounding non- residential areas were estimated based on the proposed roadway layout shown on the Master Land Use Plan. The length of pipe within Retail, Office and Industrial areas was not estimated due to the site- and process-specifc needs of individual properties. At this stage of Corridor planning, exact pipe sizes along individual streets and parcels cannot be determined. An average cost per linear foot of pipe was assumed.
Costs for sanitary pipe were taken from recent project bid tabulations and were approximated to include lateral connections, manholes, and typical construction activities. Pipe 10” and smaller is assumed to be PVC. Pipe 12” and larger is assumed to be ductile iron. Approximate costs for pump stations were taken from recent project bid tabulations within the Hampton Roads area.
Water
In order to estimate what new water infrastructure would be required to serve Areas 3-6, location and size of existing water infrastructure was reviewed. The majority of Area 4 has already been developed and the existing water transmission lines already exist. Area 5 has an existing 16” ductile iron transmission main that extends down Scenic Parkway to Drumcastle Lane. This transmission main can be extended to the proposed transmission main that extends through the Corridor. The majority of Areas 3 and 6 do not have existing water infrastructure and will require new transmission mains.
For cost estimating purposes, pipe sizes for the transmission mains within the various Areas were estimated based on conveying thef re flow at the maximum allowable velocity outlined in the Chesapeake Public Facilities Manual (PFM). Pipe lengths for transmission mains were estimated based on approximate connection points to the existing water infrastructure and proposed transmission main. Pipe lengths for distribution mains were estimated based on the proposed roadway layout shown on the Master Land Use Plan. At this stage of Corridor planning, exact pipe sizes along individual streets and parcels cannot be determined. An average cost per linear foot of pipe was assumed.
For estimating pipe lengths, diameters and number of connections within the residential area allotment, an existing adjacent subdivision was analyzed. Pipe length and size data was collected from the City-provided GIS database and was equated to the acreage of the existing subdivision. The length of pipe within Retail, Office and Industrial areas was not estimated due to the site- and process-specifc needs of individual properties.
Infrastructure Strategy | 117 Costs for water main pipe were taken from recent project bid tabulations and were approximated to include connections and other typical construction activities. Pipe 10” and smaller is assumed to be PVC. Pipe 12” and larger is assumed to be ductile iron.
COST TABLES
The following tables show the estimated utility infrastructure costs for the proposed Program Allocations. Costs were divided to show the magnitude of funding required by the City of Chesapeake, HRSD, and Developers. As was noted above, pipe sizes and locations for serving non-residential areas are highly dependent on the site- and process-specifc needs of individual properties. Therefore, many non-residential costs are approximated based on the footage of the roadway networks in the areas. Sewer pump stations and force mains and the intermediate water transmission main distances are estimated based on the proposed Master Land Use Plan and the size of the development areas. Funding sources for the developer-constructed public infrastructure will be identifed and agreed upon as development progresses. All costs assume complete build out of the Corridor, per the Program Allocations. All lengths and sizes of proposed utility infrastructure are approximate. All costs are estimated in 2014 dollars.
City of Chesapeake Costs
Water
Proposed Water Transmission Main
Approx. LF of Pipe Approx. Pipe Size Estimated Unit Cost Approx. Total Cost
49,000/65,000 24” $350 $17M/$23M
NOTE: Costs for HRSD Costs the future HRSD Interceptor and water Sewer transmission main are shown as the shortest Proposed HRSD Interceptor Force Main and longest routing options. Depending on Approx. LF of Pipe Approx. Pipe Size Estimated Unit Cost Approx. Total Cost the alignment chosen, costs are expected to be within this range. These 52,000/68,000 24” $350 $18M/$24M approximate costs do not include easement or right-of-way acquisition.
118 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Developer Costs
Sewer
APPROXIMATE RESIDENTIAL SEWER SERVICE COSTS
Area 3 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 264 $18,500 $ 4,884,000
Area 4 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 52 $18,500 $962,000
Area 5 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 104 $18,500 $1,924,000
Area 6 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 144 $18,500 $2,664,000
Total Cost $10,434,000
Infrastructure Strategy | 119 APPROXIMATE NON RESIDENTIAL SEWER SERVICE COSTS
Area 3 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 60,000 $235 $14,100,000
Area 4 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 0 $235 $0
Area 5 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 0 $235 $0
Area 6 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 40,000 $235 $9,400,000
Total Cost $23,500,000
120 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia APPROXIMATE SEWER PUMP STATION/FORCE MAIN COSTS
Area 3 No. of Stations / LF of Pipe Unit Cost Approx. Cost - PS & FM
Pump Stations 2 $900,000 $1,800,000
Force Main 7,500 $175 $1,312,500
Area 4 No. of Stations / LF of Pipe Unit Cost Approx. Cost - Residential
Pump Stations 0 $750,000 $0
Force Main 0 $175 $0
Area 5 No. of Stations / LF of Pipe Unit Cost Approx. Cost - Residential
Pump Stations 1 $900,000 $900,000
Force Main 2,500 $175 $437,500
Area 6 No. of Stations / LF of Pipe Unit Cost Approx. Cost - Residential
Pump Stations 1 $900,000 $900,000
Force Main 5,000 $175 $875,000
Total Cost $6,225,500
APPROXIMATE TOTAL DEVELOPER COSTS FOR SEWER NOTE: All approximate Developer costs were generated from available Residential Non Residential Pump Station/Force Main information. It is assumed that these $10,434,000 $23,500,000 $6,225,500 costs are not all inclusive and are on the low end of the total amount of infrastructure that will be required to serve Total Cost $42,159,500 the proposed Program Allocations. These approximate costs should be updated as more information and detail is made available.
Infrastructure Strategy | 121 APPROXIMATE RESIDENTIAL WATER SERVICE COSTS
Area 3 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 264 $13,750 $3,630,000
Area 4 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 52 $13,750 $715,000
Area 5 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 104 $13,750 $1,430,000
Area 6 Acres Unit Cost / Res Acre Approx. Cost - Residential
Residential 144 $13,750 $1,980,000
Total Cost $7,755,000
122 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia APPROXIMATE NON RESIDENTIAL WATER SERVICE COSTS
Area 3 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 60,000 $150 $9,000,000
Intermediate 10,500 $175 $1,837,500 Transmission Mains
Area 4 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 0 $150 $0
Intermediate 0 $175 $0 Transmission Mains
Area 5 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 0 $150 $0
Intermediate 5,000 $175 $875,500 Transmission Mains
Area 6 Approx. LF Cost / LF Approx. Cost - Non Residential
Major Roadways 40,000 $150 $6,000,000
Intermediate 0 $175 $0 Transmission Mains
Total Cost $17,712,500
APPROXIMATE TOTAL DEVELOPER COSTS FOR WATER
Residential Non Residential
$7,755,000 $17,712,500
Total Cost $25,467,500
Infrastructure Strategy | 123 Opportunity Site - Area 10
All costs for Area 10 are based on the following assumptions:
1. Services will connect to the proposed water and sewer infrastructure on the proposed Pleasant Grove Parkway.
2. Only water and sewer costs shown are for projected Program Allocations, not full build-out of Area.
3. If development requires hire flows than typical light industrial, an elevated water storage tank and larger water main will likely be required.
4. All costs will ultimately be the responsibility of the developer(s)
APPROXIMATE UTILITY COSTS TO SERVE AREA 10
Sewer Water (Light Industrial) Elevated Water Storage Tank
$3,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000
124 | Infrastructure Strategy DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Telecommunications Infrastructure Strategy
Cities such as Portland, Los Angeles and others have committed to city wide broadband strategies to advance connectivity going forward . Part of the impetus for this is the 2010 National Broadband Plan established in 2010 that “sets out a roadmap for initiatives to stimulate economic growth, spur job creation and boost America’s capabilities in education, health care, homeland security and more . The plan includes sections focusing on economic opportunity, education, health care, energy and the environment, government performance, civic engagement and public safety” .
Establishing a broadband infrastructure strategy will enhance the competitive advantage of Chesapeake to attract new businesses . Like with the quality of place and its amenities, busi- nesses are making decisions to locate based on the quality and capacity of its broadband infrastructure . Once implemented it will help accelerate job creation, promote innovation and entrepreneurship, expand the image and attractiveness of the city, support improved heath- care and public safety and enhance social inclusion and equity . The Portland Plan and the Los Angeles Plan offers several strategies that should be consid- ered for the master plan:
• Prioritize “big pipe capacity through clustering very large capacity users and providing incentives to serve these areas . • Attract R&D partners to the project and partner with R&D partners that already exist in the region . • Establish Neighborhood hubs and high capacity access points within neighborhood centers . • Ensure that every home and every business can be served by advanced communica- tions networks . • Create an open network, so that no one is prevented or blocked from taking full advan- tage of the internet’s capabilities . • Integrate broadband infrastructure into the design of street infrastructure and community planning and design .
Utility placement (water, sewer, fber optic) under pavement to minimize Figure 80: Proposed utility placement conflict with streetscape elements
Infrastructure Strategy | 125 This master plan and subsequent planning and design efforts benefit from engagement with the citizens of Chesapeake. 7 Appendices
Community Input:
83%
83% of the respondents live in the Study Area .
Source: Survey 1 and 2 results, April 2014 and July 2014
Appendices | 127 Public Charette 1 April 3, 2014
What the Community said:
My interest in the project area is
87% homeowner
What is the biggest threat to Chesapeake’s future? (Choose 3)
Loss of agriculture and rural quality
Loss of open space and environmental quality Housing choices and affordability
Loss of tax revenue to other cities
Lack of jobs and major employment centers Loss of heritage and culture
National economic issues
Global economic issues I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250
128 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia What would have the most positive impact on Chesapeake’s future? (Choose 3)
A major employment center New housing communities
Agriculture preservation
Environmental protection Providing a tourist economy
Providing green oriented focus
A new town center for Chesapeake
Protection of water quality I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250
Assuming growth in the region is inevitable, the study area
Is a logical place to accommodate growth
Should only accommodate a reasonable portion of that growth
Limit growth to preserve agriculture and open space
Should accommodate as much growth as it can
I do not know, I would like to learn more
0 50 100 150 200 250
Appendices | 129 The planning process should most promote: (Choose 3)
Economic development
Strengthening community
Environmental responsibility
History and heritage
Lack of jobs and major employment centers
None of the above
All of the above
I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
The most important strategy when planning the study area is to: (Choose 3)
Maintain agricultural an rural qualities Create dynamic “mixed use” communities
Create more suburban style housing projects
Create parks and recreation space Leverage airport and Route 17 into jobs creating uses
Connect the study area to rapid transit
Create golf course and recreation based communities
Organize the plan around wetlands and canals I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 30 60 90 120 150
130 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia The livability features most important to provide are: (Choose 3)
Jobs/housing balance Park space per capita
Walkability
Accessibility to public transportation Places of worship per capita
Ratio of open space to developed area
Community and neighborhood connectivity
Community gardens and community supported agriculture I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250
The most important things we need to improve upon as a City are: (Choose 3)
Variety and affordability in housing choices Environmental responsibility Urban, community and neighborhood form and design Multimodal accessibility (transity, cars, bikes, walking) Ratios of development to open space Ratios of jobs to housing units Ratios of parks and recreation per capita Higher percentage of community and institutional uses Access to local and regional goods and services I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200
Appendices | 131 The most important features of the study area that can be used to inform the plan are: (Choose 3)
The Great Dismal Swamp The agricultural landscape
The new housing community and school
The airport
The site’s wetlands and canals
The equestrian facility
Dominion Boulevard
The new bridge I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250
If I was to plan the best outcome long term, I would:
A. Create a land use master plan
B. Allow the land to develop as it will based on market
C. Create a master plan and specific codes and standards
Somewhere between A and B
Somewhere between B and C
I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
132 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia If I was to plan a perfect neighborhood:
68% would integrate the land uses to include houses, gathering places and commercial within walking distance of each other
If I was to plan a perfect development:
79% would plan it so that the environmentally sensitive areas are protected and development is organized onto the remaining land
Appendices | 133 If I was to plan a perfect development:
77% would link stormwater management and recreation into a big system that connects the neighborhood together with a green infrastructure
How many acres of parks per captia should the plan provide?
15 acres per 1000 people (NRPA standard)
More than 15 acres per 1000 people
Less than 15 acres per 1000 people
The City doesn’t need to provide parks
We don’t need any more parks
I do not know, I would like to learn more 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
134 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Importance of walking and biking trails
62% think walking and biking trails are very important
Appendices | 135 Public Charette 2 July 1, 2014
What the community said:
My interest in the project area is
83% homeowner
The event that should trigger the development of an area is:
A. Once the previous Area has been fully developed
B. uses maintain jobs to housing balance
C. Whenever the market is ready for new development
All of the above
A and B only
A and C only
B and C only 0 10 20 30 40 50
136 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia The first Areas that should be developed are: (Choose 2)
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
The next phase of development should occur on: (Choose 2)
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Appendices | 137 The Areas that should be planned and developed last are: (Choose 2)
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
The Areas that should not be planned for at this time and left alone are: (Choose 2)
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
138 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia The first Areas that promote a gateway experience for Chesa- peake are: (Choose 2)
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 The best place to locate an employment center is:
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 20 40 60 80 100
Appendices | 139 The Major Employment Center should include:
Light industrial uses
Office and retail uses
Office, retail and residential uses
Office, retail, residential, and community uses
Office, light industrial and industrial
Office, light industrial, industrial, and retail uses
Office, light industrial, industrial, retail and residential uses
Office, light industrial, industrial, retail, residential and community uses 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
The Area to promote as a walkable mixed use town center is:
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
140 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia The best area to promote suburban style development is:
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
The best area to promote rural development is:
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Appendices | 141 The best area to preserve agriculture is:
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
The scenario that I most agree with is:
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
142 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Public Open House November 13, 2014
What the community said:
Streets/Transit Station 1 . Like the “readability of the text” 2 . Lacks street names 3 . Farm land, Army Corps gave okay to clear 4 . Market study used to justify designate density levels & conservation areas 5 . Need for east to west connectors 6 . Need to relieve traffic on Shillelagh Road 7 . Get roof tops to support the incoming businesses 8 . *Color a progression 9 . Intersection important, blending existing land uses 10 . Need a tourist draw 11 . Extend line down Shillelagh Road 12 . Like sidewalks and trails 13 . Don’t make traffic worse on George Washington Highway 14 . Light rail farfetched, but Bus Rapid Transit could work- need rooftops first
Land Use Plan Station 1 . High density/ medium density residential won’t work in this area 2 . Too much residential, not enough non-residential land uses . Mixed use will end up being just residential 3 . Include some areas here in the suburban overlay 4 . Keep densities north of Pleasant Grove Pkwy 5 . Quality of Life- Recreation center, community pool needed, and evening activities 6 . Walkability- Not like Greenbrier 7 . Area for Farmers Market 8 . Traffic from 64 to 464- access to Dominion area 9 . Vacancy rates for both residential & commercial- Don’t overbuild (area by Walmart not full) 10 . Public open spaces are good/keep green space 11 . Concerned with traffic 12 . Commuter tolls for frequent users/ toll- discount? (avoidance) 13 . Need to be mindful of people’s property rights for future roadways coming through on plan . 14 . Area 1,2,4 should be higher priority 15 . Would like to get City water & sewer 16 . Likes live/work/play concept- especially near medical center 17 . Property- Back of Las Gaviotas/Cahoon golf course is not forested (NWI)= farmland (Spruill/29.2 acres – 4 parcels) 18 . Check proposed alignment of roads 19 . “Grassfield” name needs to be memorialized 20 . Need mix of businesses, high tech but also mom & pop retail, boutiques 21 . Need a hardware store, not big box 22 . Don’t do same old same old strip centers and big box 23 . For office /warehouse uses with outside storage, try and hide it in middle of office/office research areas
Appendices | 143 Open Space/ Storm Water Station 1 . Balance traffic flow 2 . From Norfolk 3 . Hubs for public transit 4 . Consider road from Raleigh through Chesapeake 5 . Sidewalks/Community Center 6 . Pools 7 . Gathering Spaces 8 . Want more wide open space-moved here for wide open space 9 . Airport expansion opportunity & direct access to airport 10 . Parks near Great Dismal Swamp 11 . Golf course frontage- is park the best land use? 12 . Check temporary road/wetland permit 13 . How to get over water-what are non-toll options? 14 . Take care of existing residents & upgrade utilities (ie. sewer) before more development 15 . Safe pedestrian crossing for high school 16 . Lack of crossing here for high school kids 17 . More green space- leave the farms 18 . Boardwalk along Great Dismal Swamp like Suffolk- learn about natural systems Public Open House November 20, 2014
What the community said:
Streets/Transit Station 1 . “A joke” until Pleasant Grove is purchased and started 2 . What will happen to property (road frontage) past airport on West Road 3 . Map of the final interchange when everything is done, what will it look like? 4 . What happened to the concerns about the impact on infrastructure, schools, etc . 5 . Update public GPS map software 6 . Make City website lay person accessible 7 . Extend proposed bike paths to Dominion Common area 8 . Where is the map showing how to get on and off the Veterans Bridge? 9 . Look at land use for Teeuwen Nursery 10 . Where will the utilities go? 11 . Distinguish between proposed street networks
Land Use Station 1 . Have infrastructure in place to handle development and infrastructure 2 . Agriculture conservation colors on maps are hard to see 3 . Concerns about toll on Dominion Blvd at bridge (hurts residential living there- should have been put closer to NC line) 4 . Change area 1 & 2 name from Opportunity Area- Be more specific (less suspicious) 5 . Recreational center as anchor- build first so community can grow around it 6 . Symbolize existing government/schools on map 7 . Natural wetlands in Area 1 & 2
144 | Appendices DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia 8 . 100 year storm for drainage instead of 10 year 9 . Dominion Blvd Economic Dev. Node- Utilize for recreation uses (ie. parks/golf courses and have some retail located near existing developed areas) 10 . Pleasant Grove Economic Development Node- Utilize for recreational uses (ie. Dismal Swamp/Canal, trails)
Open Space/ Stormwater Station 1 . Likes the Pleasant Grove Pkwy alignment, especially near West Road 2 . Ample green space- good 3 . Doesn’t like the conservation designation on his property (Teeuwen Greenhouses) 4 . Impervious surfaces create a problem for drainage . Need to provide for pervious surfaces, porous 5 . The plans are looking good . It’s good to have a plan up front so that growth doesn’t happen willy-nilly when Veterans Bridge opens 6 . Consider closing Shillelagh Road ditch (culvert) in urban area at Dominion Blvd 7 . Bike paths along recreational ditches are good 8 . Try and preserve open space for a middle school near Grassfield High School 9 . Need to replace Deep Creek lock bridge 10 . Need to consider who would maintain and protect ditch features 11 . Need facilities and amenities to keep people here . Not strip centers and cookie cutter subdivisions 12 . Concerned about impact of storm drainage on Bells Mill Rd . area 13 . Bike paths are needed along roads in the area . Not good now 14 . Forested area at end of Vincek Way is gone now 15 . Maybe consider collecting water and using it to serve water needs of residents & businesses 16 . Cahoon Pkwy alignment is a little off 17 . More connectivity for Herring Ditch Road not good 18 . Newer stormwater management systems are good (examples)
Appendices | 145 Dom in ion Bou levar d Corr idor Market Study
Prepared for City of Chesapeake | Chesapeake, Virginia | April 11, 2014
Robert Charles Lesser & Co. Real Estate Advisors | rclco.com
146 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Contents Background and Objectives
• The City of Chesapeake is a thriving economic hub supported by Key Findings 3 excellent infrastructure and location and driven by substantial growth of the sustainable energy and startup sectors. The Employment Cores Analysis 13 Dominion Boulevard Corridor Study planning effort will build upon the foundation established in the Forward Chesapeake 2026 Economics and Demographics 24 Comprehensive Plan and complement the current work on the Moving Forward Chesapeake 2035 Comprehensive Plan to develop a strategy for development of the corridor. This report Office and Industrial Market 31 contains the Demographic Analysis and Market and Economic Research and Analysis. RetailMarket 38 • RCLCO researched and analyzed relevant demographic and For-Sale Residential 43 economic data for the study area, city, and region. Our goal was to understand the City’s past and present population and household For-Rent Residential 53 characteristics and understand trends or projections that could be concluded for incorporation into the development of the Dominion Critical Assumptions 59 Boulevard Corridor Study and Economic Development Strategic Plan. We considered both short- and long-term projections and opportunities. Appendix 61 • Our approach to this assignment included: An assessment of the area’s potential to become a major emppyloyment center and a market analysis of the residential, retail commercial, and office/industrial markets in order to recommend market-driven impacts to the land plan and create a land-use allocation strategy and development phasing schedule.
2 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 147 Key Findings
3 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
148 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Keyyg Findings – Economy and Demo gpgraphics
• The Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA (VA Beach sectors to the area including: Industrial Technologies, MSA) is poised to see moderate growth in the next 20 years. Communication Technologies, Military Support Industries, as well Many of the industries upon which the region has grown (military, as others. contractors, transportation, and government) are projected to have moderate to weak future growth. • Household growth in the region is tied to both primary home development related to jobs and to retirement home growth which • However, there are strong sectors of future economic growth that is less dependent upon job growth. The region is very attractive should positively impact the region including Professional and for both groups of households given the relatively low cost of Business Services, Health Services, and Construction. In living, good schools, nice climate, amenity base, and location addition, the City of Chesapeake is working to bring additional close to the ocean.
Annual Employment Growth Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2040
20,000 PROJECTED 15, 000 10,000 5,000 0 -5, 000 -10,000 -15,000 -20,000 -25, 000
Office Employment Growth Total Employment Growth Excluding Military Military Employment Growth
NOTE: This Data does not include military or government empyployment Source: Moody’s Economy.com
4 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 149 Keyyg Findings – Market
• While completing a long-term forecast for an area over a 20+ year o Office: The office market is still in recovery, but 2014 is horizon, the current state of the market is not as critical as with a expected to be better than 2013, suggesting the office market development project that is slated to start and be finished within a will soon be in recovery as well. Vacancy rates as of 2014Q1 five-year timeframe. However, understanding the current market were 11.5%, and average rents at $16.44/fs, below the peak of provides us with the opportunity to understand where the study $18.41/fs. Office growth is tied to employment growth, and area fits into the region, as well as provide an understanding of 2013 was challenged by sequestration which impacted defense short-term opportunities. and government contracting companies in the region. Long- term, the growth in Professional and Business Services o For-sale residential: The for-sale residential market is slowly and Health Services as well as other office-oriented recovering from the Great Recession. Home prices are up and employment will help bolster the office market. invinventoryentory iiss dodownwn.. ThThee HHamptonamptonRRoadsoads rregionegion ststillill hhasas a llargearge number of foreclosures to work through the system. However, o Industrial: The Hampton Roads region is unique in that it all indicators point to a continued recovery, and long-term has almost double the amount of industrial space (96M SF) health in the for-sale market. For-sale housing also than office space (48M SF). The industrial market is represents a strong short-term opportunity in the study performing relatively well with only 8% vacancy rates and rental area. rates close to $5/nnn SF. The challenge for future industrial is that the types of jobs that lead to industrial development o For-rent residential: The for-rent residential market is currently (Manufacturing, Trade) are expected to decrease. very strong. Vacancies are low and rents are increasing. There Manufacturing is expected to increase after the large losses has been a lot of new development recently in the rental market from 2001-2010, but Trade, Transportation, and Utilities is in the region, so the opportunity for additional short-term rental expected to decrease for the foreseeable future. Opportunities many not be as strong as it was a few years ago. However, in industrial is tied to the obsolescence of old buildings, long-term, the apartment market should remain strong. and finding niche opportunities. The rental market includes both multifamily rentals as well as single-family rentals.
o Retail: The market appears to have stabilized. Vacancy rates continue to drop and as of 2014Q1 were at 6.5%, and rents have remained stable at approximately $13/nnn average rate. There was limited construction during the downturn, which, in turn, has allowed the market to recover relatively quickly. Retail growth is tied to household growth, so as the region continues to gain households, retail will grow as well.
5 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
150 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Site Analysis
• The Hampton Road’s region provides long-term favorable growth Study Area Relative to the MSA and the City of Chesapeake fundamentals, and the subject area is in a strong location to receive a fair amount of that growth.
• The study area is approximately 10,000 acres in the City of Chesapeake. It is located southwest of the Steel Bridge, and is along the Dominion Boulevard corridor. It is east of The Great Dismal Swamp.
• The City of Chesapeake is a well-regarded place to live and do busbusinessiness.I. Itt iiss hhomeome to ttwowo ooff tthehe rregionegion’ s eemploymentmployment cocoresres (Greenbrier and Cavalier), and has some of the region’s newest and nicest housing stock.
• The Dominion study area should see additional development as the new bridge over the Elizabeth River is constructed, eliminating the Steel Bridge. The new bridge will have a toll. Since many bridges in the region are tolled, and some projected to be at a higher rate, the toll should have limited impact on the desirability of the area for new construction.
• In addition, Dominion Boulevard is being widened to a four lane divided higgyhway all the way into North Carolina. There is speculation that at some point it will be turned into an interstate highway. All of these items are promising for the future development of the area.
• The study area itself has some development at the northern end, primarily residential and retail. Throughout the study area there are large lot single-family homes. Tidewater Community College has a new facility as well as the new Grassfield High School. To the southern end of the study area is the Chesapeake Regional Airport.
Source:Google; RCLCO
6 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 151 Dominion Residential Key Stren gths , Challen ges , and Opp ortunities
RESIDENTIAL Strengths • Close to Great Dismal Swamp and associated recreational opportunities • Chesapeake is a well-regarded place to buy a home—the schools are good, leading to strong housing demand • New Grassfield High School would be attractive for new residents • Culpepper Landing, an actively selling master-planned community with the strongest sales in the region, is already selling close to the study area Challenges • High-end housing in the region is water-oriented. Will need to figure out how to amenitize the residential projects in the study area to compete for executive housing • Without associated employment development, would be difficult to build multifamily residential Opportunities • Create multiple master-planned communities/neighborhoods, appealing to a wide range of buyers and renters • The for-sale residential market is starting recovery, and this area, if zoned for residential, would be a strong location for development
7 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
152 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Dominion Commercial Key Stren gths , Challen ges , and Opp ortunities
RETAIL INDUSTRIAL Strengths Strengths • Will be a good location for future households, and therefore, future • Closetoairport retail to support it • Development is already starting to move in this direction CCghallenges CCghallenges • For the near- and mid-term, the regional and community shopping • Industrial-related employment is projected to decrease in the region needs of residents will be met at Greenbrier area, limiting need for • The study area is not as well-positioned as other areas for some certain types of retail types of industrial development—it is not on the water, does not Opportunities lead to other major cities (e.g. along I-95) and does not have rail • Create new retail centers in "town center" configurations that could access help create a sense of community and a focal point for Opportunities development • There are not a lot of large parcels of industrial land available in the • The retail market is relatively strong and stable—could be a good market—have enough land to be able to accommodate larger users use that will be in demand in the short-term as housing is created • Industrial development in this area could serve the general industrial needs of the region OFFICE • All of the industrial buildings would be new and meet the latest Strengths standards in industrial building height clearance, etc. • Widening of Dominion Boulevard and opening of new bridge will • Tidewater Community College has a new facility in the area—may make the study area more desirable for future office be possible to work with them for training opportunities for future • The City of Chesapeake's interest in creating an employment businesses center in the study area will help it succeed • Development is already starting to move in this direction Challenges • The office market is still struggling—will not be a “leader” land use in the study area without significant catalyst • Somewhat far off of interstate access—a key to creating employment cores—will need to work on the image for access Opportunities • As Greenbrier builds out, the opportunity to be the "next" Greenbrier—although it can be with today's design standards and guidelines • Once bridge is completed and road widened, will create a new area for development • In the mid- to long-term, the health care industry should help bolster the office market
8 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 153 Demand Analysis
• RCLCO completed a statistical demand analysis for each of the Summary of Demand, Both Scenarios, 2014-2035 land uses including for-sale residential, for-rent residential, retail, office, and industrial. They are provided in Exhibits VI-6 to VI-10. Summary of Demand 2014-2024 2025-2035
• For each of the land uses, we completed a “Limited Employment Limited Employment Center Scenario Center Scenario” which was based upon current capture of each For-Sale Residential 1,918 1,535 land uses near or in the study area. We further completed a For-Rent Residential 233 174 “Regional Employment Center Scenario” that captured land use Total Residential 2,151 1,709 based upon how the area would perform it is behaved as a Retail SF 200,279 159,071 regionally-significant employment center. Office SF 43,621 22,054 Industrial SF 57,430 14,137 • The residential demand models are based upon household growth Total SF Commercial 301,329 195,262 in the region, the percent of new households likely to be either renters or owners, and the interest in those renters or owners in locating within the City of Chesapeake, and then within the study area. Summary of Demand 2014-2024 2025-2035 EmploymentCenter Scenario • The retail demand model is based upon the two scenarios of For-Sale Residential 2,278 1,871 household growth within the study area. Each household in the For-Rent Residential 448 579 overall region supports approximately 85 square feet of retail. We Total Residential 2,726 2,450 multiplied the new households by the estimated square feet of retail Retail SF 240,319 214,722 they support to understand the long-term opportunity for retail in the Office SF 233,693 482,966 study area. Industrial SF 114, 859 28, 273 Total SF Commercial 588,871 725,961 • The office and industrial demands are based upon projected employment growth in the region, the conversion of those employees into square feet of office/industrial, and the capture of the square feet in the study area under both scenarios.
9 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
154 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Overall Land Use Programs – Limited Emppyloyment Center Scenario
Based upon our analysis of the market, the potential to create an In this scenario, the commercial land uses would be spread throughout employment core at Dominion, our understanding of how regions grow, the area, and not concentrated in a core. The office would be locally we put together two land use programs for Dominion. The first one is serving. based upon the creation of a limited employment center in the study area. The area would support a limited amount of office and industrial These projections are estimates, and will vary based upon the amount development, but would not be regionally significant. Under both of the of developable acreage, land owners interest in development, as well scenarios, the opportunity for for-sale housing is strong. In this as the availability of infrastructure. Compared to the Employment scenario, housing is slightly less dense. In addition, without the Center Scenario, it gives a different scale of development. development of a major employment core, the opportunity for apartments is somewhat limited.
Limited Employment Center Scenario Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Total % of Est. Est. % of Est. Est. 2014-2024 2025-2035 (to 2035) Total Density Acres Build-Out Total Density Acres Limited Employment Center Scenario For-Sale Residential 1,918 1,535 3,453 89% 4 863 8,600 92% 4 2,150 For-Rent Residential 233 174 407 11% 20 20 750 8% 20 38 Total Residential 2,151 1,709 3,860 100% 884 9,350 100% 2,188 Retail SF 200,279 159,071 359,350 72% 0.25 33.0 791,351 64% 0.25 72.7 Office SF 43,621 22,054 65,675 13% 0.35 4.3 250,000 20% 0.35 16.4 Industrial SF 57,430 14,137 71,566 14% 0.20 8.2 200,000 16% 0.20 23.0 Total SF Commercial 301,329 195,262 496,591 100% 45.5 1,241,351 100% 112.0 Estimated Employees 734 470 1,204 Total 929 3,159 Total 2,300 Jobs to Households 0.34 0.28 0.31 0.34
Source: RCLCO
10 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 155 Overall Land Use Programs – Regional Emp pyloyment Center Scenario
This scenario depicts how the area would develop if it became a major In this scenario, the majority of the commercial industrial and office land employment center in the region. Our analysis of the employment cores uses would be concentrated in the employment core. Determining the in the region starts on Page 14 of this report. The Dominion Study Area location of this core will be very important for its success. Neighborhood does have the opportunity to become an employment center of regional retail would be spread throughout the study area. significance. It will need to have infrastructure in place, the backing of the economic development community, as well as strong amenities, These projections are estimates, and will vary based upon the amount executive housing, and a wide range of land uses. It will be critical to of developable acreage, land owners interest in development, as well have the employment core as close to the interstates as possible. The as the availability of infrastructure. Compared to the Limited City of Chesapeake may need to consider how to seed the area to Employment Center Scenario, it gives a different scale of development. become a major employment center. The center would likely be This one would be sized similarly to the Virginia Beach Town Center, coconcentratedncentrated oonn tthehe nnorthernorthern poportionrtion ooff tthehe study aarea,rea, cclosestlosest to but iitsts bbreakdownreakdown ooffllandand uses wwouldould be mmoreore ssimilarimilar to GGreenbrierreenbrier.. existing transportation access. See Exhibit V-15.
Regional Employment Center Scenario Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Total % of Est. Est. % of Est. Est. 2014-2024 2025-2035 (to 2035) Total Density Acres Build-Out Total Density Acres Employment Center Scenario For-Sale Residential 2,278 1,871 4,148 80% 5 830 9,000 75% 5 1,800 For-Rent Residential 448 579 1,027 20% 25 41 3,000 25% 25 120 Total Residential 2,726 2,450 5,176 100% 871 12,000 100% 1,920 Retail SF 240,319 214,722 455,041 35% 0.25 41.8 1,015,637 21% 0.25 93.3 Office SF 233,693 482,966 716,659 55% 0.40 41.1 2,500,000 52% 0.40 143.5 Industrial SF 114,859 28,273 143,133 11% 0.20 16.4 1,250,000 26% 0.20 143.5 Total SF Commercial 588,871 725,961 1,314,832 100% 99.3 4,765,637 100% 380.2 Estimated Employees 1,699 2,466 4,164 Total 970 14,757 Total 2,300 Jobs to Households 0.62 1.01 0.80 1.23
Source: RCLCO
11 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
156 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Mappy of Study Area with Potential Land Use Locations
• In the Employment Center Scenario, it will be important for the core to be as close to the northern part of the study area as possible. It also needs to have easy access to Dominion Boulevard, with more than one interchange, if it becomes a limited access highway. This scenario is more if Dominion Boulevard becomes an interstate highway.
• We would recommend mixing the land uses within the employment Employ- core to include a wide range of housing as well as commercial ment uses. The densest housing would be located near the employment Center cocorere.
• Additional town centers can be sprinkled throughout the study area, Higher Density Housing but would not have a large amount of regional serving employment. with transitional uses They would serve as focal points to the communities to make sure they are walkable.
• The land lends itself to multiple neighborhoods/communities.
• It will be important to have additional services such as schools, police, fire, etc. to accommodate a large new population center. Lower Density Housing with NeighborhoodRetail and Office
Catalyst Industrial Sites
12 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 157 Employment Cores Analysis
13 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
158 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Favored Quarter
The favored quarter is a defining characteristic of regional growth in most regions, and the Hampton Roads region is no exception. The maps below shows the distribution of income (per capita) around metropolitan areas. For the Hampton Roads region, the map shows a few areas of wealth (pink color), primarily near water-oriented areas. The favored quarter is typically where the best paying jobs, particularly office jobs, concentrate; on average about 40% of these jobs locate in what RCLCO has deemed to be Metro Cores, the areas of greatest job density.
Per Capita Income Key: Per Capita Income (PCI) Atlanta, San Diego, and Virginia Beach Metropolitan Areas
Low Avg High Atlanta San Diego Hampton Roads
10 20
Source: Esri
14 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 159 Favored QQpuarter in Hampton Roads
The Hampton Roads region has two distinct favored quarters: one The majority of employment is concentrated along major to the southeast towards the water in Virginia Beach and the other to transportation routes. Much of this density is concentrated in the north into the Peninsula. Given the size of the region, it would downtown Norfolk and directly to the east, towards Virginia Beach, typically only have one direction of growth, however, due to the unique within one of the region’s favored quarters. These dense employment nature of the region with the ocean, rivers, and multiple bridges, the areas are the region’ s Metro Cores. region has grown in multiple directions, following the water.
Per Capita Income Industrial & Office Buildings Hampton Roads Region Hampton Roads Region
Peninsula Favored Quarter
10 20 South Side Favored Quarter
Key: Per Capita Income (PCI) MAP KEY Industrial Buildings Office Buildings Low Avg High Source: Co Star Source: Esri
15 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
160 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Office Growth in Hampton Roads
The Hampton Roads region is dominated by industrial uses, the ports, Existing employment cores represent three generations of growth. First and the military. Industrial development is depicted on the next page. generation office development was concentrated in downtown Norfolk For the purpose of the employment center, Metro Core, analysis, we and Portsmouth. Second generation cores evolved adjacent to did not include the military installations unless they had significant transportation routes, especially Interstate 64. The completion of the civilian spin-off development, such as at Lynnhaven/Oceana. Office Hampton Roads Beltway drove additional development into the development in the region represents high paying jobs, and typically Greenbrier area and further east along I-264. Finally, most recently, the higher density development. Factors such as location of bridges and Virginia Beach Town Center was created. rivers, proximity to the labor force, as well as executive housing, have influenced and perpetuated the growth of office cores to the east and southeast.
Office Building Development Time Sequence Hampton Roads Region
1st Gen 2nd Gen 3rd Gen
Pre-1950 1950-1980 1980+
Source: CoStar
16 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 161 Industrial Growth in Hampton Roads
Industrial development has grown in a different direction than office in significant amount of industrial development. During the 2000s, the the region. Originally, the industrial was concentrated along the ports in Cavalier Industrial Park became more significant. Unlike many regions, the region, and rapidly grew during the 1950s to the 1970s to the most of the employment cores in the Hampton Roads region have at northeast of Norfolk, and to the southwest along the Elizabeth River. least some industrial development. During the 1970s, industrial development continued around the southern portion of the Hampton Roads Beltway. During the 1980s and 1990s, the Lynnhaven/Oceana area and the Greenbrier area saw a
Industrial Building Development Time Sequence Hampton Roads Region
1st Gen 2nd Gen 3rd Gen
Pre-1950 1950-1980 1980+
Source: CoStar
17 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
162 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Emppyloyment Growth in Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA
RCLCO compared the projections of Moody’s Economy.com to 1.53% from 1990 to 2005. However, when considering 2010 to 2040, the local Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization they are projecting an average annual rate of 0.5%, similar to the TPO. (TPO). Both local and national employment forecasts project a The Hampton Roads TPO projects an average annual rate of 0.6% continued recovery from the recent downturn, however, they have from 2009 to 2040. Since the overall result at the end of the time period different growth rates over the next few decades. Moody’ s projects a was similar, we utilized the Moody’ s year over year projections for the strong short-term recovery, followed by slow growth (an average annual statistical demand models to stay somewhat conservative in the rate of 0.3% from 2015 to 2040), far below the historical average of modeling.
Historical and Forecasted Employment, Excluding Military Virginia Beach MSA 900,000 PROJECTED
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000
500, 000
Moody's Economy.com Moody's Economy.com Hampton Roads TPO Forecast*
*Hampton Roads TPO projections from 2009 to 2040 recalibrated to the 2013 MSA employment numbers without military or federal workers Source: BLS; RCLCO; Hampton Roads TPO; Moody’s
18 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 163 Metro Cores in Hampton Roads
Metro Cores, or “employment centers”, are the building blocks of In the Hampton Roads region, there are currently 760,300 non- regions and drive growth patterns in metropolitan areas. RCLCO military jobs and nine employment cores. By 2035, the region’s research in regions across the U.S. has found that a correlation exists employment is forecasted to increase to 835,000 non-military jobs. This between a region’s total employment and the number of job centers indicates that over the next two decades, one to two new employment necessary to accommodate this economic activity. Long range planning centers are likely to emerge as important to the region’s economy. and economic development activities need to anticipate the location of future centers in order to maximize planning efforts.
Number of Employment Cores and Total MSA Employment Select MSAs 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8
loyment Cores loyment 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Number of Number Emp 100 300 500 700 900 1, 100 1, 300 1, 500 1, 700 1, 900 2, 100 2, 300 2, 500 2, 700 2, 900 Employment (1,000's) Denver Philadelphia Cincinatti Detroit Houston Nashville Atlanta Chattanooga Raleigh-Durham Minneapolis-St. Paul Salt Lake City Charleston Phoenix Central FL 2009 Tampa-St. Pete Sarasota San Diego 2008 Seattle-Tacoma 2012 VA Beach MSA 2013 VA Beach MSA 2035 Source: RCLCO
19 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
164 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Metro Core Definitions
There are six types of job cores that share similar characteristics and the area’s history. The analysis did not include the cores on the across regions. The Hampton Roads region has four out of six of Peninsula which are Oyster Point/Jefferson Avenue and Coliseum these core types. They are determined by geographic positioning within Central. the region, depth and make-up of their industrial/retail/office markets,
CORE TYPE DESCRIPTION HAMPTON ROADS CORES • Cultural, financial, and often governmental centers of their respective regions. Downtown Norfolk Urban Centers •Typicall y has the lar gest concentration of high-density office s pace and the majyjority of the region’s highest paying jobs. • Locations are decided by individual actors (e.g. governments, corporations, universities, Lynnhaven/Oceana Catalytic Core etc.) and have the ability to change growth patterns in a region, because of their size. • Tend to emerge where land is cheap and there is good transportation access to the larger region (e.g. major freeways and interstates, rail lines, airports, and seaports). Villagg,e Ave, Port Areas, Industrial Core Cavalier • An alternative version of this core (prevalent in San Diego) emphasizes R&D/Flex use over warehousing/distribution or manufacturing. • High-end office space tends to develop in the region’s primary favored quarter, most often along the region’s principle interstate. Favored Quarter Greenbrier, Virginia Beach Town Center Office Core • Tends to begin aftera critical mass has been established at the closer-incore , although these areas continue to increase in density many years after their creation.
Historic Satellite • Tend to have older commercial stock and smaller employment bases. None Cities • Often established along major roadways within close proximity to significant residential development. None Retail Cores • In larger MSAs, these retail cores often do not have enough regionally serving/office- oriented employment to be considered a major export and regional serving employment core.
20 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 165 Metro Core Definitions
Today, the Hampton Roads region has nine established and other catalysts such as the location of major employment locations employment cores, with one additional emerging. For the purpose like Oceana Naval Air Station. Detailed information about each core is of this analysis, we only concentrated on the seven employment cores located in Exhibit V-15. Approximately 30% of the current in the Southside. The distinct location of each of these cores is primarily employment base in the Hampton Roads region is contained driven by access to major transportation routes, the unique topography within these seven cores. of the region that divides areas seemingly next to each other on a map,
Map of Employment Cores Hampton Roads Region
MAP KEY Industrial building Office bu ilding Retail building Study Area Harborview Norfolk Ind. Park Area Cavalier Port Area Greenbrier Virginia Beach Town Center Lynnhaven/Oceana Downtown Norfolk
Source: RCLCO; CoStar; Esri
21 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
166 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Location of Potential Future Metro Cores
Positioning of Existing and Emerging Economic Cores by Type There are three core types that drive growth within a region: Hampton Roads Region • Existing cores are already influential and have more than 6,000 jobs today.
• Emerging cores will evolve and shape development patterns and are projected to have at least 6,000 jobs by 2030.
• Potential new cores are areas or regions likely to attract sign ifican t empltloyment growth in the next 20 years, btbut will still have less than 6,000 new jobs in 2035.
Emerging cores and likely new cores are likely sufficient to accommodate 30% of the region’s projected job growth through 2035—a ratio in line with their current capture.
The next generation of cores in the Hampton Roads region will likely evolve for similar reasons as existing cores. These catalysts include major transportation improvements, the emergence of new concentrations of executive housing, ppyroximity to jobs already existing, and availability of large parcels to accommodate that growth in proximity to these catalysts.
MAP KEY RCLCO did not complete the detailed analysis to determine Emerging where the likely new job cores would locate, nor determine Existing how large they would be. However, based upon our Potential experience with Metro Core growth as well as our New Core understanding of the region, we have identified potential locations for future employment cores. The Dominion Study Area could be one of these future Metro Cores.
Source: RCLCO
22 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 167 Dominion Study Area Emp pyloyment Center Action Plan
While finishing major transportation improvements and considering changes to the Comprehensive Plan, the Dominion Study area should focus on factors that will influence its desirability as an employment center:
• High quality housing • Amenities • Community infrastructure and utilities • A broad marketing effort • Encouraging and accommodating home based businesses
1. Identify the types of jobs that the study area can attract or generate based on typical location criteria for different types of employment, dedevelopmentvelopment ooff ccivicivic uses, use ooffnnaturalaturalrresources,esources, aandnd coconstructionnstruction aandnd ototherher jobs assocassociatediated wiwithth2200-yeayearr dedevelopmentvelopment ttimeframeimeframe. 2. Work with Chesapeake Department of Economic Development to formulate and implement an intentional and strategic recruiting and marketing plan for Dominion’s employment center. 3. Evaluate timing and phasing holistically: employment cores generally follow households. 4. Develop necessary physical infrastructure—in particular sewer issues. 5. Attract the high-skilled employees employers want with a variety of housing types, excellent education system, and a high quality of life environment. 6. Take advantage of synergies with available catalysts—work with TCC and Virginia’s Workforce Development System to provide training for the types of jobs you want to create in Dominion
Typical Trajectory of Employment Cores
1. Household 2. Loca lly-serving 3. Compan ies fo llow 4E4. Emp loymen t growth and jobs, retail household growth cores emerge migration
Source: RCLCO
23 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
168 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Economics and Demographics
24 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 169 National Real Estate Cycle
The national economy is currently in the upturn stage, as home sales real estate activity will change. The further into the cycle, the more and prices continue to rebound from the Great Recession. RCLCO feverish the market becomes, with developers making progressively closely monitors the economic cycles and has predicted based on more aggressive assumptions than they would at the beginning of the research into the history of past cycles and the cyclical nature of the cycle. Both the timing and changing nature of real estate activity in all of economy that the next downturn should begin around 2017 with a the future cycles is critical to the Dominion Boulevard development, and margin of error of a year or two. This downturn will probably occur after needs to be continually monitored. The study area will be developing the 2016 elections, bottoming in 2018. In the lead up to the next peak, over many different real estate cycles.
RCLCO Real Estate Market Cycle Outlook
P > GAV Sell P= Price RC = Replacement Cost Peak P > GAV Sell Peak P P
P < RC Acquire Bottom P < RC Acquire Bottom
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Source: RCLCO
25 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
170 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Hampton Roads Empyployment Growth
Like most of the United States, the Hampton Roads region was However, between 2020 and 2030, the growth will slow to 4,000 new significantly impacted by the Great Recession. Employment dropped, jobs annually. Their long-term projections do not take into account home sales plummeted, and commercial vacancies rose. Most of the major future recessions, but there are likely to be ups and downs in the sectors are in recovery, and the next few years should see better next 20 years. performance in most of the real estate classes. As stated earlier, the Hampton Roads TPO projections are in-line with The economic and demographic outlook for the region is projected to Moody’s projections, but slightly more optimistic. be moderate for the next ten years. Between 2010 and 2020, Moody’s projects that the MSA will add an average of 5,900 jobs annually.
Annual Employment Growth Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2040 PROJECTED 20,000 15, 000 10,000 5,000 0 -5, 000 -10,000 -15,000 -20,000 -25, 000
Office Employment Growth Total Employment Growth Excluding Military Military Employment Growth
NOTE: This Data does not include military or government empyployment Source: Moody’s Economy.com
26 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 171 Hampton Roads Empyployment by Sector
During the recession, the Hampton Roads region lost a significant sectors maintained close to the same level of employment and are portion of its core employment sectors, which include military, projected to gain jobs in the next two decades. Government and construction, manufacturing and trade/transportation/utilities. service-oriented employment increased during the recession and is Professional occupations, including those in information and financial expected to continue to grow at a slower pace for the next 10 years.
Historical and Projected Employment Change by Sector Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 2001-2040
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
-5,000
-10,000
-15, 000
-20,000 Military Natl. Construction Manufacturing Trade, Information Financial Professional Education and Leisure and Other Government Resources Transportation Activities and Business Health Hospitality Services and Mining & Utilities Services Services
2001-200010 2011-200020 2021-2030 2031-200040 Source: Moody’s Economy.com
27 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
172 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Household Growth
Households are projected to grow between 3,000 and 8,000 approximately 4,600 households per year. We would anticipate future households per year through 2030 in the MSA. Moody's short-term growth to be between 4,500-5,000 households per year based upon an future household projections (6,700 annually between 2013 and 2018) analysis of historical growth and the three sources of projections. are higher than Esri's projections (approximately 4,000 households per year). The average annual growth between 2000 and 2013 was
Household Growth VirginiaBeach -Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2040
14,000 PROJECTED
12,000
10,000 Moody’s Projected TPO’s Projected 2013 to 2035 Avg. 2009 to 2040 Avg. 2000-2013 Annual Growth = Annual Growth = Avg. Annual 8,000 4,700 4,800 Growth =4,600
6,000
4,000
2,000
0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040
Source: Moody’s Economy.com, Hampton Roads TPO
28 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 173 Chesapeake Demog gpraphics
Over 60% of households in Chesapeake City are headed by someone Median Income by Census Tract over the age of 45 and 87% of total household growth (2,550 Suffolk, Chesapeake, Portsmouth VA; 2013 households per year) from 2013 to 2018 is projected to come from households 55 and older. This suggests a strong demand for future housing targeting an older buyer or renter. Younger households are also projected to grow in the same time period.
Household income in the city is high, as 31% of all households have an income over $100,000. Median income surrounding the subject area is also high, with the median income of the surrounding census tracts bebeinging aboaboveve $7755,000.
2010 Median Income by Census Tracts $75,001 or greater $60,001 - $75,000 $45, 001 - $60, 000 $30,001 - $45,000 $30,000 or less
Household Income Distribution Change in Age of Householder Chesapeake City, VA; 2013 Chesapeake City, VA; 2013-2018
2,999
20.1% 18.3% 1,881 15.4% 13.0% 1,268 9.1% 7. 0% 6. 3% 6. 9% 201 4.0% -179
Less $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 Over Than ------$200,000 $15,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 $199,999 -1,880 Income Ranges Source: Esri
29 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
174 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Migration
Chesapeake City has strong same-state in-migration and same-state Domestic Population Migration out-migration based upon IRS migration data. Approximately 5,500 of Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2010 the 8,300 domestic in-migrants to Chesapeake City are from Virginia, of % OF which 60% are from the Hampton Roads area. This suggest the city is DOMESTIC TOTAL a popular choice for people moving within the region. The next biggest IN-MIGRATION DISTRIBUTION IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION source markets (although accounting for a total of less than 10%) are Same State In-Migration 5,519 66% North Carolina, Florida, and Maryland. Different State In-Migration 2,847 34% TOTAL DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION 8,366 100% Approximately 5,000 of the 8,000 out-migrants from the city move to another location within Virginia. % OF TOTAL DOMESTIC OUT- OUT-MIGRATION DISTRIBUTION OUT-MIGRANTS MIGRATION Same State Out-Migration 4,887 63% Domestic Migration Patterns Different State Out-Migration 2,887 37% Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2010 TOTAL DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION 7,774 100%
TOP STATES OFORIGIN DOMESTIC % OF DOMESTIC AREA IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION Virginia 5,519 66.0% North Carolina 307 3.7% Florida 238 2.8% Maryland 112 1.3% California 110 1.3% New York 107 1.3% TOTAL 8,366
Blue = more in-migrants Red = more out-migrants
Source: Internal Revenue Service; Forbes.com Source: Internal Revenue Service; Forbes.com
30 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 175 Office and Industrial Market
31 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
176 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Location of Jobs in the Region
In the area closest to Dominion Boulevard, employment is concentrated in the Information-Related Employment by Census Tract Cavalier area to the west, Greenbrier to the East, and Lynnhaven/Oceana to the Northeast. Downtown Norfolk also contains strong employment centers.
Professional, scientific, and technical services support is the second largest MAP KEY sector in the MSA, supporting nearly 50,000 jobs. Information-related >110 employment is predominantly clustered in Greenbrier and Lynnhaven/Oceana, where the most desirable office space is located. Tech-related employment is 75 - 109 also concentrated in these areas, in addition to the port areas. 50 - 74
The amount of employment close to the study area is positive. 25 - 49
<25 Total Employment Density by Census Tract Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth, VA; 2013 MAP KEY >4,000
3,000 - 3,999
2,000 - 2,999 Professional and Tech-Related Employment 1,000 - 1,999 by Census Tract
<1,000
MAP KEY
> 350
250 - 349
150 - 249
50 - 149
<50
Source: Esri
32 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 177 Overall Office Market
The office market in the VA Beach MSA has only recently begun to Office Absorptions and Completions recover from a dramatic contraction from 2008 through 2011. From Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA; 2006-2013 2006 to 2013, the average annual office absorption was only half the 2,000,000 volume of office space delivered in the MSA. Construction activity 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: 450,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 900,000 dipped to 150,000 square feet in 2012 (less than 10% of the highest annual completion levels before the downturn). Net absorption was 1,500,000 close to -500,000 square feet in 2011. The market appears to be improving, showing a promising uptick in both absorption, completions, occupancy, and rent growth in 2013. 1,000,000
500, 000
- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(500,000)
(1,000,000)
Net Absorption Completions Source: CoStar
Office Performance Southern Chesapeake Submarket and MSA; 2013
EXISTING INVENTORY VACANCY # TOTAL DIRECT TOTAL VAC 2013 NET 2013 4Q 2013 UNDER QUOTED BLDS RBA SF SF % ABSORPTION DELIVERIES CONST. SF RATES
Submarket 104 592,515 51,582 48,555 8.2% 8,066 2,884 2,884 $15.31 As a Percentage of Total Market 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Total Market 3,287 48,411,521 5,641,925 5,708,956 11.8% 748,934 390,173 375,277 $16.52
Source: CoStar
33 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
178 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Southern Chesapeake Submarket Office Market
Dominion Boulevard is located the Southern Chesapeake office Map of Study Area and Southern Chesapeake Submarket submarket. There are few major office developments in this submarket larger than small-scale medical offices. The submarket added approximately 100,000 square feet of rentable building space in the four year period from 2006 to 2010. The inventory has remained at 590,000 square feet since 2010. The submarket encompasses 1.2% of the MSA’s total inventory. Southern Chesapeake Submarket
Study Area
Office Inventory Southern Chesapeake Submarket and MSA; 2006-2013 600,000 1.3%
580,000 Source: Reis
560,000 1.2% Map of Office Buildings Suffolk, Chesapeake, Portsmouth VA; 2013 540,000
520,000 1.1% 500,000
480,000
460,000 1.0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Submarket Total RBA Submarket RBA as % of MSA RBA Source: CoStar Source: CoStar
34 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 179 Southern Chesapeake Submarket Office Market
Between 2006 and 2013, the Southern Chesapeake Submarket Vacancy in the MSA rose from 2006 to 2010 to nearly 15%, dropping delivered 100,000 square feet of new office space and absorbed a net slightly in the past two years to 11%. Average asking rents, $16.50 in total of 60,000 square feet. In the last two years, office vacancy in the the MSA and $15.30 in the submarket, are still below pre-recession submarket stabilized to the long-term average of approximately 9%. levels.
Office Absorption vs. Completions Office Asking Rent and Vacancy Southern Chesapeake Submarket 2006-2013 Southern Chesapeake Submarket and MSA; 2006-2013 80,000 25% $20 25%
$18 60,000 20% $16 20% 40,000 $14
20,000 $12 15% 15% $10 0 $8 10% 10% (20,000) $6
(40,000) $4 5% 5% $2 (()60,000) $0 0% (80,000) 0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Submarket Avg. Rent MSA Avg. Rent Net Absorption RBA Delivered Vac % Submarket Vacancy MSA Vacancy
Source: CoStar Source: CoStar
35 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
180 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Overall Industrial Market
At the MSA level, the industrial market had a challenging 2013 after a the two years, allowing rent and vacancy to recover to nearly brief recovery from the recession. Average industrial rents and 2007/2008 levels. Vacancy has continued to drop from the high in 2009. occupancy appeared to bottom in 2010, at $4.50 and 90%. The market In 2013, however, the MSA experienced net negative absorption. Rents delivered a total of over a million square feet of industrial space over have slipped slightly from $4.90 in 2010 down to $4.60 in 2013.
Industrial Absorption vs. Completions Industrial Asking Rent and Vacancy Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA; 2006-2013 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA; 2006-2013
3,000,000 $5.4 12% 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: -4,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 1,000,000 2,500,000 $5.2 10% 2,000,000 $5.0 1,500,000 8%
$4.8 1,000,000 6%
500,000 $4.6
4% 0 $4.4 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-500,000 2% $4.2
-1,000,000 $4.0 0% -1,500,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Absorption Completions MSA Rent (NNN) MSA Vacancy
Source: CoStar Source: CoStar
36 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 181 Deep Creek Submarket Industrial Market
The Deep Creek Submarket (see page 39 for map) added 200,000 Industrial Inventory square feet of industrial space from 2006 to 2008, but has seen no Study Area; Deep Creek Submarket; 2005-2013 change in inventory since that time. The Dominion Boulevard study 2,000,000 4.5% area itself has not added industrial space in the past decade. 1,950,000 1,900,000 The submarket experienced a negative net absorption of approximately 4.0% -100,000 square feet of industrial space between 2006 and 2014Q1. 1,850,000 During the same time period, 190,000 square feet of space was 1,800,000 3.5% delivered. This has led the vacancy rate to climb from 2% in 2007 to 1,750,000 15% in 2013. The MSA has maintained a 6% to 8% vacancy from 2006 1,700,000 to 22013013. AAverageverage inindustrialdustrial asaskingking rrentent in tthehe MMSASA hhasas ddroppedropped frfromom $5.28 in 2006 to $4.61 in 2013. Deep Creek Submarket commands a 1,650,000 3.0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 slightly higher rent than the MSA. Deep Creek Submarket Study Area as % of Submarket Source: CoStar
Industrial Absorption vs. Completions Industrial Asking Rent and Vacancy Deep Creek Submarket; 2006-2013 Deep Creek Submarket and MSA; 2006-2013 200,000 $8 18% 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: -13,000 150,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 24,000 $7 16% 14% 100, 000 $6 12% $5 50,000 10% $4 0 8% $3 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 6% -50,000 $2 4% -100,000 $1 2% -150,000 $0 0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 -200,000 -250,000 Deep Creek Rent (NNN) MSA Rent (NNN) Absorption Completions Deep Creek Vacancy MSA Vacancy
Source: CoStar Source: CoStar
37 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
182 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Retail Market
38 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 183 Overall Retail Market
The MSA retail market did not suffer as much as other land uses during the Map of Deep Creek Retail Submarket and Study Area recession, whereas the submarket saw a sharp decline in rents and a quick recovery. Vacancy in the MSA rose slightly during the recession, from 4% to 7%, and has remained flat at 7%. The submarket reduced vacant inventory during the downturn, and from 2008 to 2013 has closely mirrored the MSA’ s level of vacancy. Deep Creek Submarket
Study Area
Retail Asking Rent and Vacancy Deep Creek Submarket and MSA; 2005-2013
$20 16%
$18 14% Map of Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA $16 12% $14 10% $12
$10 8%
$8 6% $6 4% $4 2% $2
$0 0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deep Creek Rent (NNN) MSA Rent (NNN) Deep Creek Vacancy MSA Vacancy Source: Esri; CoStar Source: Esri; CoStar
39 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
184 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Southside and Deep Creek Submarket Retail Markets
Despite a brief uptick in retail activity in 2007, the Deep Creek Retail Absorption vs. Completions Submarket has experienced little change in the past six Deep Creek Submarket; 2006-2014 YTD years, absorbing a total of 38,000SF and delivering 250,000 35,000SF. The only proposed future retail development, a 2006-2013 Avg. Absorptions: 38,000 35,000 power center, is located at the northern portion of Dominion 200,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completions: Boulevard. 150,000
In the Southside of Hampton Roads, retail vacancy is high for 100,000 regional malls, which comprise 20% of retail square footage. Neighborhood centers and power centers, accounting for 50,000 oonene-tthirdhird ooff totatotallrretailetail squasquarere ffootage,ootage, aarere vveryery wwellell occupoccupiedied. 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 -50,000 YTD Absorption Completions
Source: CoStar
SF of Current Retail Mix by Type Retail Vacancy SF and Rate by Type Southside of Hampton-Roads; March 2014 Southside of Hampton-Roads; 2012 1,200,000 45% 40% 1,000,000 7% 35% 21% 800, 000 30% 25% 20% 600,000 20% 400,000 15% 19% 10% 9% 200,000 5% - 0% 24%
General Retail Community Center Neighborhood Center Power Center Regional Mall Strip Center Vacant SF Vacancy % Source: CoStar Source: ODU CREED; CoStar
40 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 185 10-Mile Ringgj Around Subject Area Retail Market
Currently, the retail market today, as defined by a 10-mile radius around the study area, Map for Current Retail Supply is mostly in balance relative to demand sources, and includes many active retail areas 10-Mile Ring Around Study Area; 2014 that provide high amenity benefit for nearby residents and employees. The area, which includes a Wal-Mart store and a Target store, captures significant spending from outside residents for general merchandise, electronics, and apparel products. Although there are multiple grocery stores in the north and east half of the retail area, there exists an undersupply of food and beverage as well as health and personal care retail. It is estimated that $22 million in annual sales of food and beverage are spent outside of the area due to a lack of large-scale grocery stores in the southern side of Dominion Boulevard.
Current Retail Under and Over Supply 10-Mile Ring Around Study Area; March 2014
Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers Undersupplied Nonstore Retailers Food & Beverage Stores Health & Personal Care Stores Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores Food Services & Drinking Places Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Balanced Gasoline Stations Miscellaneous Store Retailers Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores Electronics & Appliance Stores Oversupplied General Merchandise Stores
($350,000,000)($250,000,000)($150,000,000) ($50,000,000) $50,000,000 $150,000,000 $250,000,000 Source: Esri; CoStar
41 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
186 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Retail Compppetitive Landscape
The Greenbrier area provides a lifestyle shopping and restaurant center center comprising 500,000 square feet of retail is the second largest that is well occupied despite lacking significant new inventory. retail building in the area. Among well-performing, relatively newer retail Accordingly, residential development in the Greenbrier area is highly buildings surrounding the study area, non-anchor tenant rents average desired. Greenbrier Mall, built in 1981 with close to 1 million square feet approximately $15 and anchor tenant rents average $10. of retail and a very low vacancy rate of 1.5%, is one example of a strong retail amenity in the area. Greenbrier Market Center, a power
Select Retail Comparables Chesapeake ,;, VA; Februar y 2014
NON- MAP YEAR ANCHOR VACANCY CENTER PROPERTY NAME SIZE (SF) ANCHOR KEY BUILT TENANT RATE (%) TYPE TENANT 1 GREENBRIER MALL 898,416 1981 n/a n/a 1.5% Regional 2 CROSSWAYS CENTER 153,111 1988 n/a n/a 0.0% Power Center GREENBRIER 3 493,657 1996 n/a n/a 0.0% Power Center MARKETCENTER 4 CHESAPEAKE CROSSING SC 287,679 1987 $14.00 $5.45 5.5% Community 5 WOODFORD SQUARE 139,623 1986 $15.91 $8.12 8.8% Community 6 GLENWOOD SQUARE 66,659 1986 $15.00 $11.39 4.3% Neighborhood 7 PARKVIEW/Greenbrier 80,831 1985 $13.92 $5.84 8.0% Neighborhood 8 DEEP CREEK PLAZA 16,000 1984 $12.07 n/a 0.0% Neighborhood 9 LIBERTY PLAZA 19,500 1983 $12.00 n/a 19.0% Neighborhood 10 ISLAND WHARF SHOPPES 15,000 1989 $9.95 n/a 0.0% Neighborhood 11 CEDAR LAKES CENTER 35,659 1987 $16.40 $12.69 7.9% Neighborhood 12 BATTLEFIELD SHOPPES 23,967 1986 $16.88 n/a 5.7% Neighborhood LAS GAVIOTAS SHOPPING 13 68,822 1986 $12.92 $9.16 6.1% Neighborhood CNTR 14 GREENBRIER STATION 21,633 1984 $17.00 $17.00 0.0% Neighborhood THE CROSSING/DEEP 15 74, 120 1989 $14. 86 $7. 78 0. 0% Neighborhood CREEK 16 GREENBRIER SOUTH 97,000 1992 $20.84 $11.99 7.9% Neighborhood 17 ORCHARD SQUARE 88,728 1989 $15.91 $9.92 5.2% Neighborhood 18 MILLWOOD PLAZA 16,969 1986 $13.00 n/a 10.0% Neighborhood TOWNE PLACE AT 19 78,072 2007 n/a n/a 13.0% Town Center Source: Google Earth; CoStar GREENBRIER Total 2,675,446 Average 1988 $14.71 $9.93 5.4%
42 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 187 For-Sale Residential
43 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
188 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia For-Sale Residential Market Trends
The Hampton Roads housing market has been slow to recover from the and 14% from 2012 to 2013. New home sales as a percentage of total recession. After a rapid rise in median existing single-family home sales has steadily declined since 2004 from 34% to 15%. Both sales prices in the early 2000s, the market hit a bottom in 2012 and only pace and median price show clear increases from 2012 and indicate began to see meaningful gains in 2013. The volume of total home sales growth and recovery in the new for-sale housing market. remained stagnant from 2008 through 2011, averaging 17,500 annual sales. The number of total sales rose nearly 10% from 2011 to 2012
Median Existing Single-Family Home Price New and Resale Homes by Year Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2020 Hampton Roads Areal 2000-2013
$300,000 PROJECTED 35,000 40%
30, 000 35% $250,000 30% 25,000 $200,000 25% 20,000
$150, 000 20% 15,000 15% $100,000 10,000 10%
$50,000 5,000 5%
0 0% $0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Resales New Sales % New
Source: Moody’s Analytics Source: Moody’s Analytics
44 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 189 For-Sale Residential Permitting Trends
Sales and permit data suggest that the recovery is progressing more From 2008 to 2012, an annual average of 3,200 single-family permits rapidly in Chesapeake City than in the MSA, which is a good sign for were issued in the MSA. Meaningful gains were realized in 2013, in Dominion Boulevard. In Chesapeake, average annual single-family which single-family permits increased 16% from 2012. However, this permits hovered at 650 from 2008 to 2011, rising slightly in 2012 and in post-recession level is only approximately almost half of pre-recession 2013 by 18%. In 2013, 911 single-family permits were issued in highs. Chesapeake, the highest since 2005 but still 36% below the historical average from 1995 to 2007. Multifamily permitting in the MSA was the lowest in 2010, with 817 issued. 2011 through 2013 saw a rapid recovery, and in 2013, Multifamily permits in Chesapeake have returned and even exceeded multifamily permits reached close to pre-recession levels. Like in pre-recession levels. Virtually no multifamily permits were issued in Chesapeake, multifamily permits have been an increasingly large 20062006 aandnd 22007007, but 22008008 tthroughhrough22013013 sasaww a ststrongrong rrecoveryecovery. In2013 2013, poportionrtion ooff totatotall pepermits,rmits, rreflectingeflecting tthehe ststrengthrength ooff tthehe rrentalentalmmarketarket. 749 multifamily permits were issued, captured 45% of total permits. This level of multifamily permitting has not been seen since 1987.
Single-Family and Multifamily Permits Single-Family and Multifamily Permits Chesapeake; 1990-2013 Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 1990-2013
3,000 100% 12,000 100% 90% 90% 2,500 10,000 80% 80% 70% 70% 2,000 8,000 60% 60% 1,500 50% 6,000 50% 40% 40% 1,000 4,000 30% 30% 20% 20% 500 2,000 10% 10% 0 0% 0 0%
SF Permits MF Permits % MF SF Permits MF Permits % MF
Source: HUD State of the Cities Source: HUD State of the Cities
45 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
190 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia New and Resale Homes in Hampton Roads
The resale market, as reflected by average sales price, did not % New Home Sales by Product Type suffer as significantly as the new home market during the Hampton Roads Area; 2000-2013 downturn, likely as a result of the lower prices, and the lower 80% run-up in prices from 2003-2006. At the height of the pre- 70% recession years, new home prices averaged $400,000 and 60% resale home prices averaged $220,000. The bottoming of the 50% market occurred in 2011 through 2012, at which point new home prices dropped to $300,000 and resales dropped to $180,000. 40% New home prices have picked up slightly in 2013, and are likely 30% to continue to rise. 20% 10% The majority of the product sold in the market is for single-family 0% Detached Multistory Multiplex Townhouse/Duplex detached product. Source: Residential DataBank (2000-2011), ODU(2012-2013) Average Sale Price Hampton Roads Area; 2000-2013
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$$,100,000
$50,000
$0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 Resales New Sales
Source: Rose and Womble (2000-2011), ODU (2012-2013)
46 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 191 Hampton Roads For-Sale Residential Price Bands
The bulk of resales in the market are priced below $250,000. This months of supply for homes under $500,000. The top of the market is market is fairly recovered, with less than six months inventory, which less well-balanced, as active listings are double that of post six month would be considered stable. There is relatively little activity and sales and there is almost twice the months of supply compared to inventory between $300,000 and $500,000. There is approximately six lower-priced homes.
Months of Supply, Active Listings, and Post Six Month Sales Hampton Roads Area; August 2013
2,500
2,000
1,500 Units
1,000 13
500 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 5
0 <$100k $101k-$150k $151k-$200k $201k-$250k $251k-$300k $301k-$350k $351k-$400k $401k-$500k $501k+
Active Listings Sales - Past 6 Months Months of Supply Source: Rose and Womble
47 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
192 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Chesapeake For-Sale Residential New Home Sales Trends
In the Chesapeake new home market, the higher end of the market the overall for-sale market, where homes less than $300,000 make up ($300K and above) has composed an increasingly large share of total the bulk of the market and the top of the market has declined since home sales, with the most significant gains seen in 2013. In 2013, half 2009. of all new homes were priced above $300,000. The opposite is true for
New Home Sales by Year and Price Range Chesapeake Cit y; VA ; 2009-2013 5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Less than $200,000 $200,000-$300,000 $300,000-$400,000 $400,000-$500,000 More than $500,000
Source: Rose and Womble (2000-2011), ODU (2012-2013)
48 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 193 Chesapeake For-Sale Residential Development Trends
Home sales throughout the city are strong. The higher end housing for the development of new homes in the study area—there appears to tends to be located close to Greenbrier, Chesapeake City Hall, and the be ample demand near the study area, and the prices are on the Great Bridge area. New home sales mirror this trend. This bodes well higher-end.
Map of Home Sales by Price Range – New Homes Map of Home Sales by Price Range – New and Resale Chesapeake, VA; 2009-2013 Chesapeake, VA; 2009-2013
Source: City of Chesapeake
49 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
194 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Activelyyg Selling Residential Communities in Chesapeake
There are several actively selling residential communities outside the by local and regional builders. There is one master-planned community, study area. Single-family attached homes are currently being built Culpepper Landing, immediately outside the study area which will around the Greenbrier and Cavalier areas, while single-family detached contain 740 residential units. It is the best selling community in the homes are concentrated in Greenbrier along Battlefield Boulevard. region. Most of the projects are smaller, and the for-sale market is dominated
Actively Selling Residential Communities Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
MAP KEY COMMUNITY NAME UNITS A4 Attached Product A1 Deep Creek Commons 40 A2 GreenTree Commons 63 A1 A3 The Grove at Arboretum 112 A4 Monarch Walk 63 Total 278 D2 A3 Detached Product D3 A2 D1 Jordan Hall 83 D5 M1 D2 The Meadows at KempBridge 86 D3 Stony Run Manor 51 D6 D4 Edinburgh 81 D5 Albemarle River 200 D1 D6 Chapel Hill Estates 98 Total 599
Master-Planned Community M1 Culpepper Landing 740 D4 Study Area
Source: Individual Project Websites; Broker Interviews; CREED
50 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 195 For-Sale Single-Family Detached Homes
Most new single-family detached homes in Chesapeake range from units at Stony Run Manor to 54 at Jordan Hall. Culpepper Landing had base prices of $300,000 to $400,000 and sizes of 2,000 to 3,000 square 104 closings in 2013, making it the best selling in the region. Base feet. There are few offerings over $500,000, consistent with the overall prices average $160 per square foot, and there is relatively little market. Annual absorption rates (see Exhibit II-15) range from eight variation between different communities and builders.
Price-to-Size Relationship – New Single-Family Detached Units Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
$750, 000
$650,000
$550,000
$450,000
$350,000
$250,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000
The Meadows at KempBridge Stony Run Manor Jordan Hall Edinburgh Albemarle River Chapel Hill Estates Harbor View Neighborhoods Culpepper Legacy Series Culpepper Heritage Series Culpepper The Grove
Source: Individual Project Websites; Broker Interviews; CREED
51 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
196 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia For-Sale Single-Family Attached Homes
New attached homes range from $150,000 to $300,000 and 1,400 to price-conscious. The condominium product offered at Harbor View is 2,200 square feet, for an average base price per square foot of the largest and most affordable option in the attached product market approximately $127. Similar to the overall market, most buyers are today.
Price-to-Size Relationship – New Single-Family Attached and Condominium Units Chesapeake, VA; March 2014 $350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800 3,000
Deep Creek Commons GreenTree Commons The Grove at Arboretum Monarch Walk Harbour View Linkside Cove Harbour View The Gables Culpepper Landing
Source: Individual Project Websites; Broker Interviews; CREED
52 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 197 For-Rent Residential
53 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
198 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Overall Rental Market
The Chesapeake submarket and the Hampton Roads region have historically Map of Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region experienced balanced deliveries and net absorption. From 2000 to 2013, the submarket has, on average, delivered 150 units and absorbed a net of 133 units annually, capturing 9% of rental absorption in the region. The Chesapeake submarket absorbed 418 units in 4 2011 and delivered 523 units in 2012, both marking the highest levels in at least two decades. The submarket’s capture of regional rental absorption also reached a record high of over 30% in 2012, though the long term trend points to future capture at around 7 10% to 15%. Chesapeake, like much of the region, is experiencing healthy vacancies and rental rates. Though the submarket does not command rents as high as Kempsville 3 and Lynnhaven, it is located near the more expensive areas and has room to grow.
6
2 Apartment Submarket Absorption Capture 1 Chesapeake and Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2013
8 2000-2013 AVG. CAPTURE: 9% 2, 000 PROJECTED 40% 5
30% 1,500 20% MAP BUILD- ASKING SUBMARKET UNITS VAC. 1, 000 10% KEY INGS RENT Kempsville/ 1 80 16,271 $1,058 4% 0% Bayside Lynnhaven/ 2 49 9,867 $1,026 6% 500 -10% Oceana 3 Hampton/York 70 12,146 $978 3% -20% 4 Williamsburg 19 2,790 $969 3% 0 5 Chesapeake 43 7,793 $958 4% 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 -30% 6 Norfolk 114 15,854 $889 3% 7 Newport News 103 19,374 $827 4% -500 -40% Portsmouth/ 8 45 6,966 $785 3% Metro Absorption Chesapeake Absorption % Capture of Region Suffolk
Source: Reis Source: Reis
54 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 199 Class A For-Rent Market Trends
Rents in the Chesapeake Class-A rental market exceeded that of the Vacancy in the submarket has generally mirrored that of the region, overall region in the early 2000s. The submarket suffered slightly more showing a slight upward trend from 2000 to 2013. Historically, class A than the region during the recession, with average Class A rents vacancy oscillates around 4%, only rising as high as 6% for the dropping to $966. Lost ground was quickly recovered in subsequent Hampton Roads region in 2008 and 6.5% for Chesapeake in 2006. years. In 2012, the average asking rent at Class A properties was approximately $1,000.
Class A Asking Rents Class A Vacancy Rates Chesapeake and Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2013 Chesapeake and Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2013 $1,200 7%
$1,100 6%
5% $1,000
4% $900 3% $800 2%
$700 1%
$600 0% 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Chesapeake Region Chesapeake Region
Source: Reis Source: Reis
55 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
200 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia For-Rent Residential Communities in Chesapeake
The Chesapeake apartment market has several newly constructed Map of Select Apartment Community Comparables apartment communities. In the Greenbrier region, close to 1,000 units Chesapeake, VA; February 2014 were delivered in 2012 and 2013. The top-of-market property, Aura at Towne Place, is achieving $1.34 per square foot at an average occupancy of 95%. The apartment stock near Dominion Boulevard is new, well-occupied, and well-amenitized. The target market for apartments is young professionals and young couples prior to buying their first home, people re-locating to the market, and lifestyle renters. 9 1 8 2 4 MAP YEAR AVG. EFF . OCC 5 3 KEY COMMUNITY NAME BUILT UNITS RENT % 1 Fenwyck Manor 2013 288 $1.17 94% 6 10 2 Streets of Greenbrier 2013 280 $1.30 67% 7 3 Aura at Towne Place 2012 215 $1.34 95% 4 The Carlton at Greenbrier 2012 176 $1.10 96% 5 The Morgan 2010 164 $1. 25 88% 6 Tapestry Park 2011 190 $1.27 100% 7 Bell Great Bridge 2009 192 $1.25 97% 8 Belmont at Greenbrier 2006 348 $1.10 93% 9 Hideaway at Greenbrier 2005 374 $1.07 98% 10 Adalay Bay 2002 240 $1.06 92% Total/Average 2, 467 $1. 23 95%*
Study Area
*Exc lu des Street s of G reenb ri er, whi c h is curren tly pre-lileasing. Source: RCLCO: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
56 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 201 Studio and One-Bedroom Rental Units
In the Class A market, the bulk of one-bedroom units cost from slightly the highest rents for one-bedroom units on a absolute and per square over $900 to $1,200 per month and range from 650 to 900 square feet. foot basis (an average of $1.61 and $1.53 per square foot respectively). Of the selected properties, only one offers a studio layout. The Hideaway at Greenbrier offers the lowest-priced one-bedroom rental communities of Aura at Towne Place and Bell Great Bridge command units.
Price-to-Size Relationship – Studio and One-Bedroom Units Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014 $1,400
$1,300
$1,200
$1, 100
$1,000
$900
$800
$700 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1,000
Aura at Towne Place 1B/1Ba The Carlton at Greenbriar 1B/1Ba The Morgan 1B/1Ba Tapestry Park 1B/1Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba/G Belmont at Greenbriar 1B/1Ba Hideaway at Greenbriar 1B/1Ba Adalay Bay 1B/1Ba Fenwyck Manor 1B/1Ba Streets of Greenbrier Studio Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba/L
Source: Individual Project Websites; Leasing Agent interviews
57 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
202 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia Two-and Three-Bedroom Rental Units
Two-bedroom units in newer apartment communities generally offer choices for renters. The Class A rental market is strong, as evidenced between 1,000 and 1,250 square feet of space at $1,100 to $1,500 per by few concessions and strong occupancy. month. Three-bedroom units range from 1,250 to 1,400 at $1,400 to $1,700 per month. One- and two-bedroom units are the most popular
Price-to-Size Relationship – Two-Bedroom Units Price-to-Size Relationship – Three-Bedroom Units Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014 Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
$2,200
$1,500 $2,000
$1,800 $1,300 $1, 600
$1,400 $1,100 $1,200
$900 $1,000 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 Aura at Towne Place 2B/2Ba The Carlton at Greenbriar 2B/2Ba Aura at Towne Place 3B/2Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba/D The Carlton at Greenbriar 3B/2Ba Tapestry Park 2B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 2B/2Ba The Morgan 3B/2Ba Belmontat Greenbriar 2B/2Ba Hideaway at Greenbriar 2B/2Ba Tapestry Park 3B/2Ba Adalay Bay 2B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 3B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba/G Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH Belmont at Greenbriar 3B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH/G Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba/L Hideaway at Greenbriar 3B/2Ba Adalay Bay 3B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 3B/3.5ba/G Source: Individual Project Websites; Leasing Agent interviews Streets of Greenbrier 3B/2Ba
58 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 203 Critical Assumptions
Our conclusions are based on our analysis of the information available As such, we recommend the close monitoring of the economy and the from our own sources and from the client as of the date of this report. marketplace, and updating this analysis as appropriate. We assume that the information is correct, complete, and reliable. Further, the project and investment economics should be “stress We made certain assumptions about the future performance of the tested” to ensure that potential fluctuations in revenue and cost glbllobal, national , and lllocal economy and real estttate marktket, and on assumptions resulting from alterna tive scenarios regarding the other factors similarly outside either our control or that of the client. We economy and real estate market conditions will not cause failure. analyzed trends and the information available to us in drawing these In addition, we assume that the following will occur in accordance with conclusions. However, given the fluid and dynamic nature of the current expectations: economy and real estate markets, as well as the uncertainty surrounding particularly the near-term future, it is critical to monitor the • Economic, employment, and household growth. economy and marktkets continuousl y and to revis it theaforementi oned • Other ftforecastsof tdtrends and demograp hic and economic patterns, conclusions periodically to ensure that they are reflective of changing including consumer confidence levels. market conditions. • The cost of development and construction. • Tax laws (i.e., property and income tax rates, deductibility of We assume that the economy and real estate markets will grow at a mortgage interest, and so forth). stable and moderate rate to 2020 and beyond. However, stable and • Availability and cost of capital and mortgage financing for real moderate growth patterns are historically not sustainable over extended estate developers, owners and buyers. periods of time, the economy is cyclical, and real estate markets are • Competitive projects will be developed as planned (active and typically highly sensitive to business cycles. Further, it is very difficult to future) and that a reasonable stream of supply offerings will satisfy predict when an economic and real estate upturn will end. real estate demand. With the above in mind, we assume that the long term average • Major public works projects occur and are completed as planned. absorption rates and price changes will be as projected, realizing that most of the time performance will be either above or below said Should any of the above change, this analysis should be updated, with average rates. the conclusions reviewed accordingly (and possibly revised). Our analysis does not consider the potential impact of future economic shocks on the national and/or local economy, and does not consider the potential benefits from major "booms” that may occur. Similarly, the analysis does not reflect the residual impact on the real estate market and the competitive environment of such a shock or boom. Also, it is important to note that it is difficult to predict changing consumer and market psychology.
59 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
204 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia General Limiting Conditions
Reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the data contained be used for any purpose other than that for which it is prepared or for in this study reflect accurate and timely information and are believed to which prior written consent has first been obtained from RCLCO. be reliable. This study is based on estimates, assumptions, and other information developed by RCLCO from its independent research effort, general knowledge of the industry, and consultations with the client and its representatives. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the client, its agent, and representatives or in any other data source used in preparing or presenting this study. This report is based on information that to our knowledge was current as of the date of this report, and RCLCO has not undertaken any update of its rresearchesearch eeffortffort ssinceince sucsuchh date.
Our report may contain prospective financial information, estimates, or opinions that represent our view of reasonable expectations at a particular time, but such information, estimates, or opinions are not offered as predictions or assurances that a particular level of income or profit will be achieved, that particular events will occur, or that a particular price will be offered or accepted. Actual results achieved during the period covered by our prospective financial analysis may vary from those described in our report, and the variations may be material. Therefore, no warranty or representation is made by RCLCO that any of the projected values or results contained in this study will be achieved.
Possession of this study does not carry with it the right of publication thereof or to use the name of "Robert Charles Lesser & Co." or "RCLCO" in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of RCLCO. No abstracting, excerpting, or summarization of this study may be made without first obtaining the prior written consent of RCLCO. This report is not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities or other similar purpose where it may be relied upon to any degree by any person other than the client without first obtaining the prior written consent of RCLCO. This study may not
60 Dominion Boulevard | City of Chesapeake | April 11, 2014 | E4-11982.40
Appendix | 205 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE LIST OF EXHIBITS
I. SOCIOECONOMICS
Exhibit I-1 Map of Geographies; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area and Chesapeake City; February 2014
Exhibit I-2A Annual Employment Growth; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2040
Exhibit I-2B Historical and Projected Employment Growth, Excluding Military; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2035
Exhibit I-3 Job Growth by Sector; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area;
2001-2040
Exhibit I-4 Household Growth by Block Group; Norfolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2000-2010
Exhibit I-5 Household Growth by Block Group; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2000-2010
Exhibit I-6 Household Growth; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2040
Exhibit I-7 Household and Economic Growth Summaries; Chesapeake City and Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2000-2018
Exhibit I-8 Total Jobs to Household Ratio; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2001-2040
Exhibit I-9 Total Population Migration; Chesapeake City, Virginia; 2009-2010
Exhibit I-10 Historical Net Absorption; Virginia Beach, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Portsmouth; 2010
Exhibit I-11 Single-Family and Multifamily Permits; Chesapeake, Virginia; 1990-2013
Page i E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
206 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit I-12 Single-Family and Multifamily Permits; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2013
Exhibit I-13 Chesapeake City Permits as a % of Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News MSA Permits; Chesapeake City and Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2013
Exhibit I-14 Single-Family and Multifamily Building Permits; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2020
Exhibit I-15 Average Household Size; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2040
Exhibit I-16 Median Existing Single-Family Home Price; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 1990-2020
Exhibit I-17 Median Home Value by Census Tract; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2013
Exhibit I-18 Median Household Income by Census Tract; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2013
Exhibit I-19 Age of Householder by Income; Chesapeake City; 2013
Exhibit I-20 Age of Householder by Income; Chesapeake City; 2018
Exhibit I-21 Change in Age of Householder; Chesapeake City; 2013-2018
II. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Exhibit II-1 Tenure by Age and Income; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2007-2011 Estimate
Exhibit II-2 Building Type by Tenure; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2007-2011 Estimate
Exhibit II-3 Building Type by Age; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2007-2011 Estimate
Exhibit II-4 Age by Building Type; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2007-2011 Estimate
Page ii E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
Appendix | 207 Appendix: Supporting Exhibits
208 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit II-5 Average Sales Price; Hampton Roads MSA; 2000-2013
Exhibit II-6 Months of Supply, Active Listings, and Past Six Months of Sales; Hampton Roads Area; August 2013
Exhibit II-7 Percent New Home Sales by Year; Hampton Roads Area; 2000-2013
Exhibit II-8 % New Home Sales by Product Type; Hampton Roads Area; 2000-2013
Exhibit II-9 Map of Home Sales; Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2013
Exhibit II-10 Map of Home Sales by Price Range – New and Resale; Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2013
Exhibit II-11 Map of New Home Sales by Price Range; Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2013
Exhibit II-12 Home Sales by Year and Price Range; Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2013
Exhibit II-13 Home Sales by Year and Price Range; Chesapeake City, VA; 2009-2013
Exhibit II-14 Location of Actively Selling Residential Communities; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit II-15 Actively Selling Residential Communities; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit II-16 Price-to-Size Relationship – New Home Communities; Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
Exhibit II-17 Price-to-Size Relationship – New Single-Family Attached and Condominium Units; Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
Exhibit II-18 Price-to-Size Relationship – New Single-Family Detached Units; Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
Exhibit II-19 Location of Planned and Proposed Communities; Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
III. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Exhibit III-1 Rental Apartment Submarket Maps; Chesapeake and Norfolk-Hampton Roads Region; February 2014
Exhibit III-2 Rental Apartment Submarket Snapshot; Norfolk-Hampton Roads Region; February 2014
Page iii E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
Appendix | 209 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit III-3 Apartment Absorption vs. Completions; Norfolk-Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2018
Exhibit III-4 Apartment Absorption vs. Completions; Chesapeake Submarket; 2000-2018
Exhibit III-5 Chesapeake Submarket Capture of Norfolk-Hampton Roads Apartment Absorption; Chesapeake and Norfolk/Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2018
Exhibit III-6 Class A Asking Rents; Chesapeake and Norfolk-Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2013
Exhibit III-7 Class A Vacancy Rates; Chesapeake and Norfolk-Hampton Roads Region; 2000-2013
Exhibit III-8 Select Apartment Community Comparables; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-9 Select Apartment Community Comparables; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-10 Price-to-Size Relationship; New Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-11 Price-to-Size Relationship – Studio and One-Bedroom Units; Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-12 Price-to-Size Relationship – Two-Bedroom Units; Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-13 Price-to-Size Relationship – Three-Bedroom Units; Newer Apartments in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit III-14 Planned and Proposed Rental Apartments; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
IV. RETAIL
Exhibit IV-1 Retail Submarket Map; Hampton Roads Market, VA; February 2014
Exhibit IV-2 Retail Inventory; Study Area; Deep Creek Submarket; 2005-2013
Exhibit IV-3 Retail Inventory; Deep Creek Submarket; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2005-2013
Exhibit IV-4 Retail Absorption vs. Completions; Deep Creek Submarket; 2006-2014 YTD
Page iv E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
210 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit IV-5 SF of Current Retail Mix by Type; South Side of Hamptons Roads; March 2014
Exhibit IV-6 Retail Asking Rent and Vacancy; Deep Creek Submarket and MSA; 2005-2013
Exhibit IV-7 Retail Vacancy SF and Rate by Type; South side of Hampton Roads; 2012
Exhibit IV-8 Select Retail Comparables; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit IV-9 Select Retail Comparables; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; February 2014
Exhibit IV-10 Map of Grocery Stores; Close to Study Area in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit IV-11 Map of Target, Wal-Mart and K-Mart; Close to Study Area in Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit IV-12 Planned and Proposed Retail; Norfolk/Chesapeake Submarket; February 2014
Exhibit IV-13 Map for Current Retail Under and Oversupply; 10-Mile Ring around Study Area; March 2014
Exhibit IV-14 Current Retail Under and Oversupply; 10-Mile Ring around Study Area; March 2014
V. OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL
Exhibit V-1 Employment Density by Census Tract; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2013
Exhibit V-2 Employment Density by Census Tract; Suffolk, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth; Virginia; 2013
Exhibit V-3 Information-Related Employment by Census Tract; Hampton Roads, VA; 2013
Exhibit V-4 Professional and Tech-Related Employment by Census Tract; Hampton Roads, VA; 2013
Exhibit V-5 Top 10 Industries by Employment; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2011
Exhibit V-6 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; Pre-1950
Exhibit V-7 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 1950-1970
Page v E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
Appendix | 211 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit V-8 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 1970-1980
Exhibit V-9 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 1980-1990
Exhibit V-10 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 1990-2000
Exhibit V-11 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 2000-2014
Exhibit V-12 Office and Industrial Buildings; Chesapeake Region; 2014
Exhibit V-13 Number of Employment Cores and Total MSA Employment; Virginia Beach MSA – Not Including Military Employment or Cores; 2013, 2024, and 2035
Exhibit V-14 Map of Core Areas; Hampton Roads, VA; 2014
Exhibit V-15 Core Types; Hampton Roads, VA; 2014
Exhibit V-16 Office Submarket Map; Southern Chesapeake Submarket, VA; March 2014
Exhibit V-17 Office Absorption vs. Completions; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 2006-2013
Exhibit V-18 Office Performance; Southern Chesapeake Submarket, VA; 2006-2013
Exhibit V-19 Overall Office Market Performance; Southern Chesapeake Submarket, VA; 2006-2013
Exhibit V-20 Office Asking Rent and Vacancy; Deep Creek Submarket and MSA; 2006-2013
Exhibit V-21 Office Submarket Performance; Southern Chesapeake Submarket and MSA; 2013
Exhibit V-22 Map of Comparable Office Buildings; Southern Chesapeake Submarket, VA; March 2014
Exhibit V-23 Comparable Office Buildings; Southern Chesapeake Submarket, VA; March 2014
Exhibit V-24 Industrial Inventory; Study Area; Deep Creek Submarket; 2005-2013
Exhibit V-25 Industrial Absorption vs. Completions; Deep Creek Submarket; 2006-2013
Exhibit V-26 Industrial Absorption vs. Completions; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA; 2006-2013
Page vi E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
212 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE Exhibit V-27 Industrial Asking Rent and Vacancy; Deep Creek Submarket; 2006-2013
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
Exhibit VI-1 Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities; Dominion Study Area; March 2014
Exhibit VI-2 Summary of Demands; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Exhibit VI-3 Job to Housing Ratios; Dominion Study Area; March 2014
Exhibit VI-4 Employment Matrix; Chesapeake, VA; March 2014
Exhibit VI-5 Residential Matrix by Household Driver; Chesapeake, VA; February 2014
Exhibit VI-6 For-Sale Residential Demand; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Exhibit VI-7 For-Rent Residential Demand; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Exhibit VI-8 Retail Demand; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Exhibit VI-9 Office Demand; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Exhibit VI-10 Industrial Demand; Dominion Study Area; 2014-2035
Page vii E4-11982.40 March 27, 2014
Appendix | 213 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
I. SOCIOECONOMICS
214 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-1
MAP OF GEOGRAPHIES VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA AND CHESAPEAKE CITY FEBRUARY 2014
Virginia Beach MSA
Chesapeake City
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit I-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 215 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-2A
ANNUAL EMPLOYMENT GROWTH VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2040
20,000 PROJECTED TOTAL NON- MILITARY YEAR EMPLOYMENT CAGR 1990 606,667 15,000 1995 650,633 1.41% 2000 723,600 2.15% 2005 761,367 1.02% 2010 736,300 -0.67% # 10,000 2015 784,774 1.28% 2020 808,232 0.59% # 2030 822,619 0.18% 5,000 2040 846,748 0.29%
AVG. ANNUAL GROWTH 1990-2000 11,693 0 2000-2010 1,270 2010-2020 7,193 2020-2030 1,439 2030-2040 2,413 -5,000 TOTAL OFFICE YEAR EMPLOYMENT CAGR 1990 100,967 -10,000 1995 122,171 3.89% 2000 152,026 4.47% 2005 155,880 0.50% 2010 147,156 -1.15% -15,000 2015 158,425 1.49% 2020 165,305 0.85% 2025 166,489 0.14% -20,000 2030 168,891 0.29% 2040 178,053 0.53%
AVG. ANNUAL GROWTH -25,000 1990-2000 5,106 2000-2010 -487 2010-2020 1,815 2020-2030 359 Office Employment Growth Total Employment Growth Excluding Military Military Employment Growth 2030-2040 916
* This data does not include military or government employment SOURCE: Moody's Economy.com
Exhibit I-2A E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
216 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-2B
HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT GROWTH, EXCLUDING MILITARY VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2035
900,000 PROJECTED
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
650,000
600,000
550,000
500,000
Moody's Economy.com Moody's Economy.com Hampton Roads TPO Forecast*
*2013 Hampton Roads TPO employment was scaled to match 2013 MSA employment SOURCE: Moody's Economy.com; Hampton Roads TPO; RCLCO
Exhibit I-2B E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 217 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-3
JOB GROWTH BY SECTOR VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 2001-2040
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
-5,000
-10,000
-15,000
-20,000 Military Natl. Construction Manufacturing Trade, Information Financial Professional Education and Leisure and Other Services Government Resources Transportation Activities and Business Health Hospitality and Mining & Utilities Services Services 2001-2010 2011-2020 2021-2030 2031-2040
SOURCE: Moody's Economy.com
Exhibit I-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
218 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-4
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH BY BLOCK GROUP NORFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2000-2010
MAP KEY
> 0 1 - 100
101 - 200
201 - 500
501 - 1,000
>1,000
SOURCE: U.S. Census
Exhibit I-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 219 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-5
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH RATE BY BLOCK GROUP SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2000-2010
MAP KEY
> 0% 0.1% - 1.0%
1.1% - 2.0%
2.1% - 5.0%
> 5.0%
SOURCE: U.S. Census
Exhibit I-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
220 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-6
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2040
14,000 PROJECTED TOTAL YEAR HOUSEHOLDS CAGR 1980 404,209 1985 451,883 2.25% 1990 515,905 2.69% 12,000 1995 555,921 1.51% 2000 582,153 0.93% 2005 613,699 1.06% 2010 630,405 0.54% # 2015 656,543 0.82% 10,000 2020 689,241 0.98% # 2025 712,159 0.66% 2030 729,643 0.49% 2035 747,042 0.47% 8,000 2040 759,073 0.32%
AVG. ANNUAL GROWTH 1980-1990 11,170 1990-2000 6,625 6,000 2000-2010 4,825 2010-2020 5,884 2020-2030 4,040 2030- 2040 2, 943
4,000
2,000
0 2011 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040
Annual Household Growth
SOURCE: Moody's Economy.com
Exhibit I-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 221 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-7
HOUSEHOLD AND ECONOMIC GROWTH SUMMARIES CHESAPEAKE CITY AND VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 2000-2018
Population Avg. Annual Growth Annual Growth Rate 2000 2013 2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 2000-2013 2013-2018
Chesapeake 199,184 222,209 227,289 1,771 1,016 0.85% 0.45%
MSA Moodys 1,581,131 1,707,874 1,764,351 9,749 11,295 0.59% 0.65% MSA Esri 1,580,057 1,676,822 1,699,366 7,443 4,509 0.46% 0.27% Study Area 2,615 2,658 2,762 3 21 0.13% 0.77%
Households Avg. Annual Growth Annual Growth Rate 2000 2013 2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 Chesapeake 69,900 81,548 85,838 896 858 1.19% 1.03%
MSA Moodys 582,153 643,643 677,549 4,730 6,781 0.78% 1.03% MSA Esri 581,560 640,653 661,123 4,546 4,094 0.75% 0.63% Study Area 850 863 898 1 7 0.12% 0.80%
Median Income Avg. Annual Growth Annual Growth Rate 2000 2013 2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 Chesapeake $68,489 $79,697 $2,242 3.08% MSA Moodys $42,135 $51,902 $60,104 $751 $1,640 1.62% 2.98% MSA Esri $56,342 $64,428 $1,617 2.72% Study Area $106,462 $116,548 $2,017 1.83%
Median Home Value Avg. Annual Growth Annual Growth Rate 2000 2013 2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 2000-2013 2013-2018 Chesapeake $256,360 $296,356 $7,999 2.94% MSA Moodys $113,373 $197,003 $244,244 $6,433 $9,448 4.34% 4.39% MSA Esri $228,287 $272,331 $8,809 3.59% Study Area $348,526 $379,502 $6,195 1.72%
SOURCE: Esri; Moody's Economy.com
Exhibit I-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
222 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-8
TOTAL JOBS TO HOUSEHOLD RATIO VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 2001-2040
1.5 PROJECTED
1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3
1.25
1.2
1.15
1.1
1.05
SOURCE: Moody's Economy.com
Exhibit I-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 223 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-9
TOTAL POPULATION MIGRATION* CHESAPEAKE CITY, VIRGINIA 2009-2010
TOP AREAS OF ORIGIN DOMESTIC % OF TOTAL DOMESTIC % OF DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION DISTRIBUTION IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION COUNTY STATE IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION Same State In-Migration 5,519 66% Virginia Beach City VA 2,159 25.8% Different State In-Migration 2,847 34% Norfolk City VA 1,218 14.6% TOTAL DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION 8,366 100% Portsmouth City VA 932 11.1% Suffolk City VA 362 4.3% DOMESTIC % OF TOTAL Newport News City VA 130 1.6% OUT-MIGRATION DISTRIBUTION IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION Hampton City VA 129 1.5% Same State Out-Migration 4,887 63% SUB-TOTAL 4,930 59% Different State Out-Migration 2,887 37% TOTAL DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION 8,366 100% TOTAL DOMESTIC IN-MIGRATION 7,774 100% TOP STATES OF ORIGIN DOMESTIC % OF DOMESTIC MIGRATION INCOME DATA (2010) AREA IN-MIGRANTS IN-MIGRATION Inbound Income per cap. $19,700 Virginia 5,519 66.0% Outbound Income per cap. $20,000 North Carolina 307 3.7% Non-migrant Income per cap. $27,000 Florida 238 2.8% Maryland 112 1.3% California 110 1.3% New York 107 1.3% TOTAL 8,366
Blue = more in-migrants Red = more out-migrants
* The IRS measures migration by adding up the number of exemptions and returns that change address each year SOURCE: Internal Revenue Service, forbes.com
Exhibit I-9 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
224 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-10
HISTORICAL NET MIGRATION VIRGINIA BEACH, NORFOLK, SUFFOLK, AND PORTSMOUTH 2010
VIRGINIA BEACH NORFOLK Inbound Income per cap. $19,500 Inbound Income per cap. $16,900 Outbound Income per cap. $20,200 Outbound Income per cap. $17,600 Non-migrant Income per cap. $29,000 Non-migrant Income per cap. $22,000
Outbound Migration Outbound Migration
Inbound Migration Inbound Migration
SUFFOLK PORTSMOUTH Inbound Income per cap. $20,100 Inbound Income per cap. $19,500 Outbound Income per cap. $20,600 Outbound Income per cap. $20,200 Non-migrant Income per cap. $26,000 Non-migrant Income per cap. $29,000
Outbound Migration Outbound Migration
Inbound Migration Inbound Migration
number of returns SOURCE: Internal Revenue Service, forbes.com
Exhibit I-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 225 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-11
SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY PERMITS CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA 1990-2013
3,000 100%
2,500 80%
2,000 60%
1,500 40%
1,000 20%
500 0%
0 -20% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SF Permits MF Permits % MF
SOURCE: HUD State of the Cities
Exhibit I-11 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
226 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-12
SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY PERMITS VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2013
12,000 100%
90%
10,000 80%
70% 8,000
60%
6,000 50%
40%
4,000 30%
20% 2,000
10%
0 0% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SF Permits MF Permits % MF
SOURCE: HUD State of the Cities
Exhibit I-12 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 227 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-13
CHESAPEAKE CITY PERMITS AS A % OF VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS MSA PERMITS CHESAPEAKE CITY AND VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2013
12,000 70%
60% 10,000
50%
8,000 40%
6,000 30%
20% 4,000
10%
2,000 0%
0 -10% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Chesapeake City Total Permits MSA Total Permits % of MSA SF Permits % of MSA MF Permits
SOURCE: HUD State of the Cities
Exhibit I-13 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
228 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-14
SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY BUILDING PERMITS VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2020
14,000 PROJECTED 50% AVG. ANNUAL SINGLE- MULTI- YEAR PERMITS FAMILY % FAMILY % 45% 1986-1990 13,601 9,388 69% 4,213 31% 12,000 1991-1995 8,827 7,366 83% 1,461 17% 1996-2000 8,040 6,706 83% 1,333 17% 40% 2001-2005 10,594 7,938 75% 2,656 25% 2006-2010 5,424 3,703 68% 1,721 32% 2011-2015 7,084 5,934 84% 1,150 16% 10,000 35% 2016-2020 8,485 7,784 92% 701 8% 2021-2025 6,376 5,875 92% 501 8% 2026-2030 5,858 5,465 93% 392 7% 30% 8,000
25%
6,000 20%
15% 4, 000
10%
2,000 5%
0 0%
Single-Family Multifamily % Multifamily
SOURCE: Moody's Analytics
Exhibit I-14 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 229 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-15
AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2040
2.85 PROJECTED
2.80
2.75
2.70
2.65
2.60
2.55
2.50
2.45
SOURCE: Moody's Analytics
Exhibit I-15 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
230 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-16
MEDIAN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME PRICE VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1990-2020
MEDIAN $300,000 PROJECTED YEAR PRICE CAGR 1980 $49,094 1985 $71,946 7.94% 1990 $85,020 3.40% 1995 $105,742 4.46% $250,000 2000 $113,373 1.40% 2005 $221,679 14.35% 2010 $202,886 -1.76% 2015 $216,659 1.32% 2020 $262,383 3.90% $200,000 2025 $307,620 3.23% 2030 $354,511 2.88% 2035 $409,732 2.94% 2040 $487,565 3.54%
1980-2010 4.84% $150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
Median Existing Single-Family Home Price (NAR)
SOURCE: Moody's Analytics
Exhibit I-16 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 231 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-17
MEDIAN HOME VALUE BY CENSUS TRACT SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2013
2013 Median Home Value by Census Tracts $300,001 or greater $250,001 - $300,000 $200,001 - $250,000 $150,001 - $200,000 $150,000 or less
* Data is from Esri 2010 estimates SOURCE: ESRI
Exhibit I-17 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
232 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-18
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2013
2010 Median Income by Census Tracts $75,001 or greater $60,001 - $75,000 $45,001 - $60,000 $30,001 - $45,000 $30,000 or less
* Data is from Esri 2010 estimates SOURCE: ESRI
Exhibit I-18 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 233 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-19
AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER BY INCOME CHESAPEAKE CITY 2013
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 Plus TOTAL INCOME RANGE #%#%#%#%#%#% #%
Less Than $15,000 399 15.0% 866 6.8% 612 4.1% 744 3.9% 1,099 6.9% 1,989 12.4% 5,709 7.0% $15,000 - $24,999 344 12.9% 930 7.3% 664 4.4% 641 3.4% 729 4.5% 1,828 11.4% 5,136 6.3% $25,000 - $34,999 431 16.2% 1,557 12.2% 1,016 6.8% 985 5.2% 1,241 7.7% 2,152 13.4% 7,382 9.1% $35,000 - $49,999 521 19.6% 2,061 16.1% 1,687 11.3% 1,847 9.7% 1,814 11.3% 2,634 16.4% 10,564 13.0% $50,000 - $74,999 511 19.2% 2,726 21.4% 3,065 20.5% 3,343 17.5% 2,649 16.5% 2,611 16.2% 14,905 18.3% $75,000 - $99,999 291 10.9% 1,952 15.3% 2,740 18.4% 3,218 16.9% 2,475 15.4% 1,882 11.7% 12,558 15.4% $100,000 - $149,999 144 5.4% 1,926 15.1% 3,355 22.5% 5,344 28.0% 3,600 22.5% 2,016 12.5% 16,385 20.1% $150,000 - $199,999 17 0.6% 520 4.1% 1,189 8.0% 1,858 9.7% 1,470 9.2% 582 3.6% 5,636 6.9% Over $200,000 6 0.2% 225 1.8% 597 4.0% 1,110 5.8% 952 5.9% 383 2.4% 3,273 4.0% TOTAL 2,664 100% 12,763 100% 14,925 100% 19,090 100% 16,029 100% 16,077 100% 81,548 100% Percent of Total 3% 16% 18% 23% 20% 20% 100%
HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
23.4% 20.1% 18.3% 18.3% 19.7% 19.7% 15.4% 15.7% 13.0% 9. 1% 7.0% 6.3% 6.9% 4.0% 3.3%
Less Than $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 Over 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 Plus $15,000 ------$200,000 35,00%Age of Householder $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 $199,999 Income Ranges
SOURCE: ESRI
Exhibit I-19 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
234 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-20
AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER BY INCOME CHESAPEAKE CITY 2018
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 Plus TOTAL INCOME RANGE #%#%#%#%#%#% #%
Less Than $15,000 374 15.1% 879 6.3% 546 3.6% 596 3.5% 1,045 5.8% 2,296 12.0% 5,736 6.7% $15,000 - $24,999 303 12.2% 757 5.4% 533 3.5% 460 2.7% 594 3.3% 1,737 9.1% 4,384 5.1% $25,000 - $34,999 299 12.0% 1,091 7.8% 662 4.4% 551 3.2% 845 4.7% 1,847 9.7% 5,295 6.2% $35,000 - $49,999 519 20.9% 2,065 14.7% 1,585 10.5% 1,473 8.6% 1,812 10.1% 3,073 16.1% 10,527 12.3% $50,000 - $74,999 478 19.2% 2,711 19.3% 2,713 17.9% 2,523 14.7% 2,497 13.9% 2,877 15.1% 13,799 16.1% $75,000 - $99,999 300 12.1% 2,317 16.5% 2,762 18.3% 2,740 15.9% 2,694 15.0% 2,417 12.7% 13,230 15.4% $100,000 - $149,999 172 6.9% 2,688 19.2% 3,681 24.3% 5,051 29.3% 4,409 24.6% 2,890 15.1% 18,891 22.0% $150,000 - $199,999 32 1.3% 1,132 8.1% 1,883 12.4% 2,595 15.1% 2,670 14.9% 1,281 6.7% 9,593 11.2% Over $200,000 8 0.3% 391 2.8% 761 5.0% 1,221 7.1% 1,344 7.5% 658 3.4% 4,383 5.1% TOTAL 2,485 100% 14,031 100% 15,126 100% 17,210 100% 17,910 100% 19,076 100% 85,838 100% Percent of Total 3% 16% 18% 20% 21% 22% 100%
HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
22.0% 22.2% 20.0% 20.9% 17.6% 16.1% 15.4% 16.3% 12.3% 11.2% 6.7% 5.1% 6.2% 5.1% 2.9%
Less Than $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 Over 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 Plus $15,000 ------$200,000 35,00%Age of Householder $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 $199,999 Income Ranges
SOURCE: ESRI
Exhibit I-20 E1-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 235 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit I-21
CHANGE IN AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER CHESAPEAKE CITY 2013-2018
15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 Plus TOTAL INCOME RANGE#%#%#%#%#%#% #%
TOTAL -179 -4% 1,268 30% 201 5% -1,880 -44% 1,881 44% 2,999 70% 4,290 Percent of Total -4% 30% 5% -44% 44% 70% 100%
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH BY AGE 2013-2018
2,999
1,881
1,268
201
-179
-1,880
SOURCE: ESRI
Exhibit I-21 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
236 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
II. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Appendix | 237 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-1
TENURE BY AGE AND BY INCOME VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA1 2007-2011 ESTIMATE
% of Total Households Income Less than $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- More than Own $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 $150,000 Total Under 25 2% 2% 4% 4% 5% 3% 19% 25 - 34 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 7% 35 - 54 2% 2% 5% 5% 6% 3% 22% Age 55 -64 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 10% 65+ 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 10% Total 8% 7% 15% 13% 15% 9% 67%
Less than $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- More than Rent $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $150,000 $150,000 Total Under 25 7% 3% 3% 2% 1% 0% 15% 25 - 34 2% 2% 2% 1% 0% 0% 7% 35 - 54 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 8% Age 55 -64 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 65+ 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% Total 14% 6% 7% 4% 2% 1% 33%
1 Estimated by Pumas 2000, 2100, 2200, 2801, 2802, 2803, 2900, 3000, and 3100 SOURCE: American Community Survey, 5% Sample, 2007-2011
Exhibit II-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
238 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-2
BUILDING TYPE BY TENURE VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1 2007-2011 ESTIMATE
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
Number of of Units Number 400,000
200,000
0 Mobile Home Multifamily Single-family Attached Single-family Detached Building Type
Rent Own
1 Estimated by Pumas 2000, 2100, 2200, 2801, 2802, 2803, 2900, 3000, and 3100 SOURCE: American Community Survey, 5% Sample, 2007-2011
Exhibit II-2 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 239 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-3
BUILDING TYPE BY AGE VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1 2007-2011 ESTIMATE
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
Number of of Units Number 400,000
200,000
0 Mobile Home Multifamily Single-family Attached Single-family Detached Building Type
Under 25 25 - 34 35 - 54 55 -64 65+
1 Estimated by Pumas 2000, 2100, 2200, 2801, 2802, 2803, 2900, 3000, and 3100 SOURCE: American Community Survey, 5% Sample, 2007-2011
Exhibit II-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
240 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-4
AGE BY BUILDING TYPE VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 1 2007-2011 ESTIMATE
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
Number of of Units Number 200,000
100,000
0 Under 25 25 - 34 35 - 54 55 -64 65+ Building Type
Mobile Home Multifamily Single-family Attached Single-family Detached
1 Estimated by Pumas 2000, 2100, 2200, 2801, 2802, 2803, 2900, 3000, and 3100 SOURCE: American Community Survey, 5% Sample, 2007-2011
Exhibit II-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 241 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-5
AVERAGE SALE PRICES HAMPTON ROADS MSA 2000-2013
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$1 50,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Resales New Sales
SOURCE: Rose and Womble (2000-2011), Old Dominion University (2012-2013)
Exhibit II-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
242 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-6
MONTHS OF SUPPLY, ACTIVE LISTINGS, AND PAST SIX MONTHS SALES HAMPTON ROADS AREA AUGUST 2013
2,500
2,000
1,500
Units
1,000 13
500 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 5
0 <$100k $101k-$150k $151k-$200k $201k-$250k $251k-$300k $301k-$350k $351k-$400k $401k-$500k $501k+ Active Listings Sales - Past 6 Months Months of Supply
SOURCE: Rose and Womble
Exhibit II-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 243 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-7
PERCENT NEW HOME SALES BY YEAR HAMPTON ROADS AREA 2000-2013
35,000 40.0% % NEW HOME SALES Year % New 2000 30.0% 2001 35.0% 35.0% 30,000 2002 31.0% 2003 29.0% 2004 34.0% 2005 32.0% 30.0% 2006 30.0% 25,000 2007 26.0% 2008 22.8% 2009 17.8% 25.0% 2010 16.9% 2011 15.6% 20,000 2012 16.7%
2013 15.3%
20.0%
15,000
15.0%
10,000 10.0%
5,000 5.0%
0 0.0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Resales New Sales % New
SOURCE: Residential DataBank (2000-2011), Old Dominion University (2012-2013)
Exhibit II-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
244 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-8
% NEW HOME SALES BY PRODUCT TYPE HAMPTON ROADS AREA 2000-2013
80%
HAMPTON ROADS PRODUCT
70% MIX 2013 CLOSINGS
Product Type % Detached 67% 60% Multistory 3% Multiplex 10% 50% Townhouse/Duplex 20%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Detached Multistory Multiplex Townhouse/Duplex
SOURCE: Residential DataBank (2000-2011), Old Dominion University (2012-2013)
Exhibit II-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 245 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-9
MAP OF HOME SALES CHESAPEAKE CITY, VA 2009-2013
All Home Sales New Home Sales
SOURCE: City of Chesapeake
Exhibit II-9 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
246 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-10
MAP OF HOME SALES BY PRICE RANGE - NEW AND RESALE CHESAPEAKE CITY, VA 2009-2013
MAP KEY
SOURCE: City of Chesapeake
Exhibit II-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 247 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-11
MAP OF NEW HOME SALES BY PRICE RANGE CHESAPEAKE CITY, VA 2009-2013
MAP KEY
SOURCE: City of Chesapeake
Exhibit II-11 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
248 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-12
HOMES SALES BY YEAR AND PRICE RANGE CHESAPEAKE CITY, VA 2009-2013
ALL HOME SALES NEW HOME SALES ONLY
100% 100%
90% 90%
80% 80%
70% 70%
60% 60% More than $500,000 More than $500,000 $400,000-$500,000 $400,000-$500,000 50% 50% $300,000-$400,000 $300,000-$400,000 $200,000-$300,000 $200,000-$300,000 40% Less t han $200, 000 40% Less t han $200, 000
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
SOURCE: City of Chesapeake
Exhibit II-12 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 249 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-13
HOMES SALES BY YEAR AND PRICE RANGE CHESAPEAKE CITY, VA 2009-2013
ALL HOME SALES
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000 More than $500,000 $400,000-$500,000 2,500 $300,000-$400,000 $200,000-$300,000 2, 000 Less than $200, 000
1,500
1,000
500
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
SOURCE: City of Chesapeake
Exhibit II-13 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
250 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-14
LOCATION OF ACTIVELY SELLING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP KEY COMMUNITY NAME UNITS Attached Product A1 Deep Creek Commons 40 A4 A2 GreenTree Commons 63 A3 The Grove at Arboretum 112 A4 Monarch Walk 63 Total 278 A1 Detached Product D1 Jordan Hall 83 D2 The Meadows at KempBridge 86 D2 D3 Stony Run Manor 51 A3 D4 Edinburgh 81 A2 D3 D5 Albemarle River 200 D5 D6 Chapel Hill Estates 98 M1 D7 Ashdon Builders 0 Total 599
D6 Master-Planned Community M1 Culpepper Landing 740 D1 Study Area
D4
SOURCE: RCLCO; Google Earth
Exhibit II-14 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 251 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-15
ACTIVELY SELLING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
COMMUNITY/ YEAR TOTAL BASE SALES PRICE BASE HOME SIZE (SF) $/SF MAP BUILDER/ SALES HOMES TOTAL ANNUAL KEY ADDRESS PICTURE TYPE BEGAN PLANNED SALES ABSORP. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. OTHER A1 Deep Creek Commons TH 2013 40 33 33 $164,900 - $169,900 $167,400 1,488 - 1,488 1,488 $111 - $114 $113 Ashdon Builders 3B, 2.5ba 904 Deep Creek Run One car garage
A2 GreenTree Commons TH 2011 63 54 18 $243,500 - $266,000 $254,750 1,808 - 2,045 1,808 $135 - $130 $141 Ashdon Builders 3B, 2.5ba 821 Harvest Green Lane One car garage 757-312-0918
A3 The Grove at Arboretum 4 Plex 1Q 2012 112 111 65 $207,400 - $207,900 $207,650 1,704 - 1,727 1,704 $122 - $120 $122 Dragas Companies 2 story Kempsville Rd & Green Tree Road 2-3B 757-410-0087
A4 Monarch Walk Duplex 3Q 2012 63 44 29 $149,900 - $167,500 $158,700 1,200 - 1,632 1,200 $125 - $103 $132 McQ Builders 55+ 3901 Regina Way Eva Hendrick 757-746-5814
Exhibit II-15 E4-11982.40 Page 1 of 3 Printed: 3/27/2014
252 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-15
ACTIVELY SELLING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
COMMUNITY/ YEAR TOTAL BASE SALES PRICE BASE HOME SIZE (SF) $/SF MAP BUILDER/ SALES HOMES TOTAL ANNUAL KEY ADDRESS PICTURE TYPE BEGAN PLANNED SALES ABSORP. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. OTHER D1 Jordan Hall SFD 3Q 2012 83 81 54 $339,900 - $389,900 $364,900 2,176 - 2,878 2,176 $156 - $135 $168 Nature access, large backyards Ashdon Builders 4-7B $346,770 - $384,770 $365,770 2,176 - 2,825 2,176 $159 - $136 $168 Families, retirees 509 Hanbury Road W $339,900 - $389,900 $364,900 2,300 - 2,878 2,300 $148 - $135 $159 Move-up buyers
D2 The Meadows at KempBridge SFD 2010 86 82 27 $366,900 - $418,900 $392,900 2,250 - 3,080 2,250 $163 - $136 $175 Families, older couples Napolitano Homes Lots of people have pets 1429 Kemp Bridge Lane 757-277-9493
D3 Stony Run Manor SFD 2007 51 3 8.0 $429,000 - $429,000 $429,000 2,518 - 2,518 2,518 $170 - $170 $170 Buyers like Greenbriar access, Christopher Kait Construction short commutes, and Preston Homes customize the homes 609 Flatrock Lane
D4 Edinburgh SFD n/a 81 n/a n/a $700,000 - $1,000,000 $850,000 3,500 - 9,500 6,500 $200 - $105 $131 Cohen Homes 4-6B Preston Homes 1608 Falls Brook Run Debbie - 757-648-0999
D5 Albemarle River SFD 2013 200 50 50 $359,900 - $394,650 $377,275 2,300 - 2,700 2,300 $156 - $146 $164 Work all over HR area Graf Construction Like the convenience 1203 Bonnie View Arch and natural feel Lana Cary757 -729 - 5724 Close to Greenbriar
D6 Chapel Hill Estates SFD 2013 98 n/a n/a $339,900 - $369,900 $354,900 2,393 - 2,684 2,393 $142 - $138 $148 Ashdon Builders 738 Tyler Way
Exhibit II-15 E4-11982.40 Page 2 of 3 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 253 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-15
ACTIVELY SELLING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
COMMUNITY/ YEAR TOTAL BASE SALES PRICE BASE HOME SIZE (SF) $/SF MAP BUILDER/ SALES HOMES TOTAL ANNUAL KEY ADDRESS PICTURE TYPE BEGAN PLANNED SALES ABSORP. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. MIN - MAX AVG. OTHER Closings Closings M1 Culpepper Landing Robinson Dev. Group MPC 2007 740 293 104 Culpepper Legacy Series ABT Cust. & Vintage Homes SFD $294,525 - $510,380 $402,453 1,785 - 3,380 1,785 $165 - $151 $225 Culpepper Heritage Series HH Hunt SFD $281,990 - $298,990 $290,490 1,943 - 2,406 1,943 $145 - $124 $150 Culpepper The Grove Ryan Homes SFD 21 $298,000 - $358,000 $328,000 2,112 - 3,220 2,112 $141 - $111 $155 ABT Custom Homes Row Homes 25 $201,960 - $265,344 $233,652 1,496 - 2,073 1,496 $135 - $128 $156 Kotarides Builders Villas 22 $174,524 - $174,524 $174,524 1,471 - 1471 1,471 $119 - $119 $119
N/a The Riverfront at Harbour View East West Communities MPC 2011 767 657 7 Harbour View Linkside Cove 4 plex 2004 124 124 Resales $225,000 - $300,000 $262,500 2,164 - 2,583 2,164 $104 - $116 $121 Harbour View The Gables Terry Peterson SFD & Attached 2011 43 $262,000 - $518,475 $390,238 1,822 - 3,345 1,822 $144 - $155 $214 Harbor View Neighborhoods Multiple Custom Bldrs SFD 2005 600 533 7 $474,900 - $750,000 $612,450 3,166 - 4000 3,166 $150 - $188 $193 Lots - $215K-$715K
SOURCE: Individual Project Websites; Broker interviews; CREED
Exhibit II-15 E4-11982.40 Page 3 of 3 Printed: 3/27/2014
254 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-16
PRICE-TO-SIZE RELATIONSHIP - NEW HOME COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA MARCH 2014
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000
Deep Creek Commons GreenTree Commons The Grove at Arboretum Monarch Walk The Meadows at KempBridge Stony Run Manor Jordan Hall Edinburgh Albemarle River Chapel Hill Estates Harbour View Linkside Cove Harbour View The Gables Harbor View Neighborhoods Culpepper Landing
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit II-16 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 255 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-17
PRICE-TO-SIZE RELATIONSHIP - NEW SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED AND CONDOMINIUM UNITS CHESAPEAKE, VA MARCH 2014
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800 3,000
Deep Creek Commons GreenTree Commons The Grove at Arboretum Monarch Walk Harbour View Linkside Cove Harbour View The Gables Culpepper Landing
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit II-17 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
256 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-18
PRICE-TO-SIZE RELATIONSHIP - NEW SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS CHESAPEAKE, VA MARCH 2014
$750,000
$650,000
$550,000
$450,000
$350,000
$250,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 The Meadows at KempBridge Stony Run Manor Jordan Hall Edinburgh Albemarle River Chapel Hill Estates Harbor View Neighborhoods Culpepper Legacy Series Culpepper Heritage Series Culpepper The Grove
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit II-18 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 257 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit II-19
LOCATION OF PLANNED AND PROPOSED COMMUNITIES CHESAPEAKE, VA MARCH 2014
MEP KEY COMMUNITY NAME BUILDER UNITS 1 Hadley Park at Greenbrier Dragas Homes 92 villas 2 Albemarle River Graf Construction New phase
Study Area
1 2
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit II-19 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
258 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
III. MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Appendix | 259 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-1
RENTAL APARTMENT SUBMARKET MAPS CHESAPEAKE AND NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION FEBRUARY 2014
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
260 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-2
RENTAL APARTMENT SUBMARKET SNAPSHOT NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION FEBRUARY 2014
MAP ASKING KEY SUBMARKET BUILDINGS UNITS RENT VACANCY
1 Kempsville/Bayside 80 16,271 $1,058 4.0% 2 Lynnhaven/Oceana 49 9,867 $1,026 5.8% 3 Hampton/York 70 12,146 $978 3.3% 4 Williamsburg 19 2,790 $969 2.7% 5 Chesapeake 43 7,793 $958 3.6% 6 Norfolk 114 15,854 $889 3.3%
7 Newport News 103 19,374 $827 4.3% 8 Portsmouth/Suffolk 45 6,966 $785 2.8%
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-2 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 261 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-3
APARTMENT ABSORPTION VERSUS COMPLETIONS NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION 2000-2018
2,000 2000-2013 AVG NET ABSORPTION: 951 units/year PROJECTED 2000-2013 AVG COMPLETIONS: 975 units/year
1,500
1,000
500
0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
-500 Completions Net Absorption
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
262 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-4
APARTMENT ABSORPTION VERSUS COMPLETIONS CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET 2000-2018
600 2000-2013 AVG NET ABSORPTION: 133 units/year PROJECTED 2000-2013 AVG COMPLETIONS: 150 units/year
500
400
300
200
100
0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
-100
-200 Completions Net Absorption
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 263 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-5
CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET CAPTURE OF NORFOK-HAMPTON ROADS APARTMENT ABSORPTION CHESAPEAKE AND NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION 2000-2018
2,000 2000-2013 AVG. CAPTURE: 9% PROJECTED 40%
30%
1,500 20%
10% 1,000
0%
500 -10%
-20% 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 -30%
-500 -40% Metro Absorption Chesapeake Absorption % Capture of Region
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
264 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-6
CLASS A ASKING RENTS CHESAPEAKE AND NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION 2000-2013
$1,200
$1,100
$1,000
$900
$800
$700
$600 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Chesapeake Region
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 265 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-7
CLASS A VACANCY RATES CHESAPEAKE AND NORFOLK-HAMPTON ROADS REGION 2000-2013
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Chesapeake Region
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
266 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-8
SELECT APARTMENT COMMUNITY COMPARABLES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP KEY COMMUNITY NAME UNITS 1 Fenwyck Manor 288 2 Streets of Greenbrier 280 3 Aura at Towne Place 215 9 1 4 The Carlton at Greenbrier 176 8 2 4 5 The Morgan 164 5 3 6 Tapestry Park 190 7 Bell Great Bridge 192 8 Belmont at Greenbrier 348 6 10 9 Hideaway at Greenbrier 374
7 10 Adalay Bay 240 Total 2,467
Study Area
SOURCE: Google Maps; RCLCO
Exhibit III-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 267 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-9
SELECT APARTMENT COMMUNITY COMPARABLES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP MANAGEMENT YEAR FLOOR TOTAL UNIT AVG. UNIT AVG. BASE AVG. EFFECTIVE RENT AVG. EFF. EFFECTIVE AVG. EFF. KEY LOCATION BUILT PLAN UNITS MIX OCC. % BASE RENT RENT SIZE RANGE SIZE RENT/SF RENT/SF CONCESSIONS RANGE RENT RENT/SF RENT/SF 1 Fenwyck Manor 2013 Garden/TH 288 100% 93.8% $1,162 - $2,142 $1,379 850 - 1,858 1,103 $1.06 - $1.37 $1.25 $1,089 - $2,142 $1,287 $1.06 - $1.28 $1.17 1805 Kerwyck Pl 1B/1Ba 78 27% $1,162 - $1,162 $1,162 850 - 850 850 $1.37 - $1.37 $1.37 $1,089 - $1,089 $1,089 $1.28 - $1.28 $1.28 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 102 35% $1,311 - $1,311 $1,311 1,064 - 1,064 1,064 $1.23 - $1.23 $1.23 1 month free $1,202 - $1,202 $1,202 $1.13 - $1.13 $1.13 757-389-8387 2B/2Ba/G 12 4% $1,540 - $1,540 $1,540 1,374 - 1,374 1,374 $1.12 - $1.12 $1.12 $1,540 - $1,540 $1,540 $1.12 - $1.12 $1.12 2B/2.5Ba/TH 78 27% $1,450 - $1,575 $1,513 1,082 - 1,329 1,206 $1.34 - $1.19 $1.26 1 month free $1,329 - $1,444 $1,386 $1.23 - $1.09 $1.15 2B/2.5Ba/TH/G 12 4% $1,961 - $1,961 $1,961 1,858 - 1,858 1,858 $1.06 - $1.06 $1.06 $1,961 - $1,961 $1,961 $1.06 - $1.06 $1.06 3B/3.5ba/G 6 2% $2,142 - $2,142 $2,142 1,670 - 1,670 1,670 $1.28 - $1.28 $1.28 $2,142 - $2,142 $2,142 $1.28 - $1.28 $1.28
2 Streets of Greenbrier 2013 Garden/TH 280 100% 66.7% $965 - $1,530 $1,267 588 - 1,286 978 $1.19 - $1.64 $1.30 $965 - $1,530 $1,267 $1.19 - $1.64 $1.30 929 Wintercress Way Studio 17 6% 75% pre-leased $965 - $965 $965 588 - 588 588 $1.64 - $1.64 $1.64 Admin/Holding $965 - $965 $965 $1.64 - $1.64 $1.64 Chesapeake, VA 23320 1B/1Ba 108 39% $1,035 - $1,170 $1,103 701 - 917 809 $1.48 - $1.28 $1.38 Fee only $1,035 - $1,170 $1,103 $1.48 - $1.28 $1.36 757-420-4824 1B/1Ba/L 12 4% $1,200 - $1,200 $1,200 940 - 940 940 $1.28 - $1.28 $1.28 $99 $1,200 - $1,200 $1,200 $1.28 - $1.28 $1.28 2B/2Ba 108 39% $1,305 - $1,518 $1,412 1,020 - 1,221 1,121 $1.28 - $1.24 $1.26 $1,305 - $1,518 $1,412 $1.28 - $1.24 $1.26 2B/2Ba/L 12 4% $1,440 - $1,440 $1,440 1,211 - 1,211 1,211 $1.19 - $1.19 $1.19 $1,440 - $1,440 $1,440 $1.19 - $1.19 $1.19 3B/2Ba 23 8% $1,530 - $1,530 $1,530 1,286 - 1,286 1,286 $1.19 - $1.19 $1.19 $1,530 - $1,530 $1,530 $1.19 - $1.19 $1.19
3 Aura at Towne Place 2012 Garden 215 100% 95.3% $1,195 - $1,750 $1,427 739 - 1,378 1,062 $1.24 - $1.62 $1.34 $1,195 - $1,750 $1,427 $1.24 - $1.62 $1.34 717 Eden Way North 1B/1Ba 61 28% $1,195 - $1,205 $1,200 739 - 748 744 $1.62 - $1.61 $1.61 None $1,195 - $1,205 $1,200 $1.62 - $1.61 $1.61 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 120 56% $1,395 - $1,505 $1,450 1,057 - 1,213 1,135 $1.32 - $1.24 $1.28 $1,395 - $1,505 $1,450 $1.32 - $1.24 $1.28 757-296-0643 3B/2Ba 34 16% $1,750 - $1,750 $1,750 1,378 - 1,378 1,378 $1.27 - $1.27 $1.27 $1,750 - $1,750 $1,750 $1.27 - $1.27 $1.27
4 The Carlton at Greenbrier 2012 Garden 176 100% 95.5% $1,040 - $1,665 $1,348 830 - 1,320 1,122 $1.10 - $1.38 $1.20 $953 - $1,526 $1,236 $1.01 - $1.27 $1.10 501 Carlton Drive 1B/1Ba 45 26% $1,040 - $1,215 $1,128 830 - 880 855 $1.25 - $1.38 $1.32 1 month free $953 - $1,114 $1,034 $1.15 - $1.27 $1.21 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 107 61% $1,275 - $1,465 $1,370 1,160 - 1,220 1,190 $1.10 - $1.20 $1.15 1 month free $1,169 - $1,343 $1,256 $1.01 - $1.10 $1.06 855-637-1088 3B/2Ba 24 14% $1,665 - $1,665 $1,665 1,320 - 1,320 1,320 $1.26 - $1.26 $1.26 1 month free $1,526 - $1,526 $1,526 $1.16 - $1.16 $1.16
5 The Morgan 2010 Garden 164 100% 87.8% $1,126 - $1,705 $1,377 789 - 1,531 1,103 $1.11 - $1.43 $1.25 $1,126 - $1,705 $1,377 $1.11 - $1.43 $1.25 111 Gateway Court 1B/1Ba 32 20% $1,126 - $1,192 $1,159 789 - 868 829 $1.43 - $1.37 $1.40 $1,126 - $1,192 $1,159 $1.43 - $1.37 $1.40 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 92 56% $1,373 - $1,412 $1,393 1,023 - 1,220 1,122 $1.34 - $1.16 $1.25 $1,373 - $1,412 $1,393 $1.34 - $1.16 $1.24 757-410-2440 2B/2Ba/D 32 20% $1,450 - $1,505 $1,478 1,163 - 1,337 1,250 $1.25 - $1.13 $1.19 $1,450 - $1,505 $1,478 $1.25 - $1.13 $1.18 888-779-8143 3B/2Ba 8 5% $1,635 - $1,705 $1,670 1,267 - 1,531 1,399 $1.29 - $1.11 $1.20 $1,635 - $1,705 $1,670 $1.29 - $1.11 $1.19
6 Tapestry Park 2011 Garden 190 100% 100.0% $1,050 - $1,655 $1,294 786 - 1,400 1,022 $1.06 - $1.39 $1.27 $1,050 - $1,655 $1,294 $1.06 - $1.39 $1.27 728 Tapestry Park Loop 1B/1Ba 72 38% $1,050 - $1,092 $1,071 786 - 786 786 $1.34 - $1.39 $1.36 None $1,050 - $1,092 $1,071 $1.34 - $1.39 $1.36 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 22 12% $1,248 - $1,338 $1,293 1,172 - 1,172 1,106 $1.06 - $1.14 $1.10 $1,248 - $1,338 $1,293 $1.06 - $1.14 $1.17 757-548-7770 2B/2Ba 72 38% $1,399 - $1,399 $1,399 1,280 - 1,280 1,106 $1.09 - $1.09 $1.09 $1,399 - $1,399 $1,399 $1.09 - $1.09 $1.26 3B/2Ba 24 13% $1,650 - $1,655 $1,653 1,400 - 1,400 1,400 $1.18 - $1.18 $1.18 $1,650 - $1,655 $1,653 $1.18 - $1.18 $1.18
7 Bell Great Bridge 2009 Garden 192 100% 96.9% $1,112 - $1,475 $1,304 658 - 1,332 1,047 $1.11 - $1.69 $1.25 $1,112 - $1,475 $1,304 $1.11 - $1.69 $1.25 124 Fairwind Drive 1B/1Ba 48 25% $1,112 - $1,142 $1,127 658 - 829 744 $1.69 - $1.38 $1.53 None $1,112 - $1,142 $1,127 $1.69 - $1.38 $1.52 Chesapeake, VA 23320 1B/1Ba/G 6 3% $1,297 - $1,297 $1,297 803 - 803 1,106 $1.62 - $1.62 $1.62 $1,297 - $1,297 $1,297 $1.62 - $1.62 $1.17 877-318-3124 2B/2Ba 111 58% $1,301 - $1,379 $1,340 1,039 - 1,131 1,106 $1.25 - $1.22 $1.24 $1,301 - $1,379 $1,340 $1.25 - $1.22 $1.21 3B/2Ba 27 14% $1,475 - $1,475 $1,475 1,332 - 1,332 1,332 $1.11 - $1.11 $1.11 $1,475 - $1,475 $1,475 $1.11 - $1.11 $1.11
Exhibit III-9 E4-11982.40 Page 1 of 2 Printed: 3/27/2014
268 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-9
SELECT APARTMENT COMMUNITY COMPARABLES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP MANAGEMENT YEAR FLOOR TOTAL UNIT AVG. UNIT AVG. BASE AVG. EFFECTIVE RENT AVG. EFF. EFFECTIVE AVG. EFF. KEY LOCATION BUILT PLAN UNITS MIX OCC. % BASE RENT RENT SIZE RANGE SIZE RENT/SF RENT/SF CONCESSIONS RANGE RENT RENT/SF RENT/SF 8 Belmont at Greenbrier 2006 Garden 348 100% 93.4% $995 - $1,460 $1,231 798 - 1,249 1,030 $1.14 - $1.31 $1.20 $912 - $1,338 $1,128 $1.04 - $1.20 $1.10 1212 Triple Crown Circle 1B/1Ba 87 25% $995 - $1,050 $1,023 798 - 800 799 $1.25 - $1.31 $1.28 1 month free $912 - $963 $937 $1.14 - $1.20 $1.17 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 194 56% $1,195 - $1,295 $1,245 1,050 - 1,130 1,106 $1.14 - $1.15 $1.14 1 month free $1,095 - $1,187 $1,141 $1.04 - $1.05 $1.03 888-481-9125 3B/2Ba 67 19% $1,460 - $1,460 $1,460 1,249 - 1,249 1,106 $1.17 - $1.17 $1.17 1 month free $1,338 - $1,338 $1,338 $1.07 - $1.07 $1.21
9 Hideaway at Greenbrier 2005 Garden 374 100% 97.9% $875 - $1,499 $1,120 650 - 1,499 966 $1.00 - $1.35 $1.16 $792 - $1,416 $1,037 $0.94 - $1.22 $1.07 150 Coveside Lane 1B/1Ba 144 39% $875 - $949 $912 650 - 833 742 $1.35 - $1.14 $1.24 $1,000 off rent $792 - $866 $829 $1.22 - $1.04 $1.12 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 180 48% $1,075 - $1,315 $1,195 995 - 1,226 1,106 $1.08 - $1.07 $1.08 $1,000 off rent $992 - $1,232 $1,112 $1.00 - $1.00 $1.00 3B/2Ba 50 13% $1,399 - $1,499 $1,449 1,290 - 1,499 1,106 $1.08 - $1.00 $1.04 $1,000 off rent $1,316 - $1,416 $1,366 $1.02 - $0.94 $1.23
10 Adalay Bay 2002 Garden 240 100% 91.7% $900 - $1,285 $1,089 650 - 1,304 983 $0.99 - $1.38 $1.11 $858 - $1,243 $1,047 $0.95 - $1.32 $1.06 101 Sabal Palm Lane 1B/1Ba 72 30% $900 - $970 $935 650 - 742 696 $1.38 - $1.31 $1.35 $500 off rent $858 - $928 $893 $1.32 - $1.25 $1.28 Chesapeake, VA 23320 2B/2Ba 120 50% $1,090 - $1,115 $1,103 1,041 - 1,090 1,106 $1.05 - $1.02 $1.04 $500 off rent $1,048 - $1,073 $1,061 $1.01 - $0.98 $0.96 757-275-8097 3B/2Ba 48 20% $1,285 - $1,285 $1,285 1,304 - 1,304 1,106 $0.99 - $0.99 $0.99 $500 off rent $1,243 - $1,243 $1,243 $0.95 - $0.95 $1.12
SOURCE: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
Exhibit III-9 E4-11982.40 Page 2 of 2 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 269 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-10
PRICE TO SIZE RELATIONSHIP NEWER APARTMENTS IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
$2,400
$2,200
$2,000
$1,800
$1,600
$1,400
$1,200
$1,000
$800 500 700 900 1,100 1,300 1,500 1,700 1,900 Aura at Towne Place 1B/1Ba Aura at Towne Place 2B/2Ba Aura at Towne Place 3B/2Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba The Morgan 1B/1Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba/D The Morgan 3B/2Ba Tapestry Park 1B/1Ba Tapestry Park 2B/2Ba Tapestry Park 3B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba/G Bell Great Bridge 2B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 3B/2Ba Belmont at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Belmont at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Belmont at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba Adalay Bay 1B/1Ba Adalay Bay 2B/2Ba Adalay Bay 3B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 1B/1Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba/G Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH/G Fenwyck Manor 3B/3.5ba/G Streets of Greenbrier Studio Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba/L Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba/L Streets of Greenbrier 3B/2Ba
SOURCE: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
Exhibit III-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
270 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-11
PRICE TO SIZE RELATIONSHIP - STUDIO AND ONE-BEDROOM UNITS NEWER APARTMENTS IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
$1,400
$1,300
$1,200
$1,100
$1,000
$900
$800 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1,000 Aura at Towne Place 1B/1Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba The Morgan 1B/1Ba Tapestry Park 1B/1Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba Bell Great Bridge 1B/1Ba/G Belmont at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Adalay Bay 1B/1Ba Fenwyck Manor 1B/1Ba Streets of Greenbrier Studio Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba Streets of Greenbrier 1B/1Ba/L
SOURCE: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
Exhibit III-11 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 271 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-12
PRICE TO SIZE RELATIONSHIP - TWO-BEDROOM UNITS NEWER APARTMENTS IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014 $1,600
$1,500
$1,400
$1,300
$1,200
$1,100
$1,000 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 Aura at Towne Place 2B/2Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba The Morgan 2B/2Ba/D Tapestry Park 2B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 2B/2Ba Belmont at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Adalay Bay 2B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 2B/2Ba/G Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH Fenwyck Manor 2B/2.5Ba/TH/G Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba Streets of Greenbrier 2B/2Ba/L
SOURCE: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
Exhibit III-12 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
272 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-13
PRICE TO SIZE RELATIONSHIP - THREE-BEDROOM UNITS NEWER APARTMENTS IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014 $2,200
$2,000
$1,800
$1,600
$1,400
$1,200
$1,000 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350 1,400 1,450 1,500 1,550 1,600 1,650 1,700 Aura at Towne Place 3B/2Ba The Carlton at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba The Morgan 3B/2Ba Tapestry Park 3B/2Ba Bell Great Bridge 3B/2Ba Belmont at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba Hideaway at Greenbrier 3B/2Ba Adalay Bay 3B/2Ba Fenwyck Manor 3B/3.5ba/G Streets of Greenbrier 3B/2Ba
SOURCE: Property Websites; Leasing agent interviews
Exhibit III-13 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 273 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit III-14
PLANNED AND PROPOSED RENTAL APARTMENTS CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP UNITS STATUS KEY COMMUNITY NAME
1 The Morgan Apartments Phase II 120 Planned 2 Clairmont at Joliff 304 Planned 3 Red Knot at Edinburgh 336 Proposed 4 Catalina Crossing Apartments 144 Proposed 5 Cottage Trails at Culpepper Landing Phase II 48 Planned 2 6 6 Grady Crescent Apartments 24 Proposed 7 Plantation Greens 225 Under Const. Total 1,201
4 Study Area 1
5 7
3
SOURCE: REIS
Exhibit III-14 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
274 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
IV. RETAIL
Appendix | 275 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-1
RETAIL SUBMARKETS MAP HAMPTON ROADS MARKET, VA FEBRUARY 2014
Deep Creek Submarket Study Area Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA
SOURCE: ESRI; CoStar
Exhibit IV-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
276 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-2
RETAIL INVENTORY STUDY AREA; DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET 2005-2013
1,200,000 40.0%
35.0% 1,000,000 30.0%
800,000 25.0%
600,000 20.0%
15.0% 400,000
10.0%
200,000 5.0%
0 0.0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deep Creek Submarket Study Area Study Area as % of Submarket
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit IV-2 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 277 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-3
RETAIL INVENTORY DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET; VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC MSA 2005-2013
100,000,000 1.2%
98,000,000 1.0% 96,000,000
0.8% 94,000,000
92,000,000 0.6%
90,000,000 0.4%
88,000,000
0.2% 86,000,000
84,000,000 0.0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 MSA Submarket as % of MSA
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit IV-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
278 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-4
RETAIL ABSORPTION VS. COMPLETIONS DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET 2006-2014 YTD
300,000 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: 38,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 35,000 250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 YTD
-50,000 Absorption Completions
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit IV-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 279 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-5
SF OF CURRENT RETAIL MIX BY TYPE SOUTH SIDE OF HAMPTON ROADS MARCH 2014
7%
21%
20%
RETAIL TYPE SF General Retail 2,764,767
Community Center 2,612,944 Neighborhood Center 3,197,280 Power Center 1,169,554 20% Regional Mall 2,665,693 9% Strip Center 982,417
24%
General Retail Community Center Neighborhood Center Power Center Regional Mall Strip Center
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit IV-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
280 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-6
RETAIL ASKING RENT AND VACANCY DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET AND MSA 2005-2013
$20 16%
$18 14%
$16 12% $14 10% $12
$10 8%
$8 6%
$6 4% $4 2% $2
$0 0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deep Creek Rent (NNN) MSA Rent (NNN) Deep Creek Vacancy MSA Vacancy
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit IV-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 281 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-7
RETAIL VACANCY SF AND RATE BY TYPE SOUTHSIDE OF HAMPTON ROADS 2012
1,200,000 45%
40% 1,000,000 35%
800,000 30%
25% 600,000 20%
400,000 15%
10% 200,000 5%
- 0% General Retail Community Center Neighborhood Center Power Center Regional Mall Strip Center Vacant SF Vacancy %
General Retail - Strip Center - Neighborhood Center 30,000 to 150,000 square feet, supermarket anchored Community Center 100,000 to 350,000 square feet, discount department store, supermarket or drug store anchored Power Center 250,00 to 600,000 square feet, category killer, home improvement and discount department store anchored Regional Mall Shopping center with area designed for pedestrian use only
SOURCE: ODU CREED; CoStar
Exhibit IV-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
282 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-8
SELECT RETAIL COMPARABLES CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
MAP KEY PROPERTY NAME 1 GREENBRIER MALL 9 2 CROSSWAYS CENTER 3 GREENBRIER MARKET CENTER 4 CHESAPEAKE CROSSING SC 7 4 5 WOODFORD SQUARE 3 1 6 GLENWOOD SQUARE 14 8 2 7 PARKVIEW/GREENBRIAR 19 16 17 12 8 DEEP CREEK PLAZA 9 LIBERTY PLAZA 5 15 10 ISLAND WHARF SHOPPES 11 CEDAR LAKES CENTER 10 12 BATTLEFIELD SHOPPES 13 LAS GAVIOTAS SHOPPING CNTR 13 11 14 GREENBRIER STATION 6 18 15 THE CROSSING/DEEP CREEK 16 GREENBRIER SOUTH 17 ORCHARD SQUARE 10 18 MILLWOOD PLAZA 19 TOWNE PLACE AT GREENBRIER
Study Area
SOURCE: Google Earth
Exhibit IV-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 283 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-9
SELECT RETAIL COMPARABLES SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA FEBRUARY 2014
NON- YEAR ANCHOR ANCHOR VACANCY PROPERTY NAME STREET ADDRESS SIZE (SF) BUILT TENANT TENANT RATE (%) CENTER TYPE ANCHOR AND MAJOR TENANTS GREENBRIER MALL 1401 GREENBRIER PKWY 898,416 1981 n/a n/a 1.5% Regional JCPENNEY, DILLARD'S, MACY'S, SEARS CROSSWAYS CENTER 1591-1595 CROSSWAYS RD 153,111 1988 n/a n/a 0.0% Power Center DSW, VALUECITY FURNITURE, MARSHALLS, TJ MAXX, OFFICE DEPOT
GREENBRIER PKWY AND HARRIS TETTER, STEIN MART, TARGET, OLD NAVY, BABIESRUS, GREENBRIER MARKET CENTER 493,657 1996 n/a n/a 0.0% Power Center VOLVO PKWY PETSMART, OFFICEMAX, BEST BUY
BIG LOTS, CITI TRENDS, HOME EMPORIUM, BLOOD PLASMA CENTER, CHESAPEAKE CROSSING SC 1943 S MILITARY HWY 287,679 1987 $14.00 $5.45 5.5% Community KAPLAN UNIVERSITY, DARK FMR FURNITUREMA, FABRIC MARKET, RADIO SHACK
BURGER KING, BANK, JIFFY LUBE, DOLLAR GENERAL, ROSE'S VARIETY, WOODFORD SQUARE 701 BATTLEFIELD BLVD N 139,623 1986 $15.91 $8.12 8.8% Community FARM FRESH
GLENWOOD SQUARE 717 BATTLEFIELD BLVD 66,659 1986 $15.00 $11.39 4.3% Neighborhood YMCA, HAIR SALON, BLOOM, CHINESE RESTAURANT, MOVIE GALLERY FOOD LION, LEE'S FASHIONS, TACO BELL, BANK, JO-ANN FABRICS, GAS PARKVIEW/GREENBRIAR 1733 PARKVIEW DR 80,831 1985 $13.92 $5.84 8.0% Neighborhood STATION
DEEP CREEK PLAZA 3330 S MILITARY HWY 16,000 1984 $12.07 n/a 0.0% Neighborhood CASH ADVANCE, PAWN SHOP, AUTO FINANCE CO LIBERTY PLAZA 1800 LIBERTY ST 19,500 1983 $12.00 n/a 19.0% Neighborhood RITE AID, DOMINO'S PIZZA, MONEY MART ISLAND WHARF SHOPPES 123 BATTLEFIELD BLVD N 15,000 1989 $9.95 n/a 0.0% Neighborhood WILD WING, VET, TOY EXCHANGE
BANK OF AMERICA, ANGELICO VIOLINS, JAPANESE RESTAURANT, SUN CEDAR LAKES CENTER 565 CEDAR RD STE 9 35,659 1987 $16.40 $12.69 7.9% Neighborhood CLEANERS, TRAVEL AGENCY, WELLNESS ONCE
BATTLEFIELD SHOPPES 1200 BATTLEFIELD BLVD N 23,967 1986 $16.88 n/a 5.7% Neighborhood LAS GAVIOTAS SHOPPING CNTR 1245 CEDAR RD STE B 68,822 1986 $12.92 $9.16 6.1% Neighborhood FOOD LION, RITE AID GREENBRIER STATION 1011 EDEN WAY N 21,633 1984 $17.00 $17.00 0.0% Neighborhood TRI CARE THE CROSSING/DEEP CREEK 2901 CEDAR RD 74,120 1989 $14.86 $7.78 0.0% Neighborhood FOOD LION, ADVANCE AUTO PARTS, DOLLAR GENERAL, HARDEE'S GREENBRIER SOUTH 1201 VOLVO PKWY 97,000 1992 $20.84 $11.99 7.9% Neighborhood FEDEX OFFICE, CURVES, MCDONALD'S, FOOD LION ORCHARD SQUARE 1400 KEMPSVILLE RD 88,728 1989 $15.91 $9.92 5.2% Neighborhood FARM FRESH, WENDY'S MILLWOOD PLAZA 800 S BATTLEFIELD BLVD 16,969 1986 $13.00 n/a 10.0% Neighborhood MILLWOOD CLEANERS TOWNE PLACE AT GREENBRIER 725 EDEN WAY NORTH 78,072 2007 n/a n/a 13.0% Town Center CHICO'S, JOS A BANK, HYATT PLACE HOTEL, APTS
Total 2,675,446
Average 1988 $14.71 $9.93 5.4%
SOURCE: Reis
Exhibit IV-9 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
284 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-10
MAP OF GROCERY STORES CLOSE TO STUDY AREA IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
SOURCE: Google Earth
Exhibit IV-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 285 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-11
MAP OF TARGET, WAL-MART, AND K-MART CLOSE TO STUDY AREA IN CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
SOURCE: Google Earth
Exhibit IV-11 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
286 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-12
PLANNED AND PROPOSED RETAIL NORFOLK/CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET FEBRUARY 2014
1
4
2
3
MAP KEY PROPERTY NAME ADDRESS SIZE STATUS TYPE
1 Palace Station Phase II 300 W 21st St., Norfolk 30,000 Planned Neighborhood 2 Dominion Commons East Cedar Rd at Dominion Blvd. S., Chesapeake 600,000 Proposed Power Center 3 Edinburgh Shopping Center Ph II Battlefield Blvd. at Hillcrest Pkwy., Chesapeake 225,000 Planned Power Center 4 Berkley Shopping Center Ph II W. Berkley Ave. at S. Main St., Norfolk 6,000 Planned Neighborhood Total 861,000
SOURCE: Reis
Exhibit IV-12 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 287 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-13
MAP FOR CURRENT RETAIL UNDER AND OVER SUPPLY 10-MILE RING AROUND STUDY AREA 2014
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit IV-13 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
288 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit IV-14
CURRENT RETAIL UNDER AND OVER SUPPLY 10-MILE RING AROUND STUDY AREA MARCH 2014
Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers
Nonstore Retailers
Food & Beverage Stores Undersupplied
Health & Personal Care Stores
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores
Food Services & Drinking Places
Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Balanced Gasoline Stations
Miscellaneous Store Retailers
Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores
Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores Oversupplied Electronics & Appliance Stores
General Merchandise Stores
($350,000,000) ($250,000,000) ($150,000,000) ($50,000,000) $50,000,000 $150,000,000 $250,000,000
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit IV-14 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 289 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
V. OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL
290 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-1
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY CENSUS TRACT SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2013
MAP KEY >4,000
3,000 - 3,999 2,000 - 2,999 1,000 - 1,999 <1,000
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit V-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 291 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-2
EMPLOYMENT DENSITY BY CENSUS TRACT SUFFOLK, CHESAPEAKE, AND PORTSMOUTH; VIRGINIA 2013
MAP KEY > 800 Employees
200 - 800 Employees 50 - 199 Employees
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-2 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
292 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-3
INFORMATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT BY CENSUS TRACT HAMPTON ROADS, VA 2013
MAP KEY
>110
75 - 109 50 - 74 25 - 49 <25
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit V-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 293 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-4
PROFESSIONAL AND TECH-RELATED EMPLOYMENT BY CENSUS TRACT HAMPTON ROADS MSA 2013
MAP KEY >350
250 - 349 150 - 249 50 - 149 <50
SOURCE: Esri
Exhibit V-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
294 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-5
TOP 10 INDUSTRIES BY EMPLOYMENT VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA 2011
Food services and drinking places
Professional, scientific, and technical services support
Administrative and services
Ambulatory health care services
Hospitals
Specialty trade contractors
Generalmerchandise stores
Food and beverage stores
Religious, grantmaking, civic, professional, and similar organizations
- 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000
SOURCE: BLS
Exhibit V-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 295 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-6
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION PRE-1950
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
296 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-7
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 1950-1970
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 297 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-8
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 1970-1980
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
298 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-9
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 1980-1990
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-9 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 299 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-10
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 1990-2000
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
300 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-11
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 2000-2014
Office Buildings Industrial Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar; Esri
Exhibit V-11 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 301 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-12
OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS CHESAPEAKE REGION 2014
MAP KEY Industrial Buildings Office Buildings
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-12 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
302 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-13
NUMBER OF EMPLOYMENT CORES AND TOTAL MSA EMPLOYMENT VIRGINIA BEACH MSA - NOT INCLUDING MILITARY EMPLOYMENT OR CORES 2013, 2024, AND 2035
20
19
18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11
10 9 8 7 6 5 mber of Employment Cores of Employment mber u u 4 N 3 2 1 0 100 300 500 700 900 1,100 1,300 1,500 1,700 1,900 2,100 2,300 2,500 2,700 2,900 Employment (1,000's) Denver Philadelphia Cincinatti Detroit Houston Nashville Atlanta Chattanooga Raleigh-Durham Minneapolis-St. Paul Salt Lake City Charleston Phoenix Central FL 2009 Tampa-St. Pete Sarasota San Diego 2008 Seattle-Tacoma 2012 VA Beach MSA 2013 VA Beach MSA 2035
Exhibit V-13 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 303 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-14
MAP OF CORE AREAS HAMPTON ROADS, VA 2014
MAP KEY Industrial building
Office building Retail building Study Area Harborview Norfolk Ind. Park Area Cavalier Port Area Greenbrier
Virginia Beach Town Center Lynnhaven/Oceana Downtown Norfolk
Does not include the three cores on the Peninsula
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit V-14 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
304 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-15
CORE TYPES HAMPTON ROADS, VA 2014
TOTAL SQUARE FEET2 % SQUARE FEET TOTAL HHs JOBS TO 1 1 CORE NAME EMPLOYMENT OFFICE INDUSTRIAL RETAIL OFFICE INDUSTRIAL RETAIL IN THE CORE HH RATIO EST. ACRES JOBS/ACRE OFFICE CORES Greenbrier 43,180 2,672,176 3,854,975 3,193,009 27% 40% 33% 5,644 7.7 4,497 9.6 University of Utah 32,557 1,666,009 91,952 42,837 93% 5% 2% 4,743 6.9 1,286 25.3 Sandy, UT 18,563 2,991,383 2,836,626 3,715,825 31% 30% 39% 1,716 10.8 2,042 9.1 Carmel Valley, CA 17,885 4,920,656 242,150 2,196,550 67% 3% 30% 3,573 5.0 865 20.7 Lakewood Ranch Area Core, FL 15,481 2,726,525 343,200 1,668,586 58% 7% 35% 7,600 2.0 7,443 2.1 Virginia Beach Town Center 12,850 1,323,595 0 1,299,385 50% 0% 50% 340 37.8 318 40.4 Cottonwood, UT 6,371 1,859,654 13,015 65,188 96% 1% 3% 1,130 5.6 1,494 4.3 VA Beach MSA Average 28,015 1,997,886 1,927,488 2,246,197 32% 31% 36% 2,992 9.4 2,408 11.6 Overall Average 20,984 2,594,285 1,054,560 1,740,197 48% 20% 32% 3,535 5.9 2,564 8.2
INDUSTRIAL CORES 201/California Ave, UT 47,106 2,282,909 27,123,616 599,990 8% 90% 2% 850 55.4 2,829 16.7
International Center/NW Quadrant/Airport, UT 38,859 2,220,838 16,309,650 87,185 12% 88% 0% N/A N/A 22,513 1.7 Charleston Airport, SC 33,816 1,490,691 7,183,527 6,259,945 10% 48% 42% 13,678 2.5 11,643 2.9 North Charleston, SC 29,974 2,378,450 6,753,911 2,492,722 20% 58% 21% 8,906 3.4 6,889 4.4 Norfolk Ind. Park Area 25,478 1,352,482 6,286,759 3,533,477 12% 56% 32% 4,247 6.0 2,972 8.6 Port Areas 22,833 51,911 843,600 67,572 5% 88% 7% 3,255 7.0 3,554 6.4 Layton Hills, UT 20,160 804,561 7,000,000 3,064,403 7% 64% 28% 14,282 1.4 6,836 2.9 Port of Charleston, SC 17,898 2,247,094 5,416,453 1,006,019 26% 62% 12% 6,747 2.7 14,137 1.3 I-75 Corridor in Sarasota (Fruitville) 15,612 1,478,360 2,874,859 2,526,646 21% 42% 37% 5,659 2.8 3,987 3.9 Cavalier 6,024 22,501 4,034,998 15,443 1% 99% 0% 1,502 4.0 1,784 3.4 Bee Ridge - Rail Oriented, Sarasota, FL 4,449 35,201 3,374,819 135,052 1% 95% 4% 1,790 2.5 1,781 2.5 Airport Area, Sarasota, FL 3,457 32,163 2,649,978 84,336 1% 96% 3% 1,276 2.7 1,112 3.1 VA Beach MSA Average 18,112 475,631 3,721,786 1,205,497 9% 69% 22% 3,001 6.0 2,770 6.5 Overall Average 22,139 1,199,763 7,487,681 1,656,066 12% 72% 16% 5,654 3.9 6,670 3.3
URBAN CORES Downtown Salt Lake City, UT 62,609 12,294,272 3,017,363 62,609 80% 20% 0% 12,376 5.1 3,309 18.9 Charleston Peninsula/CBD, SC 45,295 4,041,361 351,987 6,878,260 36% 3% 61% 10,643 4.3 1,787 25.3 Downtown Norfolk 28,221 5,194,121 40,200 2,003,579 72% 1% 28% 1,697 16.6 471 59.9 Downtown Sarasota, FL 24,147 4,164,974 2,480,996 1,827,478 49% 29% 22% 10,516 2.3 3,434 7.0 Downtown Bradenton, FL 13,270 1,985,458 509,176 1,891,492 45% 12% 43% 1,581 8.4 833 15.9 Overall Average 34,709 5,536,037 1,279,944 2,532,684 59% 14% 27% 7,363 4.7 1,967 17.6
CATALYTIC CORES Lynnhaven/Oceana 55,656 2,030,969 5,916,906 4,275,035 17% 48% 35% 15,406 3.6 12,641 4.4 Downtown Provo/BYU, UT 42,880 1,928,628 3,203,917 3,660,134 22% 36% 42% 37,687 1.1 11,949 3.6 Naval Base/North Charleston Port Terminal 3 12,000 239,403 4,284,285 385,556 5% 87% 8% 7,575 1.6 23,766 0.5 Overall Average 36,845 1,399,667 4,468,369 2,773,575 16% 52% 32% 20,223 1.8 16,118 2.3
Exhibit V-15 E4-11982.40 Page 1 of 2 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 305 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-15
CORE TYPES HAMPTON ROADS, VA 2014
TOTAL SQUARE FEET2 % SQUARE FEET TOTAL HHs JOBS TO CORE NAME EMPLOYMENT1 OFFICE INDUSTRIAL RETAIL OFFICE INDUSTRIAL RETAIL IN THE CORE1 HH RATIO EST. ACRES JOBS/ACRE RETAIL CORES St. Andrews/West Ashley, SC 14,502 1,340,649 411,782 3,663,006 25% 8% 68% 6,863 2.1 2,908 5.0 Mt. Pleasant, SC 13,803 2,292,987 441,546 4,024,004 34% 7% 60% 6,472 2.1 3,453 4.0 Fort Union, UT 11,518 1,622,142 73,875 2,506,375 39% 2% 60% 8,208 1.4 2,406 4.8 Downtown Ogden, UT 9,152 913,517 452,067 1,310,159 34% 17% 49% 14,069 0.7 6,988 1.3 Overall Average 12,244 1,542,324 344,818 2,875,886 32% 7% 60% 8,903 1.4 3,939 3.1
EMERGING CORES Harborview 4,604 1,224,000 672,107 1,581,210 35% 19% 45% 3,207 1.4 4,097 1.1 Overall Average 4,604 1,224,000 672,107 1,581,210 35% 19% 45% 3,207 1.4 4,097 1.1
OVERALL EXISTING CORE AVERAGE 24,052 2,277,601 3,819,942 2,081,995 28% 47% 25% 7,334 3.3 5,546 4.3 EXISTING CORE TOTAL 745,607 70,605,640 118,418,188 64,541,857 28% 47% 25% 220,031 3.4 171,925 4.3 HAMPTON ROADS CORE TOTAL 198,847 13,871,755 21,649,545 15,968,710 27% 42% 31% 35,298 5.6 30,335 6.6
1 2009 data from Hampton Roads MPO 2 2014 data from CoStar 3 In addition to office, retail and industrial, there are 42 million square feet of military space in the naval station core SOURCE: RCLCO; Hampton Roads MPO; CoStar
Exhibit V-15 E4-11982.40 Page 2 of 2 Printed: 3/27/2014
306 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-16
OFFICE SUBMARKET MAP SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET, VA MARCH 2014
Southern Chesapeake Submarket Subject Site
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-16 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 307 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-17
OFFICE ABSORPTION VS. COMPLETIONS VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC MSA 2006-2013
2,000,000 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: 450,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 900,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
- 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
(500,000)
(1,000,000) Net Absorption Completions
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-17 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
308 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-18
OFFICE PERFORMANCE SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET, VA 2006-2013
600,000 1.3%
580,000 1.3%
560,000 1.2%
540,000
1.2% 520,000
1.1% 500,000
1.1% 480,000
460,000 1.0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Submarket Total RBA Submarket RBA as % of MSA RBA
NOTE: Includes all classes of office buildings SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-18 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 309 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-19
OVERALL OFFICE MARKET PERFORMANCE SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET, VA 2006-2013
80,000 25.0%
60,000
20.0% 40,000
20,000 15.0%
0
10.0% (20,000)
(40,000) 5.0%
(60,000)
(80,000) 0.0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Net Absorption RBA Delivered Vac %
NOTE: Includes all classes of office buildings SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-19 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
310 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-20
OFFICE ASKING RENT AND VACANCY DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET AND MSA 2006-2013
$20 25%
$18
$16 20%
$14
$12 15%
$10
$8 10%
$6
$4 5%
$2
$0 SOURCE: CoStar 0% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Submarket Avg. Rent MSA Avg. Rent Submarket Vacancy MSA Vacancy
Exhibit V-20 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 311 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-21
OFFICE SUBMARKET PERFORMANCE SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET AND MSA 2013
EXISTING INVENTORY VACANCY 2013 NET 2013 4Q 2013 UNDER QUOTED
# BLDS TOTAL RBA DIRECT SF TOTAL SF VAC % ABSORPTION DELIVERIES CONST. SF RATES
Submarket 104 592,515 51,582 48,555 8.2% 8,066 2,884 2,884 $15.31 As a Percentage of Total Market 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%
Total Market 3,287 48,411,521 5,641,925 5,708,956 11.8% 748,934 390,173 375,277 $16.52
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-21 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
312 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-22
MAP OF COMPARABLE OFFICE BUILDINGS SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET, VA MARCH 2014
MAP PRODUCT
KEY TYPE BUILDING $/SF 1 KONIKOFF MEDICAL OFFICE Class B -
2 449 DOMINION BLVD Class B $19.50 3 HANBURY OFFICE PARK Class B $17.00 4 213 RIVER WALK PARKWAY Class B - 5 DOMINION BUSINESS CENTER Class A $17.50 4
2 1 5 3
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-22 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 313 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-23
COMPARABLE OFFICE BUILDINGS SOUTHERN CHESAPEAKE SUBMARKET, VA MARCH 2014
KONIKOFF MEDICAL OFFICE 449 DOMINION BLVD HANBURY OFFICE PARK 213 RIVER WALK PARKWAY DOMINION BUSINESS CENTER
Product Type Class B Class B Class B Class B Class A
Year Built 2006 2007 2006 2004 (renov) 2007
Project Two 12,00 SF single-story office Flexible floor plans to accommodate Medical office Single story medical office building Description buildings suites from 1,000 SF to 20,000 SF
Total SF 15,000 12,970 24,000 14,200 20,000
Asking Prices $19.50 $17.00 - $17.50
Performance 100% leased 57% 100% 78% 100%
Sentara Family Medicine Cedar Road Medical Associates, Childrens Hospital of the Kings Key Tenants Tidewater Physical Therapy Physicians, Chesapeake Medical Herndon Construction Konikoff Dentistry Daughters Associates, Centex Homes
SOURCE: Local Market Representatives; CBRE; CoStar
Exhibit V-23 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
314 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-24
INDUSTRIAL INVENTORY STUDY AREA; DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET 2005-2013
2,500,000 4.2%
4.1%
2,000,000 4.0%
3.9% 1,500,000
3.8%
1,000,000 3.7%
3.6% 500,000
3.5%
0 3.4% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deep Creek Submarket Study Area Study Area as % of Submarket
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-24 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 315 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-25
INDUSTRIAL ABSORPTION VS. COMPLETIONS DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET 2006-2013
200,000 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: -13,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 24,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-50,000
-100,000
-150,000
-200,000
-250,000 Absorption Completions
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-25 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
316 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-26
INDUSTRIAL ABSORPTION VS. COMPLETIONS VIRGINIA BEACH-NORFOLK-NEWPORT NEWS, VA-NC MSA 2006-2013
3,000,000 2006-2013 Avg. Absorption: -4,000 2006-2013 Avg. Completion: 1,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-500,000
-1,000,000
-1,500,000 Absorption Completions
SOURCE: CoStar
Exhibit V-26 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 317 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit V-27
INDUSTRIAL ASKING RENT AND VACANCY DEEP CREEK SUBMARKET AND MSA 2006-2013
$8 18%
$7 16%
14% $6
12% $5
10%
$4 8%
$3 6%
$2 4%
$1 2%
$0 0% SOURCE:2006 CoStar 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Deep Creek Rent (NNN) MSA Rent (NNN) Deep Creek Vacancy MSA Vacancy
Exhibit V-27 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
318 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND DEMAND
Appendix | 319 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-1
STRENGTHS, CHALLENGES, AND OPPORTUNITIES DOMINION STUDY AREA MARCH 2014
STRENGTHS CHALLENGES OPPORTUNITIES • The region overall is expected to grow. The study area is in a • Land has fragmented ownership. Will need to work carefully • Most of the area is undeveloped, and the reputation in the market is good location to capture a portion of that growth to ensure that future plan is realized that it has not developed because of access, not for other reasons. Once bridge is completed, will spur development Overall • The Great Dismal Swamp provides recreational and other types • May be an opportunity to find opportunities around the Great Dismal of amenities Swamp in terms of research, branding, marketing, job creation, and differentiation • Close to Chesapeake City offices
• Close to Great Dismal Swamp and associated recreational • High-end housing in the region is water-oriented. Will need • Create multiple master-planned communities/neighborhoods, opportunities to figure out how to amenitize the residential projects appealing to a wide range of buyers and renters • Chesapeake is a well-regarded place to buy a home - the • Without associated employment development, would be • The for-sale residential market is starting recovery, and this area, if schools are good, leading to strong housing demand difficult to build multifamily residential zoned for residential, would be a strong location for development Residential • New Grassfield High School would be attractive for new residents
• Culpepper Landing, an actively selling master-planned community with the strongest sales in the region, is already selling close to the study area
• Will be a good location for future households, and therefore, • For the near- and mid-term, the regional and community • Create new retail centers in "town center" configurations that could future retail to support it shopping needs of residents will be met at Greenbriar area help create a sense of community and a focal point for development
Retail • Tidewater Community College has a new facility in the area - • The retail market is relatively strong and stable - could be a good use may be possible to work with them for training opportunities for that will be in demand in the short-term as housing is created future businesses • Widening of Dominion Boulevard and opening of new bridge will • The office market is still struggling - will be hard to jump start • As Greenbriar builds out, the opportunity to be the "next" Greenbriar - make the study area more desirable for future office any development in the area with office although it can be with today's design standards and guidelines
Office • The City of Chesapeake's interest in creating an employment • Once bridge is completed and road widened, will create a new area center in the study area will help it succeed for development • Development is already starting to move in this direction • In the mid- to long-term, the health care industry should help bolster the office market • Close to airport • Industrial-related employment is projected to decrease in • There are not a lot of large parcels of industrial land available in the the region market - have enough land to be able to accommodate larger users
• Development is already starting to move in this direction • The study area is not as well-positioned as other areas for • Industrial development in this area could serve the general industrial Industrial some types of industrial development - it is not on the water, needs of the region does not lead to other major cities (e.g. along I-95) and does not have rail access • All of the industrial buildings would be new and meet the latest standards in industrial building height clearance, etc.
Exhibit VI-1 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
320 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-2
SUMMARY OF DEMANDS DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
Study Area Acres Total 9,207 Developed 1,112 Airport 505 Environmentally Constrained 2,247 Developable 5,343 Additional Open Space 801 15% Community Facilities 400 7% Roads, ROW 801 15% Storm Water 1,069 20% Remaining 2,272
2013 Total % of Est. Est. % of Est. $/Unit/SF 2014-2024 2025-2035 (to 2035) Total Density Acres Build-Out Total Density Est. Acres Limited Employment Center Scenario For-Sale Residential $400,000 1,918 1,535 3,453 89% 4 863 8,600 92% 4 2,150 For-Rent Residential $1.30 233 174 407 11% 20 20 750 8% 20 38 Total Residential 2,151 1,709 3,860 100% 884 9,350 100% 2,188 Retail SF $16 200,279 159,071 359,350 72% 0.25 33.0 791,351 64% 0.25 72.7 Office SF $18 43,621 22,054 65,675 13% 0.35 4.3 250,000 20% 0.35 16.4 Industrial SF $6 57,430 14,137 71,566 14% 0.20 8.2 200,000 16% 0.20 23.0 Total SF Commercial 301,329 195,262 496,591 100% 45.5 1,241,351 100% 112.0 Estimated Employees 734 470 1,204 Total 929 3,159 Total 2,300 Jobs to Households 0.34 0.28 0.31 0.34
2013 Total % of Est. Est. % of Est. $/Unit/SF 2014-2024 2025-2035 (to 2035) Total Density Acres Build-Out Total Density Est. Acres Employment Center Scenario For-Sale Residential $400,000 2,278 1,871 4,148 80% 5 830 9,000 75% 5 1,800 For-Rent Residential $1.30 448 579 1,027 20% 25 41 3,000 25% 25 120 Total Residential 2,726 2,450 5,176 100% 871 12,000 100% 1,920 Retail SF $16 240,319 214,722 455,041 35% 0.25 41.8 1,015,637 21% 0.25 93.3 Office SF $18 233,693 482,966 716,659 55% 0.40 41.1 2,500,000 52% 0.40 143.5 Industrial SF $6 114,859 28,273 143,133 11% 0.20 16.4 1,250,000 26% 0.20 143.5 Total SF Commercial 588,871 725,961 1,314,832 100% 99.3 4,765,637 100% 380.2 Estimated Employees 1,699 2,466 4,164 Total 970 14,757 Total 2,300 Jobs to Households 0.62 1.01 0.80 1.23
Exhibit VI-2 E4-11982.40 Printed: 4/11/2014
Appendix | 321 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-3
JOB TO HOUSING RATIOS DOMINION STUDY AREA MARCH 2014
NO EMPLOYMENT CENTER LIMITED EMPLOYMENT CENTER CATALYTIC EMPLOYMENT CENTER EMPLOYMENT CENTER DOMINION OPPORTUNITIES
FISH- TRAD- HORIZON VICTORIA HAWK THE VILL- TAMPA SUMM- VIERA LAKEWOOD THE WOOD- ITION LOCAL WEST PLAN PARK RANCH AGES PALMS ERLIN BREVARD RANCH LANDS PORT ST ABACOA NO EMP. EMP. REGIONAL HOUSEHOLDS ORL. DELAND LITHIA MARION CO AVG. TAMPA LAS VEGAS AVG. CO SARASOTA HOUSTON AVG. LUCIE JUPITER AVG. CENTER CENTER EMP. CENTER Under 1,000 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 2.78 2.33 2.56 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.15
1,000-2,500 0.03 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.19 0.19 1.22 1.14 1.00 1.12 0.54 0.49 0.52 0.10 0.15 0.50
2,500-5,000 0.36 0.14 0.33 0.28 0.12 0.62 0.37 0.98 1.75 1.16 1.30 0.79 0.79 0.20 0.35 0.75
5,000-10,000 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.52 0.39 1.06 2.14 0.79 1.33 0.25 0.50 1.00
10,000-20,000 0.20 0.20 0.54 0.54 1.12 1.12 1.25
20,000-35,000 0.50 0.50 1.46 1.46 1.50
SOURCE: RCLCO
Exhibit VI-3 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
322 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-4
EMPLOYMENT MATRIX CHESAPEAKE, VA MARCH 2014
Projected 1990-2010 Growth Adequacy of Future Tenant Driver Historical Growth 2010-2030 Required Space Current Stock Demand Fit At Site
Specialized access controlled Military None None facilities
Government/GSA Class A Office, Flex, and Tech Unknown Limited
Warehousing/Distribution
Shipping/Logistics Flex and Tech Strong Limited Multitenant Class A X
Cyber, Modeling and Simulation, Flex and Tech Moderate Strong Technology X
Government Office Park and Flex Unknown Moderate Contractors
Specialized Medical Facilities, Healthcare Strong Strong Local Practitioner Offices
SOURCE: RCLCO; Brokers; Moody's Analytics
Exhibit VI-4 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 323 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-5
RESIDENTIAL MATRIX BY HOUSEHOLD DRIVER CHESAPEAKE, VA FEBRUARY 2014
Availability of Additional Product Household Driver Duration Tenure Price Point Desired Stock Opportunities Fit At Site
Based upon housing Active Duty Military 1-2 Years Primarily Renters Moderate MF and SF Rental Strong allowance
Government Agencies Top of market rentals Limited Rental, MF and SF Rental and 3-4 Years Rent to Own and mid level single- Strong and Contractors Moderate Single-family For-Sale family
Top of market rentals Limited Rental, MF and SF Rental and Cyber/Technology 5+ Rent to Own Strong and mid level single- Moderate Single-family For-Sale family
Top of market rentals Limited Rental, MF and SF Rental, Healthcare 5+ Mixed and mid to upscale Strong Adequate Single-family Upscale MPC level single-family
Professional/Business Mid to upscale single- 5+ Primarily Owners Adequate Single-family Upscale MPC Strong Services family
SOURCE: RCLCO; Brokers; Moody's Analytics
Exhibit VI-5 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
324 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-6
FOR-SALE RESIDENTIAL DEMAND DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 TOTAL
MSA Household Projections 1 637,312 643,643 649,200 656,543 664,162 671,092 677,549 683,516 689,241 694,593 699,570 704,237 708,379 712,159 716,011 719,531 722,913 726,249 729,643 733,215 736,673 740,143 743,567 747,042 Annual Household Change 5,557 7,343 7,619 6,930 6,456 5,967 5,725 5,352 4,976 4,667 4,142 3,780 3,852 3,519 3,382 3,336 3,394 3,572 3,458 3,470 3,424 3,475 103,399 Region Household Change2 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 115,195 % Owner Households 3 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% New Owners Households 3,707 4,898 5,082 4,623 4,306 3,980 3,819 3,570 3,319 3,113 2,763 2,521 2,569 2,347 2,256 2,225 2,264 2,382 2,306 2,314 2,284 2,318 68,967 % Choose SFD 3 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% SFD Sales 0 0 2,517 3,326 3,451 3,139 2,924 2,703 2,482 2,321 2,158 2,023 1,796 1,563 1,593 1,455 1,399 1,380 1,404 1,477 1,430 1,435 1,416 1,437 44,828 4 % Capture in Chesapeake 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% % Capture in Dominion Area W/O 5 5% 10% 15% 20% 20% 20% 20% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% Study Area Sales No Emp. Center 0 0 35 93 145 175 163 151 139 162 151 141 125 109 111 102 98 96 98 103 100 100 99 100 2,599 % Capture in Dominion Area W/ 5 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 25% 25% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% Study Area Sales With Emp. Center 0 0 35 93 145 175 204 189 173 195 181 170 151 131 134 122 117 116 118 124 120 120 119 121 3,051
% Chose Townhome/Plex 3 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% 27% Townhome/Plex Sales 0 0 995 1,315 1,364 1,241 1,156 1,068 1,025 958 891 835 742 677 690 630 605 597 608 639 619 621 613 622 18,510 % Capture in Chesapeake 4 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% % Capture in Dominion Area W/O 5 5% 10% 15% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% Study Area Sales No Emp. Center 0 0 9 24 38 46 43 40 38 36 33 31 34 31 32 29 28 28 28 30 29 29 28 29 695 % Capture in Dominion Area W/ 5 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 25% 25% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% Study Area Sales With Emp. Center 0 0 9 24 38 46 54 50 48 53 50 47 41 38 38 35 34 33 34 36 35 35 34 35 846
% Chose Multifamily 3 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 8% 8% 8% 8% 8% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% Multifamily Sales 0 0 195 257 267 243 226 209 305 286 266 249 221 252 257 235 226 223 226 238 231 231 228 232 5,303 % Capture in Chesapeake 4 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% 19% % Capture in Dominion Area W/O 5 0% 0% 0% 10% 10% 15% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% Study Area Sales No Emp. Center 0000054611111098910988899989160 % Capture in Dominion Area W/ 5 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 25% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% 30% Study Area Sales With Emp. Center 0 0 2 5 7 9 11 10 14 13 12 12 12 14 14 13 13 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 251 Total W/o Emp. Core 0 0 44 117 183 226 211 197 188 208 194 182 168 150 153 140 134 132 135 142 137 138 136 138 3,453
Total W/Emp. Core 0 0 46 122 190 231 269 248 235 261 243 228 204 183 186 170 164 161 164 173 167 168 166 168 4,149
1 Moody's Economy.com 2 Hampton Roads TPO 3 Residential Databank data from 2003-2012 4 Based upon the City of Chesapeake's capture of new sales in the market from 2009-2013 5 Based upon the desirability of the study area for residential, and the availability of land in other areas
Exhibit VI-6 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 325 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-7
FOR-RENT RESIDENTIAL DEMAND DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 TOTAL
MSA Household Projections 1 649,200 656,543 664,162 671,092 677,549 683,516 689,241 694,593 699,570 704,237 708,379 712,159 716,011 719,531 722,913 726,249 729,643 733,215 736,673 740,143 743,567 747,042 Annual Household Change 5,557 7,343 7,619 6,930 6,456 5,967 5,725 5,352 4,976 4,667 4,142 3,780 3,852 3,519 3,382 3,336 3,394 3,572 3,458 3,470 3,424 3,475 103,399 % Renter Households 2 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% New Renter Households 1,851 2,445 2,537 2,308 2,150 1,987 1,906 1,782 1,657 1,554 1,379 1,259 1,283 1,172 1,126 1,111 1,130 1,189 1,151 1,155 1,140 1,157 34,432 % Capture in Chesapeake Submkt 3 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% % Capture in Dominion Area No Emp Core 4 0% 0% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% Study Area Rentals - No Emp. Core 0 0 34 31 29 27 26 24 22 21 19 17 17 16 15 15 15 16 16 16 15 16 407
% Capture in Chesapeake Submkt 3 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% 9% % Capture in Dominion Area W/Emp Core 4 0% 0% 25% 25% 25% 25% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% Study Area Rentals - w/Emp. Core 0 0 57 52 48 45 57 53 49 46 41 57 58 53 51 50 51 54 52 52 51 52 1,027
1 Moody's Economy.com 2 American Community Survey, 5% Sample, 2007-2011 3 Based upon the Chesapeake submarket's average capture of the region's apartment absorption from 2000-2013 4 Based upon the study area's desirability for rental projects with and without the creation of an employment core in the area
Exhibit VI-7 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
326 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-8
RETAIL DEMAND DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 TOTAL
No Employment Center Scenario Annual Base Household Change 1 44 117 217 257 240 223 214 232 216 203 187 167 170 156 149 147 150 158 153 153 151 154 3,860 Retail SF/New Household 2 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 New Retail SF Demanded 3,760 9,936 18,363 21,775 20,285 18,913 18,108 19,675 18,293 17,155 15,809 14,139 14,409 13,164 12,649 12,478 12,696 13,359 12,933 12,978 12,806 12,999 326,682 Additional SF (tourist, drive-by, employee) 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0%
Total Study Area Baseline Retail Space 4,136 10,930 20,199 23,953 22,314 20,804 19,919 21,642 20,122 18,870 17,390 15,553 15,850 14,480 13,914 13,726 13,966 14,694 14,227 14,276 14,086 14,298 359,350
Employment Center Scenario Annual Base Household Change 1 44 117 240 278 259 241 245 261 243 228 209 207 211 192 185 182 186 195 189 190 187 190 4,480 Retail SF/New Household 2 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 New Retail SF Demanded 3,760 9,936 20,295 23,533 21,923 20,427 20,722 22,118 20,565 19,286 17,701 17,495 17,829 16,288 15,652 15,440 15,710 16,529 16,003 16,059 15,845 16,084 379,201 Additional SF (tourist, drive-by, employee) 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0%
Total Study Area Baseline Retail Space 4,512 11,923 24,354 28,240 26,307 24,512 24,867 26,542 24,678 23,143 21,241 20,994 21,394 19,546 18,782 18,528 18,852 19,835 19,204 19,271 19,015 19,301 455,041
1 Based upon the for-sale and rental demand for the study area in the employment center and no employment center scenarios 3 Based upon comparison of total retail square feet in MSA per CREED (54M) to total households per Esri (640K). It equals 85 SF/HH
Exhibit VI-8 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 327 CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-9
OFFICE DEMAND DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 TOTAL
Virginia Beach MSA Office Emp. Growth 1 2,572 4,078 3,574 1,844 702 334 426 327 304 169 211 174 169 424 472 532 805 931 1,069 1,006 922 848 26,510 Hampton Rds Rgn Office Emp. Growth 1 1,218 1,228 1,238 1,248 1,258 1,268 1,278 1,289 1,299 1,309 1,320 1,330 1,341 1,352 1,363 1,374 1,385 1,396 1,407 1,418 1,430 1,441 29,190 SF/Total New Employee 2 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 New Office SF Demanded 643,095 1,019,600 893,425 461,025 175,378 83,577 106,470 81,650 75,880 42,175 52,772 43,525 42,147 105,978 118,050 132,927 201,345 232,703 267,225 251,523 230,400 212,030 6,195,953 % Capture in Study Area (No Emp. Core) 3 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2%
Total New Study Area Office Space (No 7,717 12,235 10,721 5,532 2,105 1,003 1,278 980 911 506 633 522 506 1,272 1,417 1,595 2,416 2,792 3,207 3,018 2,765 2,544 65,675 Core)
% Capture in Study Area (As Emp. Core) 4 1% 2% 5% 10% 13% 13% 13% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26% 26%
Total New Study Area Office Space (With 7,717 24,470 42,884 44,258 23,044 10,982 13,990 21,457 19,940 11,083 13,868 11,438 11,076 27,850 31,022 34,932 52,911 61,151 70,224 66,097 60,546 55,719 716,659 Core)
1 Based upon Moody's economy.com projections for office employment for MSA. It does not include military or federal employment. Region from Hampton Roads TPO. Their office projections modified to not include military or federal employment 2 Based upon comparison of total occupied office square feet in Virginia Beach MSA from CoStar (43M SF) to total office employment per Moody's (152K). This equals approximately 280 SF/employee. This was dropped down to reflect the amount of right sizing currently happening in market, as well as trends towards less SF/employee nationally 3 Based upon CoStar data for the Southern Chesapeake submarket, of which the study area represents a large portion of land. Current and historical capture of approximately 1.2% of absorption 4 Based upon the Study Area becoming an employment core and performing similarly to the Greenbriar submarket as it matures
Exhibit VI-9 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
328 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia CITY OF CHESAPEAKE
Exhibit VI-10
INDUSTRIAL DEMAND DOMINION STUDY AREA 2014-2035
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 TOTAL
Virginia Beach MSA Industrial Emp. Growth 1 1,778 2,490 1,308 -262 -812 -968 -879 -714 -844 -693 -736 -542 -473 -296 -240 -257 -35 74 188 401 371 338 2,090 SF/Total New Employee 2 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 New Industrial SF Demanded 888,874 1,244,796 654,043 -130,925 -405,804 -483,791 -439,547 -356,780 -422,078 -346,737 -367,752 -271,100 -236,658 -147,864 -120,177 -128,308 -17,680 36,975 94,127 200,457 185,419 169,231 -2,943 3 % Capture in Study Area (No Emp. Core) 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% 2.1% Total New Study Area Office Space (No 18,312 25,644 13,474 0 0 0 000000000007621,939 4,130 3,820 3,486 71,566 Core)
% Capture in Study Area (As Emp. Core) 4 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Total New Study Area Office Space (With 36,623 51,288 26,948 0 0 0 000000000001,523 3,878 8,259 7,640 6,973 143,133 Core)
1 Based upon Moody's economy.com projections for Natural Resources & Mining, Manufacturing, and Trade, Transportation & Utilities employment. It does not include military or federal employment 2 Based upon comparison of total occupied industrial square feet in Virginia Beach MSA from CoStar (88M SF) to total industrial-related employment per Moody's (184K). This equals approximately 500 SF/employee. 3 Based upon CoStar data for the Deep Creek submarket, of which the study area represents a large portion of land. Currently approximately 2.1% of total inventory 4 Based upon the Study Area becoming an employment core and performing twice as well as it would without being a core
Exhibit VI-10 E4-11982.40 Printed: 3/27/2014
Appendix | 329 RCLCO 7200 Wisconsin Avenue 11th Floor Bethesda, MD 20814 Phone: (240) 644-1300 Fax: (240) 644-1311 www.rclco.com
330 | Appendix DOMINION BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY | Chesapeake, Virginia