DATE: Wednesday, November 5, 1997           TAG: 9711050454

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B1   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: BY JOHN MURPHY AND TONI GUAGENTI, STAFF WRITERS 

DATELINE: VIRGINIA BEACH                    LENGTH:   72 lines

BEACH PLAN: PRESERVE SOUTH, REBUILD NORTH

The City Council on Tuesday set a course for the city's future, approving a guide for development that promises to preserve the city's rural character, rebuild its suburban neighborhoods and promote quality from north to south.

In a 10-1 vote, the council adopted the city's comprehensive plan. The 600-page, two-volume document serves as a blueprint for growth. While not legally binding, it helps shape decisions made by the Planning Commission and City Council. It is updated every five years.

The plan promotes two key ideas:

Save the south. After holding 20 meetings with the public, city officials heard residents demand again and again that the farmland and open space in the southern portion of the city be preserved.

Rebuild the north. City planners want developers to concentrate on redeveloping blighted areas and aging buildings instead of plowing up more undeveloped land in the north.

They also hope this strategy will preserve open space.

The plan should increase competition for remaining undeveloped land in the northern part of the city. After months of debate, which centered on the preservation of the southern portion of the city, council members Tuesday considered how the plan would work as a whole.

Councilman Harold Heischober described the plan as a ``push-pull situation.''

After talking with residents about the plan, Heischober says most believe that northern concerns need more work.

``They do not feel we've sufficiently addressed the northern problems as much as the southern problems,'' he said.

In casting the sole vote against the plan on Tuesday, Councilwoman Reba S. McClanan said it fails to adequately offer solutions for the north.

``I don't think enough thought has been put into what to do with the north,'' McClanan said. ``I just was not comfortable with voting on something I really haven't integrated into my thinking.''

The plan stresses the future of residential development in the city and neglects the importance of the city's economic vitality through commercial and industrial zoning, McClanan said.

The plan has many good goals, but they aren't adequately spelled out, she said.

Other council members applauded the plan but expressed reservations over how many people could ultimately live here.

``I am not going to vote for high-density housing. I think we provide a wide selection of housing. I'm not in favor of putting up any more until we get a grip on what's going on,'' Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf said.

``You want to know how much can the city bear, given the limitations we have set. That's not a bad way to look at things,'' said Louisa M. Strayhorn.

``The challenge now is how to make sure housing doesn't deteriorate,'' said Councilwoman Barbara M. Henley.

Still, council members Tuesday were unanimous in their support for the foundations of the plan.

One of those is the Green Line, an imaginary border separating the suburban north from the rural south along Princess Anne and Sandbridge roads. It was designed to limit growth only to areas where city services, such as roads, schools and sewers, were adequately available.

Since the line's creation in 1979, the city has added about 160,000 residents north of it and just a fraction of that to the south.

Other highlights of the plan include:

Keeping the Agricultural Reserve Program. This 2-year-old program allows the city to purchase the development rights from farmers in the southern portion of the city. Farmers continue to own and farm the land but agree not to develop it for other uses.

Combining three transition areas into one large one south of the Green Line. The transition area is a buffer zone between high-density and rural zones. In this area, roughly located between Princess Anne and Indian River roads, the plan encourages development that provides recreation or other open-space uses and does not place a drain on taxpayer dollars. KEYWORDS: GROWTH REDEVELOPMENT VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu