Marlin Bay Project at Planning Commission

OPCL President Danny Murphy was one of 9 speakers at the June 10 Planning Commission meeting. There were 6 speakers against the project, 2 in favor and 1 neutral. Terry Browning owns the adjacent property and business: Browning’s Marine Sales. He spoke in favor of the project and noted that ownership of the property and business has changed since the first Marlin Bay Project. He spoke to correct speculation that his property might also soon be developed. He has bought out his brothers and owns both now outright and stated that his and his son will continue to operate the boat sales business.

The 6 speakers who oppose the project noted that there have been 57 letters of opposition to the project citing density, building height, potential environmental impacts, increased traffic and associated safety issues, overflow parking into surrounding neighborhoods, and potential flooding impacts.

President Danny Murphy’s statement:

“Good afternoon, Chairman Coston, Commissions and staff. My name is Danny Murphy, and I serve as the President of the Ocean Park Civic League.

I am here to formally state that the Civic League has chosen not to take an official position for or against the Shore Drive Area Condo project application. Over the past five years of my tenure, this site and adjacent parcels have been the focus of redevelopment projects. The Civic League and community have strongly opposed those previous plans, as some of you on this commission may recall. Our community remains divided on this proposal, as confirmed at our recent June meeting. We believe it is important to prioritize residents’ voices by stepping back and allowing them to present their individual perspectives directly to you.

According to our Bylaws, the Civic League’s mandate is to ‘inform residents of issues of neighborhood importance, to provide a forum for discussion of concerns, and to promote participation in public affairs,’ such as this hearing. We operate ‘for the mutual beneficial interests of the Ocean Park community’ and promote ‘safety, and natural resource stewardship for the protection of property values of Ocean Park so it may continue and flourish.’ As noted, redevelopment of these parcels has been discussed at numerous meetings (recap) and open houses. I would like to thank the City of Virginia Beach Planning Department, especially Deputy Director Carrie Bookholt and staff planner Marchelle Coleman, for dedicating an evening to educate our members on land use and redevelopment as it relates to this project. The Q&A portion was extremely valuable, and the city of VB should be proud of their representation.

I also thank the developer, McLeskey Assoc., for addressing past concerns, working to mitigate them where possible, and continuing to seek input throughout this process. They will likely outline their community outreach, pre-project meetings, concept reviews, and efforts to incorporate feedback from the Civic League and Bayfront Advisory Commission, including features such as the designated pet relief area. Their good-faith effort is evident.

Redevelopment is inevitable, necessary, and welcome. As the Civic League observes the future of Shore Drive, we respectfully ask that you evaluate this application within the context of the long-term vision Virginia Beach has adopted for the corridor. We emphasize that this project is unique and should not set a precedent for other nearby redevelopment proposals, several of which may soon arise. All projects must meet the standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the Shore Drive Overlay District, the Shore Drive Corridor Plan, and design guidelines. A wise councilman once told me these represent the contract with the city’s citizens.

There are concerns that many of us share, regardless of our position on the project. I ask that these concerns accompany your recommendation to the City Council, which will make the final decision.

• Scale, density, and massing are significant, documented concerns. To reach nearly 24 units per acre, the applicant is requesting variances to reduce the required 30-foot setback on Clipper Bay Drive to 15 feet and lower step-down height 33 feet adjacent to existing townhomes. We ask the Commission to consider these requests carefully before granting approval.
• Neighborhood character and corridor alignment. The key consideration is whether the project reflects Ocean Park’s identity as a historic coastal community and aligns with the City’s adopted corridor plan.
• Parking and traffic. The trade-off between building height and ground-level parking is significant, and neighbors are concerned that resident and guest vehicles may spill onto Marlin Bay Drive and nearby streets. As for traffic, Shore Drive already exceeds its designed capacity. The Shore Drive Corridor Improvements (Phase IV) project is not scheduled to begin until 2032. Additionally, without proper light cycling, Marlin Bay Drive remains a significant concern as it serves as a main conduit for the area.
• Stormwater Management and the Lynnhaven watershed. This section of the Bayfront is already vulnerable to flooding. Any new development must demonstrate that it will not increase runoff or drainage issues, nor hinder the potential need for the west Shore Drive Phase IV Stormwater Pump Station.
• Pleasure House Point Natural Area. This property is adjacent to the city’s crown jewel, which the entire community values. With 52 new units, increased use of the area is inevitable. We request meaningful & thoughtful protection for the habitat and trails.
• We respectfully request that, regardless of your recommendation, these concerns be included in the record and forwarded to Council, and that residents continue to have a full and fair opportunity to be heard.
• Thank you for your time and your service.”

Link to the full Planning Commission Meeting June 10