HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/14/2017 - Planning Commission - Agenda -RegularPlanni ng Commission Meeti ng
AGENDA
Wednesday, June 14, 2017, 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153
1.Call to Order
2.Consent Agenda
A.Minutes of Work Session
Consider approval of the minutes from the May 10, 2017, work session.
B.Minutes of Regular Meeting
Consider approval of the minutes from the May 10, 2017, regular meeting.
3.New Business
A.Amendment to the City Code
Hold public hearing to consider amending C hapter 106 Zoning, Article II District Regulations,
Section 106-218(B)(5) Light Manufacturing District, C ommercial Uses and Section 106-220(B)(5)
Heavy Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses, and Article III Use and Design
Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses, pertaining to microbreweries.
B.Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
Hold public hearing to consider the request of J oseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for rezoning the
property located at 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard, (Tax Map # 137-5-7 and 137-5-6) from HBD
Highway Business District to RSF Residential Single Family.
C.Special Exception P ermit
Hold public hearing to consider the request of J oseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance
of a Special Exception Permit to allow a new 1200 sq ft accessory building on the property located
at 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard, (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
D.Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
Hold public hearing to consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley Graham,
LLC, J ustin I. & Andrea N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer,
BG G T, LLC , Daniel I. & Helene M. Shain, David B. & C arolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. &
Elizabeth T. Graham, property owners, for rezoning 13 parcels located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709,
713, 717, 721, 725, 729 and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-
1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-
1, and 290-1-1) from PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to P UD Planned Unit District
with amended conditions.
4.Adjournment
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION
May 10, 2017
A work session of the Planning Commission of the City of Salem, Virginia, was held
in Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, at 6:00 p.m., on
May 10, 2017, there being present the following members of said Commission, to wit: Vicki
G. Daulton, Denise P. King, Reid A. Garst II, and N. Jackson Beamer (Samuel R. Carter, III –
absent); together with Charles E. Van Allman, Jr., Director of Community Development;
Benjamin W. Tripp, City Planner; Mary Ellen Wines, Zoning Administrator; and William C.
Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; and the following business was transacted:
The Executive Secretary Pro Tem reported that this date, place, and time had been
set in order for the Commission to hold a work session; and
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Laura and Robert Owen,
property owners, and Mount Regis Center, lessee, for the issuance of a
Special Exception Permit to allow an outpatient mental health and
substance abuse clinic on the property located at 120 Roanoke Boulevard
(Tax Map # 121- 9 - 3)
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of one parcel,
located on the south side of Boulevard, near the intersection with South Colorado Street.
The property is approximately .34 acres, and is occupied by a single story office building.
After the original facility at 405 Kimball Avenue was destroyed by fire, Mount Regis moved
its outpatient administrative offices to this location temporarily. The applicant intents to
rebuild at the original location but due to the time involved for reconstruction, they would
like to temporarily operate the outpatient mental health and substance abuse clinic at this
location. The treatment provided by the proposed facility would be limited to counseling
for clients in early recovery and for their families. No medications are dispensed. This use
is intended to be of a temporary nature, lasting approximately two years until the Kimball
Avenue location can be rebuilt. The applicant has voluntarily proffered that if approved,
after no more than two years they will request the revocation of this permit; and
WHEREAS, Ben Tripp and Mary Ellen discussed the Special Exception Permit
request, and it was noted that several phone calls had been received in reference to the
request;
WHEREAS, a full and lengthy discussion was held regarding the request of Laura
and Robert Owen, property owners, and Mount Regis Center, lessee, for the issuance of a
Special Exception Permit to allow an outpatient mental health and substance abuse clinic
on the property located at 120 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax Map # 121- 9 - 3).
2
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Beckner Living Trust,
property owner, and Daryl and Marlene Beckner, Trustees, for the
issuance of a Special Exception Permit to allow an accessory apartment in
a proposed attached garage addition on the property located at 844
Roanoke Boulevard (Tax Map # 158-5-5)
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of one parcel,
located on the south side of Roanoke Boulevard across from the Salem Civic Center. The
property is approximately .34 acres and is occupied by a single family residence. The
applicants state they wold like to construct a garage addition on the right side of the house.
The addition will be approximately 28 feet by 40 feet (1,120 sq.ft. total) with an upstairs
apartment of 16 feet by 40 feet (640 sq.ft.). The garage will be attached to the house by a
breezeway structure with utilities tied to the main residence. The applicants have stated
that the intended use of the property is for the owners' adult daughter, and that in the
event she moves out then the property will not be rented or leased. This is not stated as a
voluntary proffer; and
WHEREAS, Ben Tripp and Mary Ellen Wines discussed the Special Exception Permit
request, and it was noted that there were no issues; and
WHEREAS, a full and lengthy discussion was held regarding the request of Beckner
Living Trust, property owner, and Daryl and Marlene Beckner, Trustees, for the issuance of
a Special Exception Permit to allow an accessory apartment in a proposed attached garage
addition on the property located at 844 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax Map # 158-5-5).
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Jasbir S. Mavi, property
owner, for rezoning the property located at 1656 Woodshill Lane (Tax
Map # 239-1-8) from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single
Family District
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of one parcel,
located at the end of Woodshill Lane, a private road, and abutting the municipal
boundary. The property is approximately 1.7 acres and is occupied by a single family
residence. The applicant is requesting to rezone this lot to Single Family District so that a
lot line adjustment can be made with a property behind it located on Gratton Street.
Woodshill Lane is a private road. The city does not allow subdivision of land on private
roads, however, this request will not result in any additional lots or houses on Woodshill
Lane; and
3
WHEREAS, Mary Ellen Wines and Ben Tripp discussed the rezoning request, and
it was noted several calls had been received regarding the request.
WHEREAS, a full and lengthy discussion was held regarding the request of Jasbir S.
Mavi, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 1656 Woodshill Lane (Tax Map
# 239-1-8) from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single Family District.
THEREUPON, no action was taken by the Commission at this work session.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the work session
was adjourned at 6:55 p.m.
_____________________________
Executive Secretary
________________________
Chair
Planni ng Commission Meeting
M INUTES
Wednesday, May 10, 2017, 7:00 P M
Council Chambers, C ity Hall, 114 North B road Street, Salem, Virginia 24153
1.C all to Order
A regular meeting of the Planning C ommission of the C ity of Salem, Virginia, was
held in C ouncil C hambers, C ity Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, at 7:00 P M, there being
present the following members to wit: Vicki G. Daulton, D enise P. King, Reid A.
G arst II, N. J ackson Beamer, and Samuel R. C arter (absent); with Vicki G.
D aulton, C hair, presiding; together with Charles E. Van Allman, J r., Director of
C ommunity Development; Benjamin W. Tripp, C ity Planner; Mary Ellen Wines,
Zoning Administrator; and William C . Maxwell, Assistant C ity Attorney.
2.C onsent Agenda
A.Work Session Minutes of April 12, 2017
C onsider approval of the minutes of the April 12, 2017, work session.
A pproved as presented
B.Minutes of April 12, 2017
C onsider approval of the minutes of the April 12, 2017 meeting.
A pproved as presented
3.Old Business
A.Vice-C hairman
C onsider appointment of Vice-C hairman.
C hair Daulton noted this date has been set to consider the appointment of a new
Vice C hair. She asked if there were any recommendations for Vice C hair. Reid
G arst nominated Denise King for the Vice C hair appointment. J ackson Beamer
noted that he was in agreement.
Reid G arst motioned to appoint Denise King as Vice C hair of the Planning
C ommission. J ackson Beamer seconded the motion.
Ayes: Beamer, Daulton, Garst, King
A bsent: C arter
4.New Business
A.Special E xception P ermit
Hold public hearing to consider the request of Laura and Robert Owen, property
owners, and Mount Regis C enter, lessee, for the issuance of a Special Exception
Permit to allow an outpatient mental health and substance abuse clinic on the
property located at 120 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax Map # 121- 9 - 3).
T he Executive Secretary Pro Tem reported that notice of such hearing had been
published in the April 27 and May 4, 2017, issues of the Salem Times Register and
adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed A pril 24, 2017.
Staff noted the following regarding the request: the subject property consists of one
parcel, located on the south side of Boulevard, near the intersection with South
C olorado Street. T he property is approximately .34 acres, and is occupied by a
single story office building. After the original facility at 405 Kimball Avenue was
destroyed by fire, Mount Regis moved its outpatient administrative offices to this
location temporarily. T he applicant intents to rebuild at the original location but due
to the time involved for reconstruction, they would like to temporarily operate the
outpatient mental health and substance abuse clinic at this location. T he treatment
provided by the proposed facility would be limited to counseling for clients in early
recovery and for their families. No medications are dispensed. T his use is intended
to be of a temporary nature, lasting approximately two years until the Kimball
Avenue location can be rebuilt. T he applicant has voluntarily proffered that if
approved, after no more than two years they will request the revocation of this
permit.
C hair Daulton asked if there was anyone in attendance to speak on this matter.
C urt Lane, C EO of Mount Regis C enter, 125 Knotbreak Road appeared before the
C ommission explaining the Special Exception Permit request. He read the letter
submitted to the C ity along with the petition for the benefit of those in attendance.
C ommissioner King noted she thought it was made clear to the C ommission in the
letter submitted that there will be no drugs of any kind dispensed at this location.
Mr. Lane noted that she was correct. Drugs will not be involved in any way at this
facility. T his is no different than marriage counseling; patients come they have a one
hour session and then they leave. If they are in their education class then they come
for three hours. T his is strictly outpatient and strictly counseling with no
medications whatsoever. Mrs. King asked what would be the hours of operation.
Mr. Lane noted that they have afternoon and evening classes. T hey are hearing from
the community that there are a lot of parents who have children who are
experiencing drug problems. T he children are not engaged in treatment, and the
parents do not know what to do. T hey need support, education, and direction. T heir
plan is to create a community support class for those parents so this would be an
example of a one hour session. T hey will probably offer this in the evening when
most people are off work. T his is a typical example of what they would be doing at
this location. Mrs. King asked how many staff will be working at this facility as she
noted when viewing the property that there might not be sufficient parking during the
daytime. Mr. Lane noted that currently they have only two business personnel
located here and as they introduce this program, the staffing would grow as the
program grows; however, this is not a high capacity program at all. T he evening
class usually consists of a cap of twelve patients. By the nature of the therapy that
they do, they cannot have a very large group because it is educational and people
cannot participate in an education process if the group is too large. T hey would
probably have at most two counselors involved in this program and they might have
one clerical assistant, which would be day and evening for the counseling side. A nd
again, on the business side they only have two personnel.
C hair Daulton noted this would be group therapy sessions in the evening, and Mr.
Lane noted that this was correct. He noted that they would also like to introduce
group education for the parents. Mrs. Daulton noted with the nucleus of 12 which
was mentioned earlier, will there be additional family who would be there at the
same time. Mr. Lane noted that they do offer a family program but it is not part of
the three 3-hour sessions that he mentioned. T he family is not there for those
sessions. T hey do have them involved once a week for about an hour for the
educational information. She noted that she thought he had answered her question
related to the substance abuse clinic. She asked how he would characterize the
difference between a substance abuse clinic that they will be providing and one that
would be dispensing medication. He noted that he understands the concerns of the
neighbors and they are very sensitive to those concerns. T hey share this concern and
this is why they do not do this type of therapy. T hey do not use methadone and most
people equate substance abuse services with methadone clinics. Mount Regis
C enter does not use methadone. We are a counseling based center and do use
medications to detox patients the first week of their treatment.T hey have a
psychiatrist who will start patients on medication that anyone of us might receive
such an Zoloft or Prozac after they are out of detox. He further discussed
medication dispensing and behavioral health related to substance abuse.
C ommissioner Garst asked Mr. Lane where they had been providing these services
since the fire at the Kimball Avenue facility. Mr. Lane noted that this is a good
question. T his is the problem as they have to find a place because there is a great
demand for these service. T hey do not have these programs up and running and are
kind of waiting to see what is going to happen with this building. At the current time,
they have a residential IO P program where the patients stay at Mount Regis C enter
for these services. So for the current time, the services are being provided at their
current location on Knotbreak Road. Mr. Garst asked if they were outgrowing this
and Mr. Lane noted that yes they are basically.
C ommissioner King noted she understands that this location on Roanoke Boulevard
will be temporary. Mr. Lane noted that she was correct. Mrs. King noted that this is
temporary while they rebuild the facility on Kimball Avenue and so we are talking
about perhaps a two-year term or until they receive an occupancy permit. At that
time then everything would move back to Kimball Avenue. Mr. Lane noted that this
is correct. He further noted that they are not involved in the process right now. It is
up to the insurance company as to what to do with the facility and the timeliness of
rebuilding, but they do have a voice in what they want done. He thought they are
getting close to end of getting appraisals, etc.
C ommissioner Beamer noted that they are doing this service at their current facility
and have outgrown it. Mr. Lane stated that this is correct. Mr. Beamer asked him if
the hours would be from perhaps 8 in the morning until late at night. Mr. Lane
discussed the assessment of patients. T he people who come to the classes are
vetted very thoroughly so most of them work and therefore these are evening
classes. Typically the classes are Monday, Wednesday, and T hursday evening from
6 to 9. Patients come at the time of their session and leave once it is over. T hey
hope to also offer an afternoon class with the same pattern 3-hour sessions three
days a week. T his is very typical of marriage counseling and based on the same
model as any other outpatient model for behavioral health.
D r. Eugene Bane, property owner at 115 Boulevard, appeared before the Planning
C ommission. He noted that he and his wife have a vested interest in this request as
their building is located across the street from this building. His building is currently
leased to J oe Baba of J oe's Deli and to Yvette Reynolds of Premier Benefits.T hey
have some concerns about having this type of facility across from their building.
T his type of facility has a tendency to reduce real estate values. Even though they
have indicated that this is a temporary facility, they are concerned about the future
of it. In talking with the Planning Department yesterday, he was told that once this
Special Exception permit is issued that it goes with the property, which means that
when Mount Regis moves away it is still part of the property and is still available
for a new entity to come in. T hey believe that Mount Regis which has been here for
a long time in Salem has an excellent reputation in Salem and does things right;
however, they are not sure what might happen once they move out. T hey would like
to see that a clause is put on the Special Exception permit that will allow it to be
removed. He noted that he was on the Board of Trustees of an optometry medical
school in Memphis, Tennessee for eight years, and they had a small parking lot that
separated the students academic buildings from a substance abuse clinic.
T he people coming to the clinic would park their cars in the student parking lot.
T hen they would throw out their fast food wrappers, their cigarette ashtrays, and
their syringes and needles into the parking lot. T hen they would go to the clinic and
get their drugs. Once they got back in their cars, they would sit down, turn the radio
up loud and start taking their pills or whatever. When the female students arrived at
the school, they would harass them as they came into the school. T he Board was
very distressed with having this facility and voted to purchase the building and when
their lease ran out, they did not renew it. So as a result, this was the only way they
were able to get rid of the clinic. He noted that they are concerned about the
proposed center messing up the parking. Mr. Baba's restaurant is open on T hursday
evenings so if the clinic is open T hursday evenings then there are going to be 12
cars parked there on the street which could eat up a lot of the parking that his
customers use. Further, they are not totally convinced that it could not build up and
become more than what has been mentioned this evening. He doesn't understand
why they don't have room in their new facility to have the outpatient facility at that
location. He further noted that they want language saying that there will absolutely
be no medications dispensed at this proposed facility. T hey do not need a
methadone pharmacy across the street from their building and it could evolve into
that sort of thing if we do not have some strong language in this Special Exception
permit.
C ommissioner Garst noted that Dr. Bane's biggest concerns are the potential for
drugs to be prescribed there or even used there by the patients and also the duration
of the use. He asked if this was correct. Dr. Bane noted that he was correct and the
fact that it does tend to reduce real estate values. Mr. G arst stated if we had
mechanisms to make sure it was temporary does he think that it would be a lasting
effect on real estate values. Dr. Bane noted that he does not know that it would be
an immediate thing but he is concerned about the future and the possibility that
some less desirable substance abuse group could move into this building. He noted
that he was told yesterday that the permit will stay with the property. Mr. Garst
asked who had told him this. He noted that it was a lady in the Planning
D epartment. Mary Ellen Wines noted that she was the one who had spoken with Mr.
Bane and that it was before they had legal clarification. She noted that normally a
Special Exception Permit goes with the property and not the tenant. But after
speaking with legal counsel, we do have some mechanisms to control this situation.
D r. Bane noted that he wants to make sure the language is in the approval.
Richard Smith of Spartan Silkscreen located at 107 Roanoke Boulevard appeared
before the C ommission. He noted that he owns the business and the property. He
noted that they have some concerns. He is aware that Mount Regis has been great
for the community and the people in the community. He does not want to step on
their toes and say that we are not going to support them. He has gone through a fire
just like they have and he knows what they are going through. If we are going to do
a temporary permit, then let's do a temporary permit. We need to make sure that the
property stays as is and give them a temporary business permit to operate the
facility for a set time. We need to review this after a year or two. He further
discussed the proposed use of the facility and the fact that this is a new venture for
them and they do not know how this is going to go. He believes that we need to
place restrictions on the hours and restrictions on what they can and cannot do such
as the dispensing of drugs. We need to make sure that they are abiding by the
restrictions and if they are not, then the City should pull the permit. We need to
make sure that we set the guidelines and the groundwork so that we can control it if
it gets out of hand. Again, he is not going to say they are not a needed commodity
because they are, and they are great for the community.
D aniel Austin, owner of Dominion Service and West Salem C ollision Center,
appeared before the Commission. He noted the reason he moved to Salem is
because of the support from other businesses. He thinks all of the businesses in this
area are very proud to support other businesses like Mount Regis Center. From
what he is understanding is that this is a temporary permit which will put a deadline
on things. When you have a deadline, you tend to get it done quickly. His concern is
this - how close is this facility to the junior high school? When he first got here
tonight this was what he was concerned about because he thought it was a
methadone clinic and did not know it is just for counseling. However, there are a lot
of different types of people that need help and at any given time on a Friday
afternoon, there are hundreds of children walking by this facility. T he only concern
he really has is the protection of our pride of the city. He would like for the
C ommission to take this into high consideration. If there is an amendment with a
deadline for the permit, then he is all for it.
J im C owan of Cowan Perry, 1328 T hird Street, Roanoke, appeared before the
C ommission. He noted that his firm is counsel and represent First C itizens Bank.
First C itizens Bank owns the branch next door and is the immediate neighbor to this
property. He noted more importantly they share a parking lot with the proposed
lease space. Parking in this area is an issue already and they share some of the
same concerns which have been voiced. T hey also share respect and compassion
for the mission and what Mount Regis is trying to do here. What they want to do is
ask the C ommission to set back and say why is this a use that requires a Special
Exception Permit. We have a number of uses in this district that can be done by
right and others which require a Special Exception Permit. T he reason for the
Special Exception permits under the C ity's zoning ordinance is that those uses are
recognized to have an additional adverse and generally considered potentially
negative impact on their neighbors. So part of that process is so that as much can be
done as possible to mitigate those adverse impacts of some of these types of uses.
O ne of the questions they have is what is being done here. Not every property can
be mitigated and sometimes we can put a landscape buffer between two uses to
mitigate the impact. We can control hours of operation, determine where access is,
etc. But not every lot lends itself to sufficient mitigation to address that issue in its
totality. T heir concern here is that this is a location where it is very difficult if not
impossible to mitigate some of those adverse impacts on the neighboring property.
T he bank has been an owner and operating business here and has been an very
active member of this community for many, many years and they have concerns.
T here is an AT M now at this property. T hey have concerns about their customers
who use this parking lot and may have interactions with people coming to the clinic.
We need to be mindful of this. T heir question is what has been done or can we
really do anything at this location to truly sort of mitigate some of the impacts on
the adjoining businesses and property owners. And their view is they are not sure
we can and they would like the C ity to look to that mission. T he reason we have the
Special Exception process is to be able to ask the question is this an appropriate
location? He has not really seen a lot concrete information that addresses and really
attempts to mitigate in a meaningful way the impact on their client's adjoining
business.
J oe Baba, owner of J oe's D eli, appeared before the C ommission. He has been at
this location, 115 Roanoke Boulevard, for almost four years. He finally found his
spot in Salem and he has been in the C ity since 2001. T his is the location he really
wants to stay in. He has a family and four children who he has to support. T hanks
to Dr. Bane for allowing him to rent his building he is able to support his family. He
has customers from all around Salem and beyond. His concern as a business owner
is the parking in this area is limited. He noted that his main concern is his business
and everything he has invested in his business. He is concerned not just about the
parking but possibly any kind of outside people coming towards his shop and
disrupting his business. He was in two other locations near Mount Regis and at one
location he had a problem with stragglers coming down and taking their break at the
store next to his restaurant. T hese people would loiter towards his customers. He
cannot allow this and cannot have this towards his business. At this point he
respects that there could be offices at this location which can better his business,
but as an outpatient treatment center he is a realist and he understands what comes
with this type of facility. He does not want this to interfere with his business. Again
he has been here since 2001 and he is looking to stay here another 15 years. He
noted that everything is great at this location and now the C ity is planning to make
some improvements to the downtown. He has problems with the counseling part of
the proposed business as this might interfere with his business as a whole. He
serves alcohol at this restaurant and has evening events, and he does not want to
cause someone to jump off the bandwagon possibly because of his serving alcohol.
He does not want to lose his business and his customers over little things that he has
seen in the past. He is a realistic person, and he understands what could happen as
we go further with this. He further noted the children who walk through this area;
we need to be concerned about them. He noted that he hopes the C ommission will
take all of this into consideration.
C hair Daulton noted that the C ommission appreciates his concerns. She said she
thinks what might be best at this point in the request is to ask Mr. C urt Lane to
come back up address some of these issues noted here, if there is no one else who
would like to speak. She stated she wanted to let everyone know that the Planning
C ommission is a recommending body only. T he C ommission will recommend to
C ity C ouncil whether or not a Special Exception Permit should be granted. It is not
up to the C ommission to decide the final outcome. She stated that those in
attendance should bring all their concerns back to C ity C ouncil at their meeting,
which she believes is on May 22. She asked Mr. Lane to come back and address
the concerns.
Mr. Lane noted that he appreciates the opportunity. He noted that they have raised
some excellent points, and he anticipated their concerns as it comes with the
territory of what they do. He has been a small business owner himself and
particularly in real estate so he understands real estate values. He believes the
concerns are well based, based on the public's understanding of a substance abuse
facility is. He state he would gladly proffer any conditions in writing to include: (1)
Mount Regis Center will not dispense any medications, which has nothing to do with
the service they are providing, (2) he will also provide the hours of their services,
(3) they will be glad to work with the bank to control the parking as best as they
can, to monitor it, provide signage, and let their clients know where to park, etc.
He noted that the patients we are talking about here for this type of service are
school teachers and police officers. T hey are people who hold jobs and are just like
us. Mount Regis is a volunteer facility. T hey are not high end, but they are certainly
a facility dedicated to the middle class. So these people are gainfully employed,
and this is why they offer evening classes. Most of clients are parents themselves so
he understands the concern about the children. He understands that the people are
not familiar with the population that they treat. For any new services such as the
things he mentioned in terms of offering outreach to families and parents, they will
coordinate this with their neighbors. T hey will try to work around their business
hours and speak to them to make this work for everyone. T he intention is to help
the community and certainly not to negatively impact even the ones adjacent to
them. He will be glad to proffer all these things in writing.
C hair Daulton noted that he had mentioned the reason why they do not want to
integrate the outpatient into their new inpatient facility on Knotbreak Road. Mr.
Lane noted that it is a standard practice that they usually do not mix inpatient
services and outpatient services on a voluntary unit. If there is a locked unit, which
they do not, then they can separate the two populations. It is a standard practice
that they minimize the traffic, whether it is patients or even visitors, coming through
a facility such as this one. When their new facility was being built, the historic
Mount Regis Center was intact they had planned and budgeted for the new building
not to house their outpatient services.
C hair Daulton noted she was on the C ommission when they came to request the
new inpatient facility. One of the questions which came up at that time was about
the children at the Montessori school. She asked if he could tell us a little about
how that relationship is between the school and Mount Regis. He noted that they
had asked the school what would make them more comfortable and so they asked
for a fence and they built two fences. He noted that they have had no complaints
from them. T hey made a personal invite for them to attend the open house and grand
walk through of their facility. He noted that there were quite a few people in
attendance so he is not sure if anyone came from the facility. T hey have endeavored
to be good neighbors and to be responsive to their concerns.
C ommissioner King noted that the former location on Kimball Avenue is next to a
childcare at Bethel Baptist C hurch. Mr. Lane noted that the location is right up the
hill from Bethel Baptist. She asked him if he could tell what incidents have taken
place with them being located near the daycare. He stated that there were no
incidents whatsoever and in fact the pastor of the church was one of their strongest
supporters. He actually let them hold classes at the church after the facility
burned.T hey had patients that they had committed to take care of and just because
their facility burned they would not turn them out until they felt like they were
ready. So the church allowed them to use their facility for this purpose. Again,
there be no issues whatsoever. In fact, when they were petitioning the City for the
new facility on Knotbreak Road, they went around to their neighbors in the Kimball
Avenue area and got 200 signatures saying that they were very good neighbors and
had not created no trouble for them. Further, children walk in front of the facility on
Kimball Avenue all the time and in fact, one of the first things he did was to put a
sidewalk running the length of the property.
Mrs. King noted that there was an issue raised about loitering. She asked what
measures Mount Regis would take to ensure that this would not happen. Initially
when we hear substance abuse clinic, all of us think of a methadone type clinic and
this is a counseling service very much like marriage counseling, but at the same
time, we want to make sure there is no loitering. Mr. Lane noted that this is a very
good point. T he licensed professional counselor, Director of Outpatient Service,
will be there and tell them that they cannot stay and talk. T hey will simply tell the
patients they cannot hang around the building. He noted that they will put
information in the written orientation packet to let them know.
C ommissioner Garst asked Mr. Lane why they picked this location. Mr. Lane noted
that they were a bit rushed to find a location for their business offices. T hey did a
quick search and found this building was available and moved the business offices
here. It is a good location for their outpatient services as it is mostly in a
commercial area. Again, they are sensitive to the fact that people are a little
uncomfortable to them being in residential areas. Further, the building lends itself
well to their needs. Mr. Garst noted that was good for the admin part of the business
and just kind of decided to extend that into the outpatient services side of things.
Mr. Lane agreed with him noting it is functional, in a mostly commercial location,
easy to find, and easy to monitor and control.
C ommissioner Beamer asked Mr. Lane if they had offered this type of service at the
facility on Kimball Avenue. Mr. Lane noted that they have provided the outpatient
services at that location for more years than he is aware. Mr. Beamer asked how
many staff they had at the location on the Boulevard, and Mr. Lane noted that at the
Boulevard location during the interim when they were not operational they had 20
staff working. Mr. Lane further discussed the outpatient services at the historic
facility.
C ommissioner Garst asked how long did they have 20 people working at the
Boulevard location, and Mr. Lane noted it was probably about three months. Mr.
G arst asked if he expected to have this kind of people load in there now. Mr. Lane
noted that he did not think so. He noted they currently have two staff members
working there and when they move the outpatient services here, it will be
administered by one counselor. As the program takes on the new functions that he
discussed, they would probably add a second counselor and a clerk. So there would
be 4 or 5 staff members working at this location.
T here was also further discussion about the bank next door and the parking lots
which are adjacent. Mr. Lane noted that they try to monitor the parking very closely
and make sure they are not parking in the bank's parking. Further it is very
important to them to be good neighbors.
C hair Daulton noted that the former Vice C hair of the Planning C ommission was
very involved with Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare and he was very up on a lot
of the statistics regarding substance abuse and the amount of every day people who
have a need for their services. She asked if he could comment very briefly about the
statistics. Mr. Lane noted that about 15% of the population needs treatment
currently and only about 3 to 5% of that population will receive treatment. If we
look at people who are receiving any type of mental health counseling, be it for
depression or anxiety or marriage counseling, about 30% of those people have an
active substance abuse problem.T he difference between Mount Regis' program and
their program is that Mount Regis tests their patients to make sure they are not using
and they do not. In the general population at any point, there is about 15% of people
who actively have a substance abuse problem and only about 5% will get treatment
through a facility such as Mount Regis.
C ommissioner Garst asked if he is saying that the only people they will have at this
facility have been tested. Mr. Lane stated this was correct that they will be tested
as they test their patients all the time. T hey test them at the time of admission, and
they are tested weekly and sometimes daily. T his shows them that they are in an
environment which is entirely accountable. Further, they do breathalyzer tests every
time they come on the facility. If there is any type of alcohol, they are rejected from
the program. Mr. Garst noted that they have to be clean to go to this facility, and
Mr. Lane noted this was correct and that they are monitored.
Mr. Maxwell noted there was an issue raised earlier about the temporary nature and
he does not think that this has been addressed in the conditions. His recollection of
the report was they were talking about a two year period, and while we are
committed to put restrictions on the request, he thinks it would be a good idea to
formulate something to make sure the applicant is in agreement to what the
C ommission suggests. One suggestion might be if it is for two years, that the permit
will be good for two years or upon the issuance of an occupancy permit for the
replacement facility or whichever occurs first. In other words, if they get in the
replacement facility finished in a year and a half then the Special Exception Permit
would expire.
C hair Daulton noted that the conditions are not proffered but will be placed on the
Special Exception Permit as a part of the approval. She noted the conditions: a two
year time frame or a certificate of occupancy for the replacement facility before the
two year period, no medicine to be dispensed, and the hours of operation. Mr. Tripp
noted that the hours have not been discussed. T here was further discussion
regarding the hours. Mr. Lane noted that he thought just for the outpatient services
the hours would be 12 to 9:30 pm, Monday through Friday. C hair Daulton asked
staff when Mr. Lane would need to get this in writing to the C ity. Mr. Maxwell
noted that as part of the C ommission's recommendation they can go ahead and
formulate the conditions this evening. T hen City C ouncil can always modify those
conditions. T here was further discussion regarding the recommendation to Council.
Mr. Smith noted that the Peacock Salem building is getting ready to be renovated. A
lot the employees who were working here previously were parking in the Peacock
Salem parking area as there was not enough parking. So he thinks we need to
consider this since they will not be able to park at that building when they start the
renovations. He asked if the patients who would be using this facility will be tested
just like they have been at the other facility. Mr. Lane noted that they would be
tested.
Lisa Hatcher of Mount Regis C enter appeared before the C ommission. She noted
that she is actually one of the only two employees who works at the 120 Roanoke
Boulevard location at this time. She noted someone behind her in the audience
mentioned that they have seen more cars at this location. She conducts business
operations here so she has meetings from time to time, and they are always very
respectful. In particular if she has a meeting and it is around lunch time, then she
tries to be a good neighbor and actually gets food from J oe's Deli. As far as
employees parking at the Peacock Salem building, they did have someone park in
this lot on the first day they were using this building. She has to say she is sorry that
it was her. She thought that they haven't used the property for years so she thought
they would not mind her parking there. Within one hour, the new owners of Peacock
told her associate that they do mind them parking in their lot. After this, Mr. Lane
sent out a message to employees letting them know the bank did not want them
using their lot and Peacock Salem did not want them using their lot and to please be
respectful.
Mr. Austin noted he would like the C ommission to consider another restriction. He
thought a lot of the problems associated with this type of facility comes from the
people who walk to the building. We can probably eliminate the loitering and some
of the shenanigans that go on if we require the patients to possess a drivers license
so their coming and going would be restricted to this property as opposed to walking
through neighborhoods. He noted that he owns a property in Roanoke next to a
similar facility where urination in driveways and accosting women goes on. He does
not want us to lower our standards and thinks that if they have a drivers license and
are arriving in a vehicle instead of walking through neighborhoods to get to these
meetings. T here was further discussion regarding people who attend the facilities
such as Mount Regis and the placing of this type of restriction on this request.
Mr. C owan noted that he wanted to address the parking issue. If the Commission is
so inclined to just consider some conditions regarding the parking from their
perspective. It was mentioned earlier how did they pick this location for their
business. It sounds like for office use they picked it for some good reasons, but he
does not think there was any consideration of whether this was the most appropriate
location for the outpatient treatment services. And, he thinks it is a location that is
very difficult to mitigate some of the concerns we have heard from the adjoining
business owners who have been here for a long time and that causes issues for their
patrons and this is a concern. If people do not want to use this bank location, then it
is a concern for the bank. He further discussed the parking issue and placing a
condition about parking. If we put a condition that they are responsible for
preventing their folk from parking in the bank's parking area, then there would be
accountability. Mr. Maxwell noted anyone who has a business knows that it is very
hard to control parking as an owner or a tenant of a building. Further, he does not
think it would be appropriate for this to be a condition for the use of the property.
Mr. C owan noted if we cannot control the parking then it might not be an
appropriate location for this use, and Mr. Maxwell noted that he did not think
anybody can control the parking. Mr. Garst asked if the banks hours are 9 to 5, and
Mr. C owan noted that he thought was correct, but the AT M is open obviously 24
hours a day. Mrs. King asked where the AT M is located at the bank, and it was
noted that the AT M is on the side of the building in between the buildings.
Mr. Baba noted that he cannot really ask the Commission for restrictions for this
request, but he is opposed to it because he is business owner, and he opposes the
fact that there will be a rehab center right across the street from his business. He is
not a property owner so he cannot do anything about this.T he only thing he can do
as a tenant is to take action on his own to remediate himself from the building he is
in right now. His gut feeling is telling him that his business is not going to be secure
at this location any more. C ommissioner Beamer noted that Mr. Baba has parking in
the back of his building, is that correct? Mr. Baba noted that this is correct. Mr.
Beamer noted there is a parking lot across the street from his lot, and he asked who
owns that lot. Mr. Baba noted the lot is owned by Union Bank. Mr. Beamer asked if
anyone could use the lot, and Mr. Baba noted that no one can touch the lot.
Someone in the audience noted that the City of Salem Fire Department uses part of
the lot.T here was further discussion regarding the lot owned by Union Bank. Mr.
Baba further discussed the proposed use and how this facility is going to affect his
business and his family.
Mr. Austin noted he is trying to understand something and has a question for Mr.
Lane. If Mount Regis is trying to keep the inpatient and the outpatient services
separated, how did they did they do this before they built the new facility? Was it
all under one roof and it is not common practice to keep them separated?
Mr. Lane noted that this varies based on the ability and capacity of the program and
what they are able to do. When he first came to Mount Regis, they were on Prince
G eorge Street in Roanoke and they did outpatient counseling, evening classes, and
individual therapy. T hey were there for a number of years, and it came back to the
facility in Salem. T hey just outgrew the facility on Kimball Avenue, and this was
one of the factors for the new facility that they could not separate inpatient and
outpatient.
C ommissioner Garst asked if the facility becomes bad actors somehow, can the
Special Exception permit be revoked? Mr. Maxwell noted that if they are in
violation of the conditions imposed, then the permit could be revoked.
C ommissioner King made a motion to recommend approval of the request with
conditions. C ommissioner G arst asked to amend the motion for the hours to be
Monday through Friday from 5 to 9 pm, which would eliminate this interfering with
any traffic from the middle school, which has been a concern, and the bank closes at
5, which would eliminate cross pollination with the bank. Further it would be 5 days
instead of 3 so hopefully this would be a better solution. Mr. Lane noted the
purpose of offering afternoon intensive outpatient classes is for people who work
later shifts and cannot attend the evening classes. So they typically offer a 1 to 3 pm
class on those same days. T his was why he was saying 12 to 9:30 pm. T here was
further discussion on the amended motion.
T he vote on the amended motion stood as follows:
N . J ackson Beamer - Aye; Reid A. Garst - Aye; Denise P. King - Nay; Vicki G.
D aulton - Nay, and Samuel R. C arter- Absent.
D enise King motioned to recommend to the C ouncil of the C ity of Salem that the
request of Laura and Robert Owen, property owners, and Mount Regis C enter,
lessee, for the issuance of a Special Exception Permit to allow an outpatient mental
health counseling center on the property located at 120 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax
Map #121-9-3) be approved with the following conditions: (1) no dispensing of
medications, that it is a counseling treatment center only; (2) the permit is valid for a
period of two years or the issuance of a C ertificate of O ccupancy Permit for the
current facility to be rebuilt on Kimball Avenue, which every comes first; and (3)
the hours of operation for outpatient services will be Monday through Friday from
12 to 9:30 pm. Reid Garst seconded the motion.
Ayes: Beamer, Daulton, Garst, King
A bsent: C arter
B.Special E xception P ermit
Hold public hearing to consider the request of Beckner Living Trust, property
owner, and Daryl and Marlene Beckner, Trustees, for the issuance of a Special
Exception Permit to allow an accessory apartment in a proposed attached garage
addition on the property located at 844 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax Map # 158-5-5).
T he Executive Secretary Pro Tem reported that notice of such hearing had been
published in the April 27 and May 4, 2017, issues of the Salem Times Register and
adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed A pril 24, 2017.
Staff noted the following regarding the request: the subject property consists of one
parcel, located on the south side of Roanoke Boulevard across from the Salem
C ivic C enter. T he property is approximately .34 acres and is occupied by a single
family residence. T he applicants state they wold like to construct a garage addition
on the right side of the house. T he addition will be approximately 28 feet by 40 feet
(1,120 sq.ft. total) with an upstairs apartment of 16 feet by 40 feet (640 sq.ft.). T he
garage will be attached to the house by a breezeway structure with utilities tied to
the main residence. T he applicants have stated that the intended use of the property
is for the owners' adult daughter, and that in the event she moves out then the
property will not be rented or leased. T his is not stated as a voluntary proffer.
D aryl Beckner, property owner, appeared before the C ommission explaining the
Special Exception Permit request. He noted that they would like to build a garage
addition with an apartment above for their adult daughter. T he garage addition will
be 28' by 40' and will be attached to the existing house by a breezeway with an
upstairs apartment, which will be 16' by 40' and accessed by a stairway inside the
garage. He noted that he had copies of the drawings to show what they would like to
do if the C ommission has not seen them.
C hair Daulton asked if he was aware of the condition that only a family member
would be able to reside in the apartment so they will not be allowed to rent it should
the daughter move out. Mr. Beckner noted that they were aware of this restriction.
C hair Daulton also noted that the proposed addition will be no larger than 28' by 40'
(1,120 sq. ft.) and the upstairs apartment will be no larger than 640 square foot. Mr.
Beckner noted that he was in agreement with her.
C ommissioner King noted she wanted to thank Mrs. Beckner for showing her
around when she stopped by the property.
C ommissioner Beamer asked Mr. Beckner when they proposed getting started on
the addition, and Mr. Beckner noted as soon as City C ouncil approves the request.
Mr. Beckner noted that they will have to do a new plat in order to build the
addition. Mr. VanAllman stated that the internal lot lines will have to be vacated
before construction.
C hair Daulton asked if there was anyone else in attendance who would like to
speak on this request, and there was no response.
J ackson Beamer motioned to recommend approval of the request of Beckner Living
Trust, property owner, and Daryl and Marlene Beckner, Trustees, for the issuance
of a Special Exception Permit to allow an accessory apartment in a proposed
attached garage addition on the property located at 844 Roanoke Boulevard (Tax
Map # 158-5-5) be approved with the following condition: the proposed addition
will be built in substantial conformance to the presented design. Denise King
seconded the motion.
Ayes: Beamer, C arter, Daulton, Garst, King
C .Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
Hold public hearing to consider the request of J asbir S. Mavi, property owner, for
rezoning the property located at 1656 Woodshill Lane (Tax Map # 239-1-8) from
A G Agricultural District to RS F Residential Single Family District.
T he Executive Secretary Pro Tem reported that notice of such hearing had been
published in the April 27 and May 4, 2017, issues of the Salem Times Register and
adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed A pril 24, 2017.
Staff noted the following regarding the request: the subject property consists of one
parcel, located at the end of Woodshill Lane, a private road, and abutting the
municipal boundary. T he property is approximately 1.7 acres and is occupied by a
single family residence. T he applicant is requesting to rezone this lot to Single
Family District so that a lot line adjustment can be made with a property behind it
located on Gratton Street. Woodshill Lane is a private road. T he city does not allow
subdivision of land on private roads, however, this request will not result in any
additional lots or houses on Woodshill Lane.
A lan C lemons of Parker Design Group, representing the property owner, appeared
before the C ommission explaining the rezoning request. He noted his firm is
handling the survey for the property owner. He noted if the C ommission had any
questions he would be glad to answer those.
C ommissioner King asked why the property owner was not present at the meeting.
Mr. C lemons noted that the property owner lives in Florida.
C hair Daulton noted the Commission understands that the property will be
reconfigured from vertical to horizontal. Mr. C lemons asked if they had a copy of
the plat. He noted that this was correct and just to point out the lot is nonforming as
far as the A G zoning because it needs to be ten acres.T he two property owners are
basically just doing a land swap to make both lots better.
C hair Daulton noted the property owners are aware that Woodshill Lane is a private
road and that no additional lots could be developed. Mr. C lemons noted that this is
correct.
C hair Daulton asked if there was anyone else in attendance who would like to
speak on this request, and there was no response.
Reid G arst motioned to recommend to the Council of the C ity of Salem that the
request of J asbir S. Mavi, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 1656
Woodshill Lane (Tax Map # 239-1-8) from A G Agricultural District to RSF
Residential Single Family District be approved. J ackson Beamer seconded the
motion.
Ayes: Beamer, C arter, Daulton, Garst, King
T he meeting was adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Work S ession, Wednesday, May 10, 2017, 6:00 p.m., C ouncil C hambers C onference R oom
CITY OF SALEM ITEM A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Meeting Date:
City Administrative Staff June 14, 2017
Report prepared:
June 6, 2017
RE: Hold public hearing to consider amending Chapter 106 Zoning, Article II District
Regulations, Section 106-218(B)(5) Light Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses and
Section 106-220(B)(5) Heavy Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses, and Article III
Use and Design Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses, pertaining to
microbreweries
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The zoning ordinance distinguishes between “Brewery” and “Microbrewery” by where the beer that
is produced is primarily consumed, with the difference being that beer from a brewery is primarily
for distribution, whereas with a microbrewery it is mostly sold or consumed onsite. As the craft
beer industry has grown the city has received interest from several companies who would like to
operate such an establishment in an industrial area, but who would be classified under city code as
microbreweries. This item will add the Microbrewery use to the Light Manufacturing and Heavy
Manufacturing zoning districts by Special Exception Permit in order to allow these requests to be
considered in the future.
Page 1
CHAPTER 106
ARTICLE II DISTRICT REGULATIONS
SECTION 106-218 LIGHT MANUFACTURING DISTRICT
Sec. 106-218. - LM—Light manufacturing district.
Sec. 106-218.1. - Statement of intent.
The LM Light Manufacturing District is created to establish and preserve areas
within the city that are suitable for business and light industrial uses. LM Light
Manufacturing districts are the location of a significant portion of the city's employment
base. The district allows a wide variety of industrial and warehouse uses and activities
that occur primarily within enclosed structures, with minimal or no environmental
impacts associated with smoke, odor, and noise.
(B) The following uses are permitted by special exception in the LM Light
Manufacturing District, subject to all other applicable requirements contained in
this chapter. An asterisk (*) indicates that the use is subject to additional, modified
or more stringent standards as listed in Article III, Use and Design Standards.
5. Commercial Use Types
Athletic Instruction Services
Microbrewery*
SECTION 106-220 HEAVY MANUFACTURING DISTRICT
Sec. 106-220. - HM—Heavy manufacturing district.
Sec. 106-220.1. - Statement of intent.
The HM Heavy Manufacturing District is created to establish and preserve areas
within the city that are suitable for business and more intensive industrial uses. The
district allows a wide variety of intensive industrial and warehouse uses.
Manufacturing activities and uses within the district occur primarily within enclosed
structures, but uses have significant outdoor storage needs.
(B) The following uses are permitted by special exception in the HM Heavy
Manufacturing District, subject to all other applicable requirements contained in
this chapter. An asterisk (*) indicates that the use is subject to additional, modified
or more stringent standards as listed in Article III, Use and Design Standards.
Page 2
5. Commercial Use Types
Athletic Instruction Services
Microbrewery*
Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service *
ARTICLE III USE AND DESIGN STANDARDS
SECTION 106-310 COMMERCIAL USES.
Sec. 106-310.19. - Microbreweries.
(A) General standards:
1. Such establishments shall include a tasting area, and may include restaurant, retail,
and live entertainment uses.
2. First floor frontage shall have at least 50% transparency from the street, and shall
be primarily occupied by non-industrial uses.
(B) Standards in DBD and TBD Districts:
1. Such establishments shall include a tasting area, and may include restaurant, retail,
and live entertainment uses.
2. First floor frontage shall have at least 50% transparency from the street, and shall
be primarily occupied by non-industrial uses.
Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the City of Salem Planning Commission, at its regular
meeting on June 14, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in Council Chambers of the City Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, in the City
of Salem, Virginia, will hold a public hearing, pursuant to Sections 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2285 of the Code of
Virginia, as amended, to consider approval of the following requests relative to the CODE OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA:
1. Consider amending Chapter 106 Zoning, Article II District Regulations, Section 106-218(B)(5) Light
Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses and Section 106-220(B)(5) Heavy Manufacturing District,
Commercial Uses, and Article III Use and Design Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses,
pertaining to microbreweries.
2. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #s 137-5-6 & 137-5-7) from HBD Highway Business District to
RSF Residential Single Family.
3. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance of a Special
Exception Permit to allow a new 1,200 sq. ft. accessory building on the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
4. Consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley Graham, LLC, Justin I. & Andrea
N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel I. &
Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, property
owners, for rezoning 13 parcels located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729
and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-
1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-1, and 290-1-1) from
PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with amended
conditions.
Copies of the proposed plans, ordinances or amendments may be examined in the Office of the City
Planner, Community Development, 21 South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia.
At said hearing, parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard relative to the said request.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
BY_______________________________
James E. Taliaferro, II
Executive Secretary
(PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE JUNE 1 AND 8, 2017, ISSUES OF THE “SALEM TIMES-REGISTER.")
CITY OF SALEM ITEM B
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Meeting Date:
City Administrative Staff June 14, 2017
Report prepared:
June 6, 2017
RE: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for
rezoning the property located at 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard, (Tax Map # 137-5-7 and
137-5-6) from HBD Highway Business District to RSF Residential Single Family).
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Zoning: HBD Highway Business District
Future Land Use Plan Designation: Residential
Proposed Zoning: RSF Residential Single Family District
Existing Use: Single Family Residence
Proposed Use: Single Family Residence
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The subject property consists of two parcels on the west side of Fort Lewis Boulevard, north of the
intersection with West Main Street. The southernmost property, 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard (137-5-
7) is approximately 0.4 acres, and is occupied by a single family residence and an associated
garage. The other property (137-5-6) is approximately 0.5 acres and is currently vacant.
The owner wishes to rezone the property to RSF Residential Single Family in order to make the
residential use conforming, and to allow for the construction of a 1,200 sqft garage behind the
existing garage on 137-5-7.
ISSUES:
Accessory structures larger than 1,000 sqft require a Special Exception Permit. Item C is the
request for the issuance of this permit.
PETTflON FOR ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING)
City of Salem Deparfinent of Planning and Development
Melinda J. Payne, Director
Email : m payne@salernva.qoy
Judy Hough, Planner
E m a i t : iho u!^E@sglcIn yescv
Telephone: 540-375-3007
Ben Tripp, Planner
Email: btripp@s,af emva.qqv
1 Lesar owne(s) o, o'00.ry'#ff*ifr..,..fl3,,
u4 )
2. Location of Property:
Address: l,
Subdivision:
L€^)t B/,5
OfficialTax Map Number:/3'7-5'7 * /3?-5-L
J.Characteristics of Property:
Size (Acreag e): 0. 311 + 0- St I
Deed Restrictions:
Present Use:Ees,aeotct t 7*J+r- Lor
4, Zoning Classification:
Present Zoning: A/ I b
Proposed Zonm
Land Use Designation:R LsrO €/r <,e
5. Reason(s) for Rezoning Request (lncluding proposed use):Craqr€lrlq lJor, Co^r rtR.hi
6. Agent(s) or representative(s) of property owne(s): (Specify interest)
?J/ A
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
7. Affidavit:
A. The undersigned person certifies that this petition and the foregoing answers, statements, and other information
herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief, Also, the
petitioner that a "Notice of Zoning Request" sign will be posted on the property by the City.
Signed:
lnterest in L\/i)
Mailing Address.trtt BIAt/A 7(t tsZ
Telephone Number:?z-;7
5-e- Lot Z
124 Fort Lewis Blvcl
Salem, 24153
f,Aay 8,2017
Executive Secretary
City of $alem Flanning Commission
Dear Sir or l\{adam:
I am tJre owner of properties at 124 Fort Levuis Blvd, tax rnap #s 1 37-5-? and 137-5-8 loeated in the City
of $a[em, VA. Therc pr*perties are clrnen8y classi{bd ae legal non-confcnning and t:us ds nct atrbtiv
h'nprouements I wish to make. Therefore I am requesting en arnended zoning to RSF whieh wiltbring
the property into c.snfomlance with the land use plan now in force, and a[trouu future irnprovern*:ts to
the propedbs.
With the hope that tlis rezoning wiltr be granted, I am abo seeking a specr'al exception permit tc ereet
an oversize aoce€$CIry building with a fooprint of 30' by 40' ar 1*0S squ*r€ feet on the rear sf the
property at 124 Fort Lewi* Blvd. in conrpliance with all set back and o&er re*trictione in force. This
building wiil be u$ed to store and allow repair and restoration of rny personal eollest*r vehlcles and
equipment only.
Thank you for your *onsiderafion of my request.
.:3lrrce rely,,M,,*
LEGEND
o IRON PIN SET
• IRON PIN FOUND
PIPE e-
N/F
AMOS M. SHEMK
INST.I 130002363
TAX MAPI 137-5-8
----
DRN: SJB
CHK: JRM
--
N/F
DANIEL K. DUTTON
& RENE S. DUTTON
D.8. 296, PC. 26
TAX MAPI 137-5-11
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY OF THE PREMISES SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PERFORMED UNDER MY
SUPERVISION; THAT IMPROVEMENTS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN HEREON, AND THAT VISIBLE
ENCROACHMENTS BY IMPROVEMENTS EJTl1ER FROM ADJOINING PREMISES OR FROM SUBJECT PREMISES ARE SHOWN
HEREON. THIS SURVEY WftS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE BENEFlT OF A T1TLE REPORT AND IS SUBJECT TO INFORMAnON
WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY SUCH. PROPERTY IS IN F.E.MA DEFINED ZONE X UNSHADED.
NOTES:
1. OWNERS OF RECORD: GORDON W. JARVIS
& RUTH B. JARVIS N39'OO'00"W 176.90' (TOTAL)-- - --_-------:--oor----W------.;---..;..------:-------_@'''"
60.0' ____ !J.?.~~: 101.90' R 2. LEGAL REFERENCE: DEED BOOK 546, PAGE 386
(RKE. CO.) (LOT D)
I I D.B. 164,
PC. 454 ~\) I
f
I '
I I ~
iJ:M .. _1JZ:ff-7 ~
0.344 AC.
(TOTAL)
T.M. 137-5-6
LOT D
0.517 AC.
/100
x IRON BAR BEARS
x
N10'59'31"E 4.48'
FROM CORNER
3. TAX MAP NUMBERS:
DEED BOOK 164, PAGE 451
(NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C)
DEED BOOK 164, PAGE 454
(PART OF HALL PROPER1Y)
137-5-6 (LOT D)
137-5-7 (NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C)
(AND PART OF OFHALL PROPER1Y)
N39'OO'00"W 75.00'-
!6.0-----OLO DEED LIN]
(VACANT LOT) x _______________ 1 __ 4. PROPER1Y MAY CONTAIN UNDERGROUND UTILl1Y
SERVICE LINES.
ff----------5'W.L£~--
" DB. 444, PC. 124
j:_ WALK
~ ~
r0.8. 164,
) PC. 451
17.7'
FENCE COR.
ON LINE
if 75' (DEED)
o 74.88'
WATER
METER
121.6' (PLAT)
121.52'
-S3759'26"£ 196.40' (TOTAL)
538'35 '00 'r (PLA T)
FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
50' R/W
o 30 60
~! 9
SCALE: 1" = 30'
--
LOT 1
N/F
DAVID WHITE DA vr5, II
0.8. 59, PC. 549
lAX MAPI 137-5-5
c---5'W.L.£
DB. 444, PC. 122
-If-213.1' __ •
PIPE
PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT SURVEY FOR
JOSEPH M. SULLIVAN
100 & 124 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
LOT 0, NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C
AND THE NORTHERLY 75 FT.
OF THE HALL PROPER1Y
SECTION 2
FORT LEWIS TERRACE
PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 150 (RKE.
CI1Y OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
SURVEYED 12-07-16
JOB #05160504 MS
SCALE: 1" = 30'
CO.)
BL\LlEQ
D ASSOCIATES INC.
TEL: 540-772-9580 FAX: 540-772-8050 REFLECTING TOMORROW
PLANNERS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS o PLANNERS 0 ARCHlTECTS
Balzer & Associates, Inc. 1208 Corporate Circle Roanoke Va. 24018 o ENGINEERS 0 SURVEYORS
AG - Agriculture District
BCD - Business Commerce District
CBD - Community Business District
CUD - College/University District
DBD - Downtown Business District
HBD - Highway Business District
HBD/HM - Highway Business/Heavy Manufacturing District
HBD/LM - Highway Business/Light Manufacturing District
HM - Heavy Manufacturing District
LM - Light Manufacturing District
LM/HM - Light Manufacturing/Heavy Manufacturing District
MHP - Manufactured Home Park District
PUD - Planned Unit District
RB - Residential Business District
RMF - Residential Multi-Family District
RMF/RB - Residential Multi-Family/Residential Business District
RSF - Residential Single Family District
RSF/HBD - Residential Single/Highway Business District
RSF/LM - Residential Single Family/Light Manufacturing
RSF/RB - Residential Single Family/Residential Business District
RSF/RMF - Residential Single Family/Residential Multi-Family District
RSF/TBD - Residential Single Family/Transitional Business District
TBD - Transitional Business District
EXISTING ZONING FUTURE LAND USE
T
e
x
a
s
H
o
l
l
o
w
R
o
a
d
S.
F
o
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
B
l
v
d
West M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Bonav
i
s
t
a
R
o
a
d
Fo
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d
Waln
u
t
L
a
n
e
(
P
r
i
v
a
t
e
)
Fielder
&
S
o
w
e
r
,
P
B
1
0
,
P
G
9
2
Coffey,
P
e
n
d
l
e
t
o
n
,
P
B
1
3
,
P
G
1
7
City of
S
a
l
e
m
,
P
B
9
,
P
G
3
7
City
of
S
ale
m,
P
B
9,
P
G
60
Fo
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
,
S
e
c
.
2
,
P
B
2
,
P
G
1
5
0
(
R
C
)
Law
r
e
n
c
e
,
B
o
l
e
y
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
B
o
l
e
y
,
P
B
1
4
,
P
G
3
8
,
3
9
7
10
11 5
4
3
2
1
D
C
B A
D
B
A C6
1A
11A
10A10
D1
B1
C1
80
50
50
(Priv
a
t
e
1
2
'
R
/
W
)
9.3
9.4
9
9
6
7
9
10
11
1
1
11
10
9.1
9.2
8
2
2
2.1
4
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
23
22
8
9.1
3
10.1
10
10
3
28.94
28
.
9
4
32.60
63.
6
4
20
5
.
9
6
166.19 2 4 6.8 6
25
7
.
0
7
63.64
120.37
290.00
77.00
75.00
58.00
105.20
101.00
54.10
19
5
.
0
0
20
0
.
0
0
1
9
2
.
9
1
1
9
5
.
0
0
9
0
.
0
0
1
0
8
.
0
0
2
0
9
.
9
0
71.50
64.50
66.75
77.00
2
3
.
0
0
50.0
0
50.00
50.0
0
84.00
119.50
80.27
41.
0
7
157.7
4
60.
0
0
90.64
9
0.2
9
141.36
1
8
4
.
5
5
60.17
73.
9
4
1
5
3
.
4
2
45
.
1
6
29
.
5
9
147.14
140.13
30.
9
0
161
.
7
2
172.92
80.9
3
50.
0
0
90.
0
0
80.
0
0
20
0
.
0
0
10
0
.
0
0
12
5
.
6
8
10
0
.
0
0
74
.
8
4
335.45
1
0
2
.
8
0
77.1943.20
100.00
103.6
4
380.02
2.73
325.95
90.76
211.13
77.40
60.
0
0
75.
0
0
202.90
202.90
10
1
.
9
0
74
.
8
8
12
1
.
6
0
90
.
0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
202.6
0
45.30
102.8
60
.
0
0
62
.
0
0
63
.
0
0
18
5
.
0
0
60
.
0
0
47
.
0
0
63.
0
0
185.0
0
77.00
123.0
0
25.00 68
.
0
0
102.0
0
83.00
100.0
0
27
.
0
0
200.0
0
13
0
.
0
0
95
.
0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
309.00
200.50 17
4
.
7
7
130.67
203.00
370.67
108.50
67
.
9
0
11
7
.
9
0
50
.
0
0
55
.
0
0
90
.
0
0
99.06
143
.
7
9
176.7
0
85.00
245.3
0
92.
0
0
5
2
.
1
6
130.0
0
61.64
251.90
252.00
63.80
293
.
6
6
125
.
9
4
113.66
9
0
.
4
0
2
7
4
.
9
5
5
6
4
1
2231-2
2
3
3
2205
2213
2221
2229 -
2
2
2
7
14
6
14
0
12
4
15
0
11
5
15
6
21
6
20
3
15
5
137
123
123
120
118
2155
15
3
130
132
W
a
l
n
u
t
L
a
n
e
2245
2243
110-112 W
a
l
n
u
t
L
a
n
e
2218
21
27
21
0
20
2
2206
0.92 Ac. +/-
1.46 Ac.
1.64 Ac.
0.817 Ac.
1.376 Ac.
0.990 Ac.
1.496 Ac.
1.72 Ac.
0.956 Ac.
0.290 Ac.
0.274 Ac.
1.637 Ac.
0.727 Ac.
1.0 Ac.
1.0 Ac.
0.344 Ac.
0.517 Ac.
0 100 20050
Feet±1 inch = 100 feet ITEM BJUNE 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION124 Fort Lewis Boulevard
CITY OF SALEM
Community Development DepartmentP.O. Box 869Salem, Virginia 24153-0869Phone: (540) 375-3032
Tax Parcels 137-5-6 & 137-5-7 Buildings Parcels City Limits
Commercial
Downtown
Economic Development Area
Industrial
Institutional
Mixed Use
Public Parks and Recreational
Residential
Transitional
Tax Parcels 137-5-6 & 137-5-7 Buildings Parcels City Limits
Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the City of Salem Planning Commission, at its regular
meeting on June 14, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in Council Chambers of the City Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, in the City
of Salem, Virginia, will hold a public hearing, pursuant to Sections 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2285 of the Code of
Virginia, as amended, to consider approval of the following requests relative to the CODE OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA:
1. Consider amending Chapter 106 Zoning, Article II District Regulations, Section 106-218(B)(5) Light
Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses and Section 106-220(B)(5) Heavy Manufacturing District,
Commercial Uses, and Article III Use and Design Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses,
pertaining to microbreweries.
2. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #s 137-5-6 & 137-5-7) from HBD Highway Business District to
RSF Residential Single Family.
3. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance of a Special
Exception Permit to allow a new 1,200 sq. ft. accessory building on the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
4. Consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley Graham, LLC, Justin I. & Andrea
N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel I. &
Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, property
owners, for rezoning 13 parcels located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729
and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-
1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-1, and 290-1-1) from
PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with amended
conditions.
Copies of the proposed plans, ordinances or amendments may be examined in the Office of the City
Planner, Community Development, 21 South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia.
At said hearing, parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard relative to the said request.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
BY_______________________________
James E. Taliaferro, II
Executive Secretary
(PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE JUNE 1 AND 8, 2017, ISSUES OF THE “SALEM TIMES-REGISTER.")
AFFADAVIT OF MAILING PURSUANT TO 515.2-2204
CODE OF VIRGINIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 14,2017
ITEM # 38
This is to certify that I mailed letters in reference to the rezoning request of Joseph M. Sullivan,
property owner, for rezoning the propeffy located al 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map# 137-5-7)
from HBD Highway Business District to RSF Residential Single Family District to the following
property owners and adjacent property owners on May 31,2017, in the 2:00 p.m. mail:
BOLEY PROPERTIES LLC
115 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
SALEM VA24153
AMOS M SHENK
118 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
SALEM VA 24153
Signed
City of Salem
Commonwealth of Virginia
L
JAMES J BOLEY
AUDREY H BOLEY
197 REBECCA DRIVE
WINFIELD WV 25213
DANIEL K DUTTON
RENE S DUTTON
2319 ROLLINGWOOD DR
SALEM VA24153
KATHERINE SANFORD DAVI
POBOX95
OLDHAMS VA22529
The berore me this-7] *, * f'(\Ag ,zo l1,ay
Nduty Public
My commiss io, "rpu"", 3' 3l - 0A I b
SALE UA
IMPORTANT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
PROPOSAL TO CHANGE ZONING
Notice is hereby given that a request has been filed with the City of Salem by the
property owner/petitioner of the property described below. The Planning Commission of
the City of Salem will consider this request at its meeting listed below and make a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council of the City of Salem will also
consider this request, and the recommendation of the Planning Commission at its
meeting listed below. City Council will make the final decision in this matter.
Propefi Owner/Petitioner:
Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner
Location of Property:
124 Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #137-5-7)
Purpose of Request:
To rezone from HBD Highway Business District to RSF Residential Single Family
District
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by the Planning Commission
on this request are as follows:
WeoresonY, Jurue 14,2017 - 7 p.na.
Gourrrcrr- CHRMeeRs, Frnsr Froon, Slleu Grry Hell
114 Nonrn Bnoao SrReer, SRreru, VrRcrr,rl
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by City Council on this
request are as follows:
MoruoaY, JUNE 26, 2017 - 7:30 p.u.
Couttcu- GHRMgens, FIRSI FrooR, Salem Glry Hnu
114 Nonrx Bnolo Srneer, Slreu, VrRolrun
Additional information on this request may be obtained in the Community Development
Department,2l South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia or at (540) 375-3032.
James E. Taliaferro, ll
Executive Secretary
Planning Commission
I 14 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 (540) 375-3032
CITY OF SALEM ITEM C
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Meeting Date:
City Administrative Staff June 14, 2017
Report prepared:
June 6, 2017
RE: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the
issuance of a Special Exception Permit to allow a new 1200 sq ft accessory building on
the property located at 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard, (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Zoning: HBD Highway Business District
Future Land Use Plan Designation: Residential
Proposed Zoning: RSF Residential Single Family District
Existing Use: Single Family Residence
Proposed Use: Single Family Residence
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The subject property consists of a single parcel located on the west side of Fort Lewis Boulevard,
north of the intersection with West Main Street. It is approximately 0.4 acres, and is occupied by a
single family residence and an associated garage.
The owner wishes to construct a 1,200 sqft garage behind the existing garage.
ISSUES:
Accessory structures larger than 1,000 sqft require a Special Exception Permit.
PETITION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION PERMIT
Ciry oJ'Salem Department oJ'Plannitry and Developmcnt
Melinda J. Payne, Director
Ema il : nrcaStne@ salem v?..qev
Judy Hough, Planner
Email: ihouqh@salemva.qov
Telephone: 540-375-3007
Ben Tripp, Planner
Email: btrino@salemva.qorr
I Legal Owner(s) ofprcrcrtV wherein special eiqeption is to be conducted:
-J o scP K /Y1 - J,ukt *< .1
2. Location of Property:
Arlclress /e
Official Tax Map Number:
3. Characteristics of Property;
Size (Acreage):D,3qq
Present Zoning Classification:
Land Use Plan Designation:
Proposed use of property:
*
5. Agent(s) or representative(s) of property owne(s). (Specify interest)
rt lR
UrU
I\4ailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Affidavit:
A. The undersigned person(s) certifies that this petition and the foregoing answers, statements, and other
information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of their knowledge and beiief.
Also, the petitioner understands that a "Notice of Zoning Request" sign will be posted on the property by the
City.
Signed:6-F-?or z
lnterest in
Mailing Address:ls7
Office Use Only:
tr Sec.106-524(8)tr Sec. 106-524(C) "Use Not Provided For''
Telephone Number:5f0 *fz-617?
Deed
Present
'124 Fort Lelvis Blvd
Salem, 24153
iviary 8 20'i7
E>recu tit,e Secretarlr
Ciiy of Salerrr Planrtlng Conrrrission
Dear Sir or lvtadarr:
I an-r the orv j-rei- or' r:r'operiri:s at'i24 ForL Lewis Blvd, tax map #s 137-5-7 and 137-5-6 located in the City
oi' Saleii-r, VA. "flrese properties are currently classiried as legal non-conforming and thus do not allovrr
iii.rproi,eii-renls lv'ri:;ir to rrlal<e, -l-herefore Iam reqresting an amended zoning to RSFwhich will bring
[ire lrroperi5r irrio conforrrrance vu]th tlre land use pian now in force, and allow future improvements to
iire properlies,
Wlilr liie irolrs thal this rezoning will be granted, Iam also seel<ing a specialexception permit to erect
lrtr or/ersize acce$sory builcling with a footprint ci 30'by 40'or 1200 square feet on the rear of the
properili at't2t| i:crl Ler,'',is Blvc. in compliance wiih all set back and other restrictions in force. This
i-,Lriiciing wiil i-,i; useci to slore and allow repair ar rti restoraiion of my personal collector vehicles and
ec1 uilri ir er-r i: o ri l;t.
i-irarri< yoLr ior-y,6r,1; consicieratiorr of my request.
:lii rce rel,l.M*
LEGEND
o IRON PIN SET
• IRON PIN FOUND
PIPE e-
N/F
AMOS M. SHEMK
INST.I 130002363
TAX MAPI 137-5-8
----
DRN: SJB
CHK: JRM
--
N/F
DANIEL K. DUTTON
& RENE S. DUTTON
D.8. 296, PC. 26
TAX MAPI 137-5-11
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY OF THE PREMISES SHOWN HEREON HAS BEEN PERFORMED UNDER MY
SUPERVISION; THAT IMPROVEMENTS AND VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN HEREON, AND THAT VISIBLE
ENCROACHMENTS BY IMPROVEMENTS EJTl1ER FROM ADJOINING PREMISES OR FROM SUBJECT PREMISES ARE SHOWN
HEREON. THIS SURVEY WftS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE BENEFlT OF A T1TLE REPORT AND IS SUBJECT TO INFORMAnON
WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSED BY SUCH. PROPERTY IS IN F.E.MA DEFINED ZONE X UNSHADED.
NOTES:
1. OWNERS OF RECORD: GORDON W. JARVIS
& RUTH B. JARVIS N39'OO'00"W 176.90' (TOTAL)-- - --_-------:--oor----W------.;---..;..------:-------_@'''"
60.0' ____ !J.?.~~: 101.90' R 2. LEGAL REFERENCE: DEED BOOK 546, PAGE 386
(RKE. CO.) (LOT D)
I I D.B. 164,
PC. 454 ~\) I
f
I '
I I ~
iJ:M .. _1JZ:ff-7 ~
0.344 AC.
(TOTAL)
T.M. 137-5-6
LOT D
0.517 AC.
/100
x IRON BAR BEARS
x
N10'59'31"E 4.48'
FROM CORNER
3. TAX MAP NUMBERS:
DEED BOOK 164, PAGE 451
(NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C)
DEED BOOK 164, PAGE 454
(PART OF HALL PROPER1Y)
137-5-6 (LOT D)
137-5-7 (NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C)
(AND PART OF OFHALL PROPER1Y)
N39'OO'00"W 75.00'-
!6.0-----OLO DEED LIN]
(VACANT LOT) x _______________ 1 __ 4. PROPER1Y MAY CONTAIN UNDERGROUND UTILl1Y
SERVICE LINES.
ff----------5'W.L£~--
" DB. 444, PC. 124
j:_ WALK
~ ~
r0.8. 164,
) PC. 451
17.7'
FENCE COR.
ON LINE
if 75' (DEED)
o 74.88'
WATER
METER
121.6' (PLAT)
121.52'
-S3759'26"£ 196.40' (TOTAL)
538'35 '00 'r (PLA T)
FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
50' R/W
o 30 60
~! 9
SCALE: 1" = 30'
--
LOT 1
N/F
DAVID WHITE DA vr5, II
0.8. 59, PC. 549
lAX MAPI 137-5-5
c---5'W.L.£
DB. 444, PC. 122
-If-213.1' __ •
PIPE
PHYSICAL IMPROVEMENT SURVEY FOR
JOSEPH M. SULLIVAN
100 & 124 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
LOT 0, NORTHERLY 75 FT. OF LOT C
AND THE NORTHERLY 75 FT.
OF THE HALL PROPER1Y
SECTION 2
FORT LEWIS TERRACE
PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 150 (RKE.
CI1Y OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
SURVEYED 12-07-16
JOB #05160504 MS
SCALE: 1" = 30'
CO.)
BL\LlEQ
D ASSOCIATES INC.
TEL: 540-772-9580 FAX: 540-772-8050 REFLECTING TOMORROW
PLANNERS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS o PLANNERS 0 ARCHlTECTS
Balzer & Associates, Inc. 1208 Corporate Circle Roanoke Va. 24018 o ENGINEERS 0 SURVEYORS
AG - Agriculture District
BCD - Business Commerce District
CBD - Community Business District
CUD - College/University District
DBD - Downtown Business District
HBD - Highway Business District
HBD/HM - Highway Business/Heavy Manufacturing District
HBD/LM - Highway Business/Light Manufacturing District
HM - Heavy Manufacturing District
LM - Light Manufacturing District
LM/HM - Light Manufacturing/Heavy Manufacturing District
MHP - Manufactured Home Park District
PUD - Planned Unit District
RB - Residential Business District
RMF - Residential Multi-Family District
RMF/RB - Residential Multi-Family/Residential Business District
RSF - Residential Single Family District
RSF/HBD - Residential Single/Highway Business District
RSF/LM - Residential Single Family/Light Manufacturing
RSF/RB - Residential Single Family/Residential Business District
RSF/RMF - Residential Single Family/Residential Multi-Family District
RSF/TBD - Residential Single Family/Transitional Business District
TBD - Transitional Business District
EXISTING ZONING FUTURE LAND USE
T
e
x
a
s
H
o
l
l
o
w
R
o
a
d
S.
F
o
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
B
l
v
d
West M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Bonav
i
s
t
a
R
o
a
d
Fo
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
B
o
u
l
e
v
a
r
d
Waln
u
t
L
a
n
e
(
P
r
i
v
a
t
e
)
Fielder
&
S
o
w
e
r
,
P
B
1
0
,
P
G
9
2
Coffey,
P
e
n
d
l
e
t
o
n
,
P
B
1
3
,
P
G
1
7
City of
S
a
l
e
m
,
P
B
9
,
P
G
3
7
City
of
S
ale
m,
P
B
9,
P
G
60
Fo
r
t
L
e
w
i
s
T
e
r
r
a
c
e
,
S
e
c
.
2
,
P
B
2
,
P
G
1
5
0
(
R
C
)
Law
r
e
n
c
e
,
B
o
l
e
y
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
,
a
n
d
B
o
l
e
y
,
P
B
1
4
,
P
G
3
8
,
3
9
7
10
11 5
4
3
2
1
D
C
B A
D
B
A C6
1A
11A
10A10
D1
B1
C1
80
50
50
(Priv
a
t
e
1
2
'
R
/
W
)
9.3
9.4
9
9
6
7
9
10
11
1
1
11
10
9.1
9.2
8
2
2
2.1
4
5
6
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
23
22
8
9.1
3
10.1
10
10
3
28.94
28
.
9
4
32.60
63.
6
4
20
5
.
9
6
166.19 2 4 6.8 6
25
7
.
0
7
63.64
120.37
290.00
77.00
75.00
58.00
105.20
101.00
54.10
19
5
.
0
0
20
0
.
0
0
1
9
2
.
9
1
1
9
5
.
0
0
9
0
.
0
0
1
0
8
.
0
0
2
0
9
.
9
0
71.50
64.50
66.75
77.00
2
3
.
0
0
50.0
0
50.00
50.0
0
84.00
119.50
80.27
41.
0
7
157.7
4
60.
0
0
90.64
9
0.2
9
141.36
1
8
4
.
5
5
60.17
73.
9
4
1
5
3
.
4
2
45
.
1
6
29
.
5
9
147.14
140.13
30.
9
0
161
.
7
2
172.92
80.9
3
50.
0
0
90.
0
0
80.
0
0
20
0
.
0
0
10
0
.
0
0
12
5
.
6
8
10
0
.
0
0
74
.
8
4
335.45
1
0
2
.
8
0
77.1943.20
100.00
103.6
4
380.02
2.73
325.95
90.76
211.13
77.40
60.
0
0
75.
0
0
202.90
202.90
10
1
.
9
0
74
.
8
8
12
1
.
6
0
90
.
0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
202.6
0
45.30
102.8
60
.
0
0
62
.
0
0
63
.
0
0
18
5
.
0
0
60
.
0
0
47
.
0
0
63.
0
0
185.0
0
77.00
123.0
0
25.00 68
.
0
0
102.0
0
83.00
100.0
0
27
.
0
0
200.0
0
13
0
.
0
0
95
.
0
0
200.0
0
200.0
0
309.00
200.50 17
4
.
7
7
130.67
203.00
370.67
108.50
67
.
9
0
11
7
.
9
0
50
.
0
0
55
.
0
0
90
.
0
0
99.06
143
.
7
9
176.7
0
85.00
245.3
0
92.
0
0
5
2
.
1
6
130.0
0
61.64
251.90
252.00
63.80
293
.
6
6
125
.
9
4
113.66
9
0
.
4
0
2
7
4
.
9
5
5
6
4
1
2231-2
2
3
3
2205
2213
2221
2229 -
2
2
2
7
14
6
14
0
12
4
15
0
11
5
15
6
21
6
20
3
15
5
137
123
123
120
118
2155
15
3
130
132
W
a
l
n
u
t
L
a
n
e
2245
2243
110-112 W
a
l
n
u
t
L
a
n
e
2218
21
27
21
0
20
2
2206
0.92 Ac. +/-
1.46 Ac.
1.64 Ac.
0.817 Ac.
1.376 Ac.
0.990 Ac.
1.496 Ac.
1.72 Ac.
0.956 Ac.
0.290 Ac.
0.274 Ac.
1.637 Ac.
0.727 Ac.
1.0 Ac.
1.0 Ac.
0.344 Ac.
0.517 Ac.
0 100 20050
Feet±1 inch = 100 feet ITEM CJUNE 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION124 Fort Lewis Boulevard
CITY OF SALEM
Community Development DepartmentP.O. Box 869Salem, Virginia 24153-0869Phone: (540) 375-3032
Tax Parcel 137-5-7 Buildings Parcels City Limits
Commercial
Downtown
Economic Development Area
Industrial
Institutional
Mixed Use
Public Parks and Recreational
Residential
Transitional
Tax Parcel 137-5-7 Buildings Parcels City Limits
Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the City of Salem Planning Commission, at its regular
meeting on June 14, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in Council Chambers of the City Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, in the City
of Salem, Virginia, will hold a public hearing, pursuant to Sections 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2285 of the Code of
Virginia, as amended, to consider approval of the following requests relative to the CODE OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA:
1. Consider amending Chapter 106 Zoning, Article II District Regulations, Section 106-218(B)(5) Light
Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses and Section 106-220(B)(5) Heavy Manufacturing District,
Commercial Uses, and Article III Use and Design Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses,
pertaining to microbreweries.
2. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #s 137-5-6 & 137-5-7) from HBD Highway Business District to
RSF Residential Single Family.
3. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance of a Special
Exception Permit to allow a new 1,200 sq. ft. accessory building on the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
4. Consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley Graham, LLC, Justin I. & Andrea
N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel I. &
Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, property
owners, for rezoning 13 parcels located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729
and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-
1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-1, and 290-1-1) from
PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with amended
conditions.
Copies of the proposed plans, ordinances or amendments may be examined in the Office of the City
Planner, Community Development, 21 South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia.
At said hearing, parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard relative to the said request.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
BY_______________________________
James E. Taliaferro, II
Executive Secretary
(PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE JUNE 1 AND 8, 2017, ISSUES OF THE “SALEM TIMES-REGISTER.")
AFFADAVIT OF MAILING PURSUANT TO S15.2-2204
CODE OF VIRGINIA
PLANNING GOMMISSION
JUNE 14,2017
ITEM # 3C
This is to certify that I mailed letters in reference to the Special Exception Permit request of
Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance of a Special Exception Permit to allow a
new 1200 sq ft accessory building on the property located at 124 Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax
Map# 137-5-7 and 137-5-6) to the following property owners and adjacent property owners
on May 31,2017, in the 2:00 p.m. mail:
3OLEY PROPERTIES LLC
115 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
SALEM V424153
\MOS M SHENK
I18 FORT LEWIS BOULEVARD
SALEM V424153
Signed
City of Salem
Commonwealth of Virginia
JAMES J BOLEY
AUDREY H BOLEY
197 REBECCA DRIVE
WINFIELD WV 25213
DANIEL K DUTTON
RENE S DUTTON
2319 ROLLINGWOOD DR
SALEM VA24153
KATHERINE SANFORD DAVIS
POBOX9s
OLDHAMS VA22529
was ack
,""49#.01-L
nowtedsed before me this 3 I oav or fY'\Ag ,2o l'1, 6y
KHYSTAL M. FAFMER
Notary Public
Commonwealth oi Virginia
Reg. #22880'
L.
ffiH'#,l5" n exp*es: 3-3t&)l8
SALE m
IMPORTANT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
PROPOSAL TO CHANGE USE
Notice is hereby given that a request of the property owner/petitioner of the property
described below has been filed with the City of Salem. The Planning Commission of
the City of Salem will consider this request at its meeting listed below and make a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council of the City of Salem will also
consider this request and the recommendation of the Planning Commission at its
meeting listed below. City Council will make the final decision in this matter.
Property Owner/Petitioner:
Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner
Location of Property:
124 Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #137-5-7)
Purpose of Request:
For the issuance of a Special Exception Permit to allow a new 1200 SF accessory
building at rear of property behind current garage.
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by the Planning Commission
on this request are as follows:
WeouesoAY, JUNE 14,2017 - 7 p.u.
Cour,rcu- CnruvleeRs, FIRSI FtooR, Sauu Clry Hlu-
114 Nonrx Bnoao SrReer, S*eu, VrRolrrll
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by City Council on this
request are as follows:
Moxolv, Juue 26,2017 - 7:30 p.u.
Courucu- CHnMeens, Frnsr FrooR, Sauru Ctry Hlu-
114 Nonrn Bnolo SrReer, Sareu, VrRorua
Additional information on this request may be obtained in the Community Development
Department,2l South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia or at (540) 375-3032.
James E. Taliaferro, ll
Executive Secretary
Planning Commission
I 14 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 (540) 375-3007
CITY OF SALEM ITEM D
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Meeting Date:
City Administrative Staff June 14, 2017
Report prepared:
June 6, 2017
RE: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley
Graham, LLC, Justin I. & Andrea N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. &
Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel I. & Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F.
Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, property owners, for rezoning 13 parcels
located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729 and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax
Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1,
271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-1, and 290-1-1) from PUD
Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with amended
conditions
SITE CHARACTERISTICS:
Zoning: PUD Planned Unit Development
Future Land Use Plan Designation: Residential
Proposed Zoning: PUD Planned Unit Development
Existing Use: Residential, Agricultural, and Open Space
Proposed Use: Residential, Agricultural, and Open Space
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The subject property consists of thirteen parcels of land in the Heritage Downs Planned Unit
Development located along Ambler Lane, a private road, west of the intersection with Franklin
Street.
The owner is requesting to increase the maximum number of residential lots from 19 to 20, and to
decrease the minimum lot size to 0.55 acres in order to better fit the houses on the lots.
The owner has also voluntarily proffered to dedicate additional right-of-way for Franklin Street for
road widening or the construction of a future walking path or greenway.
ISSUES:
This PUD is governed by a master plan and various conditions. All of those conditions will remain
in place, with the only ones being modified by this request being the maximum number of lots and
the minimum lot size. Any development will have to be in substantial conformance with the
approved master plan.
PETTTTON FOR ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING)
City of Salem Department of Planning and Development
Melinda J. Payne, Director Judy Hough, Planner Ben Tripp, Planner
Email: mpayne@salemva.qov Email: ihouqh@salqmva.oov Email: btripp@salemva,qov
Telephone: 540-375-3007
1. Legal Owne(s) of property requested to be rezoned:
Debra M. & Lance B. Duncan, Justin l. &Andrea N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & RenaeA. Keffer, BGGT, LLC
--gelflLs U9flg N4_9!ef!."D*ey!_P & cr,"ly" F B,||| ___
2, Location of Property:
AddreSS: 693, 7 00, 7 01, 7 05, 7 09, 7 13, 7 17, 7 21, 7 25, 7 29, & 7 33 Ambler Lane
SubdivisiOn: Heritage Downs
3, Characteristics of Property:
Size (Acreage): 34 62 ac'
Deed ReSkiCtiOnS: Homeowner's Association Documents
Present Use: Residential & Vacant
4. Zoning Classification:
Present Zoning:P.U.D.:Planned Unit District
Proposed Zoning:P.U.D.*Planned Unit District
Land Use Designation: Residentiar
5. Reason(s) for Rezoning Request (lncluding proposed use):
To amend the existing Low Density P.U.D. with private roads under the subdivision title of Heritage Downs.
6. Agent(s) or representative(s) of property owne(s): (Specify interest)
Tarpley-Graham, LLC c/o Brad Graham
Mailing Address:494 Glenmore Drive Salem, VA 24153
Telephone Number: 540-38e-81 e3
7. Affidavit:
A. The undersigned person certifies that this petition and the foregoing answers, statements, and other information
herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief, Also, the
on the property by the City.
51812017
lnterest in Property:Developer: Tarpley-Graham, LLC
petitioner understands that a "Notice of Zoning Request" sign will be posted
i\'):,..Signed: ,.'. / 'l-'-- ' "*--- Date:
Mailing Address:494 Glenmore Drive
Salem, VA 24153
Telephone Number: s+o-seg-e1 gs
OfficialTax Map 271-1-1,271-1-1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4,1.5, and 1.6,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4, and 2.5,271-1-3,290-1-1
DAIffPAr.lD ASSOC ATtrS INC
;;MoRRow
Mr. Jay Taliaferro
Assistant City Manager
City of Salem
114 North Broad Street
Salem, YA24l53
RE: Heritage Downs Subdivision
Balzer and Associates, Inc. Job # R1300116.00
Amendment to Planned Unit District (P.U.D.)
Dear Mr. Taliaferro,
On behalf of Tarpley-Graham, LLC,Lance and Debra Duncan, Justin and Andrea Boles, Darrell
and Kirsten P1rntz, Kendall and Renae Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel and Helene Shain, David and
Caroly Buillington, Bradley and Elizabeth Graham (Current Property Owners), and Tarpley-
Graham, LLC (Developer) we are requesting an amendment to the existing Planned Unit District
(P.U.D.) consisting of original tax parcels 27I-l-1 and 290-1-1. The subject request is being
made in accordance with Section 106-228.5 of the City of Salem Zorung ordinance in which we
are requesting to modify the maximum number of residential lots from 19 to 20 and decrease the
minimum lot size to 0.55 acres. All other standards remain unchanged.
The proposed development regulations and conceptual layout are fully outlined on the "Heritage
Downs P.U.D. Master Plan" attached to this application. It is the petitioner's intent that the
"Heritage Downs P.U.D Master Plan" be the official document that will guide the development
of this property.
Sincerely
Balzer and Associates, Inc.
Christopher Bums, P.E.
Associate
cc: B&A File
PLANNERS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
1208 Corporate Circle, SW Roanoke, Virginia (540)772-9580 FAX (540) 772-8050
0
M
K
H
G
C
A
Planned Unit Development Regulations
Densitx and ORen 5Qoce
Minimum Open Space: 12 Acres!35r.
Minimum Residential Lot Size: 0.55 Acre
Minimum Lot Frontage: None
Max. Number of Residential Lots: 20
Setbacks
Front Setback: 20' Min
Side Setback: 10' Min
Rear Setback: 30' Min
Private Road Standards
Right of Way Width: 40' Min
Pavement Width: 22' Min
Shoulder Width: 3' Min
Road Grade: 19r. Max
Utilities
Water: Public
Sanita ry Sewer: Public
Power !Cable!Phone: Underground
storm water
Storm water management will be addressed as
requried by iceal ordinance.
Use Regulations
Uses Permitted on Existing Tax Parcel 290 1
Uses permitted will be as allowed by the City of Salem
Zoning Ordinance according to the RSF regulations
Uses Permitted on Existing Tax Parcel 271 1 1
Residential Lots
Uses permitted will be as allowed by the City of Salem
Zoning Ordinance according to the RSF regulations along
with the following:
Keeping of Horses and Equestrian related uses Including
trails, stables, and pasture. A minimum of a Two Acre
Residential Tract size will be "-equired :0 have a stable on
a residential lot.
Keeping of Goats ord Cows
Open Space Areas
Keeping of horses and Equestrian related uses Includlrg
trails, stables, and pasture.
Keeping of Goats ord Cows
Community Gardens
HoriicL..iture
Hay Production
Passive and active recreational uses including but not
limited to traiis, pic-nic tobles, gazebos, and playgrounds
General Development Guideli~es
All development shall be in substantial conformance With
this plan.
A maximimum of 1 Horse per acre of open space sloall
be permitted.
All open space is intended for the private use of
of this development.
All Private Roads, stormwater faCilities and infrastructure,
and Open Space shall be maintained by the residents of
this development.
At the time of plat recordatlor"l, the developer shall dedicate
Right of Way a'ong the frontage of Franklin Street to allow
for future widening of Franklin street The Rignt of Wey
dedication shall be 25' from the centerline of Frank in St
No stable sha!1 be constructed closer tho'l 100' to a parcel
that is adjacent to this development or closer than 100'
to the Franklin SI. Right of Way.
SITE INFORMATION
TAX PARCEL NO.s:
SITE ADDRESSES:
EXISTING ZONING:
EXISTING USE:
PROPOSED USE:
PROPOSD ZONING:
REZONING AREA:
271-1-1, 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-1.6,
271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 290-1-1
700, 701, 705, 709, 713. 717, 721, 725, 729, &: 733 AMBLER '.ANE
SALEM. VA 24153
P.U.O. -PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT
Residential and Agriculture
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTiAl DEYELOP~ENT
P.U.O.-PLANNEO UNIT DISTRICT
34.62 ACRES
This Master Plan IS for ~ezonlng purposes only and IS rot for corstruction
Nft"
PCXY DrANE MULUN$
INS7: If 10002570
r.M. /254 -2-1 7R4cr,
PB. 5, PG. 58
80 0 BO 160
~
SCALE: 1" 80'
E
I
D
240
d
www.balzef.CC
Roanoke
New River V"Uey
Richmond
Staunton
Harrisonburg
R"S!DEW!AL .'lNC XVEL~V.DH ;'''G''~EN~G
>rT:DEYe.OPMrn'::~GI~WllNG
-'INDUs.!' Pl/\J>!~ING ~W~ING
LA~DS~AAC·r:C"_'lE
~CS"lM:\'t-IG
AACKrT':.C"'"LRE
nl;UC11JAAi. :~GlNo(RlNG
-fWlSPGR1A'\Cfl ~~GI~EEPING
EI>\1R<':'lMEN~A... SOl. selENa:
\E"Tl.JWDD£c,~EJI. .. ;;t;S! :;T~~"'" ~Ai...A-'GN5
Balzer a.nd Associates, Inc.
1208 Corporate Circle
Roanoke, VA 24018
540-772-9580
FAX 540-772-8050
l-n... w
() z
0
(j) ()
Z 0 «
S w Z
l-(/) (3
0 w :> ~ w Og: w :>
~ ~ wc.n w (95 z ....J
« « «~ c.n
....J LL f--~ n... 0
O:::LL ~ >-W r-
W I-li (/)
I «
:2:
ci
~
0..:
DRAWN 8Y BTC
DESIGNED BY BTC
CHECKEO BY CPB
DA-E 5/8/20 I 7
SCALE 1'~80'
REY:SICNS:
SHEET NO.
oOB flO. RDOCI :6.00
HERITAGE DOWNS - AME,NDMENT TO P.U.D.
Franklin Street
City of Salem" 2-2t-2014
Lesal Description For Tax Parcel #271-1-1
BEGINNING at a stake on the north side of State Secondary Route No. 693 at the corrmon comer of the
George L. Poff property (Deed Book 93, page 530) and the C.G. Mowles property (Deed Book 126, page
159); thence with the center of the State road S. 17 - 25 W.216.7' to a point; thence S. 2 - 10 W. 400' to a
point in the center of said Route No. 693; thence leaving the road S. 26 - 58 W. passing a marked
persimmon at 33.4', in all 130.1' to a corner fence post located southwest of the Wertz spring; thence S.
44 - 32 E. 65' to a point in the center of the State Road; thence with the center of said road S. 32-15 W.
334.1' to a point; thence S. 48 - 50 W. 92.5' to a point; thence S. 30 - 29 W. 172.5' to a point; thence still
with said road S. 5I - 34 W. 134.3' to a point at the northeast comer of the tract that C.G. Mowles
conveyed to C.L. Mowles (Deed Book 166, page 510); thence with the line of said tract N. 57 - 44 W.
passing a marked walnut on the west side of the branch at 43', along a fence in aLL674.4' to a walnut on
top of the hill; thence still with the C.L. Mowles tract N. 60 - 17 W. 360.6' to a stake on the line of the
Town of Salem property; thence with the line of same N. 15 - 45 E. 907' crossing the 20' private road and
branch to an old iron at the southwest corner of the E.M. Poff property (Deed Book 356, page 37); thence
with the line of same S. 75 - 16E. 54' to a point on the west side of the 20' roadway leading to State Sec.
R. 693; thence with the line of the George L. Poff property (Deed Book 93, page 530) S. 73 - 20 E. 529'
to a post; thence S. 71 - 30 E. 467' to a locust on the west side of the branch; thence with the west side of
saidbranchN. 13 -30E. 111'toapoint;thenceN.36-00E.67'to apoint; thenceN. T2-00E.40'toa
point; thence N. 32 - 30 E. 100' to a point; thence S. 77 - 13 E,. 25' crossing the branch tb the
BEGINNING, and containing 28.67 acres and being as shown in detail on map made by T.P. Parker, C.E.,
datedApril 10, 195i.
HERITAGE DOWNS - AMENDMENT TO P.U.D.
Frankiin Street
City of Salem
2-21-20t4
Legal Description For Tax Parcel #290-1-1
BEGINNING at a point in the center of Franklin Street at the southeast comer of J. Alfred Mullins
property and comer of Virginia Rock Maxey property; thence with the center of the road S. 40 Degrees
47'W. 36.2 feet to a point; thence S. 0 Degrees 55'W. 16.7 feet to a point; thence with two new division
lines through the Maxey property N. 56 Degrees 47' W. 168.97 feet to an iron; thence S. 20 Degrees 43;
W.230.70 feet to an iron; thence with the line of A.W. Doyle property N. 59 Degrees 55' W. 830.92 feet
to an iron; thence with the City of Salem property N. 17 Degrees .06' E. 319.17 feet to an old iron by a
rock, corner to J. Alfred Mullins property; thence with the line of same S. 59 Degrees .01' E. 359.8 feet to
a walnut; thence S. 56 Degrees 47' E 673.6 feet passing a walnut to the BEGINNING and containing 5.95
acres and being as shown on map made by T.P. Parker, S.C.E., dated October 23, 1970, which map is
recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Salem in Deed Book 14, page 203.
AFFADAVIT OF MAILING PURSUANT TO S15.2.2204
CODE OF V!RGINIA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 14,2417
ITEM # 3D
This is to certify that I mailed letters in reference to the rezoning request of Debra M. & Lance B.
Duncan, Justin l. & Andrea N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer,
BGGT, LLC, Daniel l. & Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T.
Graham, and Tarpley-Graham, LLC, property owners, for rezoning the property located at 693, 700,
701,705,709,713,717,721,725,729 and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #271-1-1.1,271-1-1.2,271-1-
1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3
and 290-1-1) from PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with
amended conditions to the following property owners and adjacent property owners on
May 31 , 2017, in the 2:00 p.m. mail:
SIMMS L EARL.ESTATE
155 DIAMOND RD
SALEM V424153
ROBERT C HAYNIE
TERRY L HAYNIE
656 JOAN CIRCLE
SALEM V424153
WILLIAM K C MILLS
ELIZABETH C MILLS
152 UPLAND DR
SALEM VA24153
LEWIS E ARMISTEAD tII
ANIKA ARMISTEAD
2901 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
RICHARD R PACE
PHOUIHONE CATHY HALL-PACE
2905 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
HEATHER D BRATTON
2917 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
GINGER S KIRBY
2495 POFF LN
SALEM Vp.24153
JOSEPH DANIEL MULLINS &
DUNCAN DEBRA L MULLINS ET
AL
2521 FRANKLIN ST
SALEM VA 241 53
JEFFERY J WINSLOW
28OO FRANKLIN ST
SALEM V424153
HOWARD W SHUMATE
TRACY G SHUMATE
2937 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM V424153
PAUL M CHAUVIN
JEANNE M CHAUVN
2909 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA.24153
BRENT N BARRETT
CAROLYN R BARRETT
2921 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
PEGGY DIANE MULLINS
2521 FRANKLIN ST
SALEM Vp.24153
(THE) 1026 FOUNDATTON L
148 UPLAND DR
SALEM V424153
JOHN R GRAYBILL JR
JESSIE H GRAYBILL
2813 FRANKLIN ST
SALEM VA24153
DERRICK R DEWALT
MICHELE T DEWALT
2941 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
MARK N ADKINS
ANN C ADKINS
2913 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM Vp.24153
LLOYD CHAD KING
CRYSTAL L KING
2925 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
JASON S KUSHMAN
SYLVAN S KUSHMAN
2929 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM V424153
BERNARD F SCHAAR
LINDA K SCHAAR
125 NIBLICK DR
SALEM V424153
Signed
City of Salem
My commission expires:3 sla0tB
BARBARA CROY
2933 PHILLIPS BROOK LN
SALEM VA24153
SANDRA B PERDUE
2515 CHERRY LN
BLACKSBURG VA 24060
me
STUART D IRBY
LYNN W IRBY
2804 FRANKLIN ST
SALEM V424153
Commonwealth of Virginia
Thp foregoing instruqent was acknowledged before me this{auv or f{)k4 ,zol'/.ay"-----,J-nstrulQen
L. ?r;,
KRYSTAL M. FAHMEH
Notary Public
Commonwealth of Virginia
Reg. #2288O1
SALE UA
IMPORTANT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
PROPOSAL TO CHANGE ZONING
Notice is hereby given that a request has been filed with the City of Salem by the property
owner/petitioner of the property described below. The Planning Commission of the City of
Salem will consider this request at its meeting listed below and make a recommendation to the
City Council. The City Council of the City of Salem will also consider this request, and the
recommendation of the Planning Commission at its meeting listed below. City Council will
make the final decision in this matter.
Property Owner/Petitioner:
Debra M. & Lance B. Duncan, Justin l. & Andrea N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz,
Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel l. & Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F.
Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, and Tarpley-Graham, LLC, property owners
Location of Property:
693, 700, 701, 745, 7O9, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729 and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #271-1-1.1 ,
271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-
2.4, 27 1-1 -2.5, 27 1-1 -3 and 290-1 -1)
Purpose of Request:
To amend the existing low density PUD Planned Unit District with private roads under the
subdivision title of Heritage Downs.
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by the Planning Commission on this
request are as follows:
WeolesolY, JUNE 14,2017 -7 p.u.
Gouucil- GHnMgens, Frnsr FLooR, Selem Clry Hall
114 Nonrx Bnoao Srneer, SAreu, VrRcrrun
The date, time, and place of the public hearing scheduled by City Council on this request are as
follows:
MoroeY, June 25, 2017 - 7:30 p.nrr.
CouNcrr- GHxileens, Frnsr Froon, St-eu Ctrv Hall
114 Nonrn Bnoeo SrReer, SlLeu, VrRetntn
Additional information on this request may be obtained in the Community Development
Department, 21 South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia or at (540) 375-3032.
James E. Taliaferro, ll
Executive Secretary
Planning Commission
114 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 (540) 375-3032
Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the City of Salem Planning Commission, at its regular
meeting on June 14, 2017, at 7:00 p.m., in Council Chambers of the City Hall, 114 N. Broad Street, in the City
of Salem, Virginia, will hold a public hearing, pursuant to Sections 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2285 of the Code of
Virginia, as amended, to consider approval of the following requests relative to the CODE OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA:
1. Consider amending Chapter 106 Zoning, Article II District Regulations, Section 106-218(B)(5) Light
Manufacturing District, Commercial Uses and Section 106-220(B)(5) Heavy Manufacturing District,
Commercial Uses, and Article III Use and Design Standards, Section 106-310.19 Commercial Uses,
pertaining to microbreweries.
2. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map #s 137-5-6 & 137-5-7) from HBD Highway Business District to
RSF Residential Single Family.
3. Consider the request of Joseph M. Sullivan, property owner, for the issuance of a Special
Exception Permit to allow a new 1,200 sq. ft. accessory building on the property located at 124
Fort Lewis Boulevard (Tax Map # 137-5-7).
4. Consider the request of Lance B. & Debra M. Duncan, Tarpley Graham, LLC, Justin I. & Andrea
N. Boles, Darrell R. & Kirsten K. Printz, Kendall S. & Renae A. Keffer, BGGT, LLC, Daniel I. &
Helene M. Shain, David B. & Carolyn F. Bullington, Bradley M. & Elizabeth T. Graham, property
owners, for rezoning 13 parcels located at 693, 700, 701, 705, 709, 713, 717, 721, 725, 729
and 733 Ambler Lane (Tax Map #s 271-1-1.1, 271-1-1.2, 271-1-1.3, 271-1-1.4, 271-1-1.5, 271-1-
1.6, 271-1-2.1, 271-1-2.2, 271-1-2.3, 271-1-2.4, 271-1-2.5, 271-1-3, 271-1-1, and 290-1-1) from
PUD Planned Unit District with conditions to PUD Planned Unit District with amended
conditions.
Copies of the proposed plans, ordinances or amendments may be examined in the Office of the City
Planner, Community Development, 21 South Bruffey Street, Salem, Virginia.
At said hearing, parties in interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to be heard relative to the said request.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
BY_______________________________
James E. Taliaferro, II
Executive Secretary
(PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE JUNE 1 AND 8, 2017, ISSUES OF THE “SALEM TIMES-REGISTER.")
AG - Agriculture District
BCD - Business Commerce District
CBD - Community Business District
CUD - College/University District
DBD - Downtown Business District
HBD - Highway Business District
HBD/HM - Highway Business/Heavy Manufacturing District
HBD/LM - Highway Business/Light Manufacturing District
HM - Heavy Manufacturing District
LM - Light Manufacturing District
LM/HM - Light Manufacturing/Heavy Manufacturing District
MHP - Manufactured Home Park District
PUD - Planned Unit District
RB - Residential Business District
RMF - Residential Multi-Family District
RMF/RB - Residential Multi-Family/Residential Business District
RSF - Residential Single Family District
RSF/HBD - Residential Single/Highway Business District
RSF/LM - Residential Single Family/Light Manufacturing
RSF/RB - Residential Single Family/Residential Business District
RSF/RMF - Residential Single Family/Residential Multi-Family District
RSF/TBD - Residential Single Family/Transitional Business District
TBD - Transitional Business District
EXISTING ZONING FUTURE LAND USE
Titleist Drive
Sawyer Drive
FranklinStreet
Phillips
B
r
o
o
k
L
a
n
e
Upland Drive
Niblick Dri
v
e
Fr
a
n
k
l
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Fr
a
n
k
l
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Bent Ri
d
g
e
L
a
n
e
(
P
r
i
v
a
t
e
)
Pof
f
L
a
n
e
(
P
v
t
)
FranklinStreet
AmblerLane(Private)
Phillips
B
r
o
o
k
,
P
B
1
0
,
P
G
S
5
3
,
5
4
,
5
5
Duncan & Mullins, PB 10, PG
4
7
Phillips
B
r
o
o
k
,
P
B
1
0
,
P
G
S
2
5
,
2
6
,
2
7
Duncan,PB9,PG 20
West Club
F
o
r
e
s
t
S
e
c
,
3
James&HelenBeachMap,PB2,PG76
Mu
l
l
i
n
s
,
P
B
1
0
,
P
G
4
4
HeritageDowns,PB14,PGS13,14
Dun
c
a
n
,
P
B
1
3
,
P
G
1
0
0
Heri
t
a
g
e
D
o
w
n
s
,
P
B
1
4
,
P
G
S
1
3
,
1
4
HeritageDowns,PB14,PGS
13,14
He
ritage
DownsPhase2,PB14,PG44
Heritage
D
o
w
n
s
P
h
ase4,P B 1 4,PG76
HeritageDownsPhase3,PB14,PG69HeritageDow
n
s
P
h
a
s
e
5
,
PB 1 4 ,PG89
21A 2 Tr. 1
22
23
24
25
26
27
30
31
32
9
8
7
5
7 8 9
4
45
3
33 34
35 36
2
E-1 1
2
18
19
20
B A
2 3 4
6
2
10
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1011
12
13
14
15
16
17
6
4
3
20
B1
19
B27
6
5
4
B1A
8
B1A1
9
10
B1A1AB1A1A1
11
10A
30
50
50
30
40
50
50
50
20
50
50
40
R/WVaries
P/O Poff Lane should be within the boundary lines of these lots.
Blk. "4"
Blk. "1"
Blk. "5"
Blk. "5"
Blk. "7"
Blk. "1"
1.1
1
19
18
17
16
11
10
9
8
1
5
1
1
2 3 4
78
9
10
11
12 13 14
26
29
30
31
2
3
5
2
1
5
1
4
3.20
3.19
3.18
3.17
3.16
3.15
3.14
3.13
3.12
3.11 3.10
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
3
3.6
2
1.6
2.4
3 1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.5
91.49
60.43
16
4
.
4
5
2
1
7
.
6
5
29
.
2
6
37.49
44.3
0
61.03
40.
0
0
54.00
40.
0
0
23
6
.
9
7
284
.
3
1
48.8
7
8
1
.
5
2
124.37
10.47
203.08
50
.
0
5
467.00
82.40
13
2
.
4
5
197.38
345.19
30
2
.
4
3
187.29
88.51
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
126.20
27.47
90.00
90.00
58.89
12.
2
7
2
6
.
3
4
97.4
5
36.73
47.77
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
117.62
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
140.42
99.62
52.65
5
4.5
9
65.40
94.07109.18
42.67
90.00
149.48
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
118
.
9
2
119
.
0
8
119
.
2
4
119
.
4
0
119
.
5
5
119
.
7
1
119
.
8
7
120
.
0
3
167.43
61
0
.
3
7
177.
1
5
1
8
9
.
1
1
80
.
0
0
10
0
.
0
0
10
6
.
0
7
106.11
142.61 110.00
53.17
131
.
6
8
186
.
3
2
186
.
3
8
104.5 1
108.56
102.00
102.00
56.29
9
5
.
0
0
5
5
.
5
3
1
5
0
.
5
3
12
8
.
0
0
15
3
.
0
0
107.21
108.23 43.19
151.42
165.00
130.00
32.41
114.89
96.97
88.88
61.25
90.00
90.00
90.00 90.00
203.77
216.38
1
5
5
.
0
5
10
4
.
8
8
75
.
5
3
10
0
.
0
0
12
0
.
7
9
11
5
.
0
0
11
5
.
0
0
11
5
.
0
0
304.62
11
8
.
1
6
30
.
8
6
140.34
7 2.4 1 88.02
143.7
0
190
.
0
0
94.3
5
132
.
3
5
138.0
0
100
.
0
0
16
0
.
0
0
100.00
95.00
15
4
.
0
0
16
5
.
0
0
95.57100.60
86.81 100.00
175.
0
0
173.23
153.23
7
3.54
19
3
.
2
3
20
0
.
3
6
127.67 107.00
157.00
20.33
53.15
53.15
1
1
4
.
6
1
190
.
0
0
1
5
1
.
2
7
4
6
.
5
1
1
0
4
.
7
6
186.
5
3
186
.
3
2
100.03
93.27
100.00
100.00
83.31
198.74
139.70
112.
6
1
100.00
104.47
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
116
.
8
5
93.6
6
13.89
14
3
.
2
8
26
8
5
.
3
1
14
9
.
7
2
1
6
0
.
3
8
131.42
164.20
145.15
2
1
7
.
1
9
961.04
1 2 0.63
100.00
2
0
3
.
5
6
90.00
128.5
7
38.0
0
327.44
125.00
90
7
.
0
0
31
9
.
4
1
830.92
25
0
.
1
0
230
.
7
0
168.9
7
189.7
5
90.
3
5
25
.
3
3
21.7
1
571.0
6
5
5
.
1
7
280
.
1
3
342.97
35
3
.
7
3
267.9
0
147.1
1
123.82
278.58
427.27
448.55
448.39
76.
1
2
81.
2
9
78.
6
1
68.
2
5
871
.
3
0
471
.
7
5
69.60
134.3
0
172
.
5
0
92.50
334
.
1
0
65.
0
0
70.
5
0
45
7
.
8
2
218
.
3
3
11
1
.
0
0
67.0
0
40.00
94.1
5
307.31
455
.
6
4
230
.
0
4
282.15
376.50
90.50
529.00
204.
3
7
115.
8
8
92.2
7
32
.
2
9
37.2
0
12
2
.
5
1
12
.
9
5
94
.
6
7
100
.
2
3
68.8
3
31.1
8
86.5
0
13.8
4
10
1
.
0
0
8
9
.
4
0
33.20
83.31
52.
5
0
74.5
7
141.6
7
1
4
6
.
6
0
92.
6
5
117.
6
8
288
.
2
7
12
.
9
5
139
.
4
3
12.9
7
15
0
.
0
8
13
0
.
3
5
15
1
.
0
3
70.6 9
95.84 114.38
100.0092.00
332.92
6 2 .1 2
94.07
6
9
.
0
1
65
.
6
8
66.97
95.
7
6
423.76
157
.
7
8
120
.
9
4
281.10
269.01
142.12
407.78
41.1
6
144
.
0
0
205.37
2
5
.
6
8
49.
0
3
290.
3
4
122.
7
7
28.32
55.86
2
2
2
1
1
2934
140
2811
125
115
116
104
107
117
115
2901
2905
2909
2902
2906
2913
2917
2921
2925
2926
2929
2933
2930
2937
2941
2940
2
701 2 707
119
123
28 0 7
26
0
0
-
2
6
4
0
26
1
0
2722
3001
2910
2922
2914
2918
125
152
148 144
249
5
118
118
110
24
7
3
25
2
1
28
1
3
693
280
0
2804
70
1
705
709
713
27 0 0
2708 2714
27212713
1 3 1
126
1
3
4
2
8
0
0
2808
71
7
1 Pake Lane
2900
72
1
725
729
733
1.062 Ac.
4.70 Ac.
1.00 Ac.
1.518 Ac.
1.339 Ac.
1.496 Ac.
1.022 Ac.
0.245 Ac.0.238 Ac.
0.238 Ac.
0.314 Ac.
0.248 Ac.
0.247 Ac.
0.247 Ac.
0.248 Ac.
0.246 Ac.
0.247 Ac.
0.246 Ac.
0.280 Ac.
0.281 Ac.
0.298 Ac.0.271 Ac.
0.230 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
0.373 Ac.
0.348 Ac.
0.241 Ac.
5.447 Ac.
4.542 Ac.
0.750 Ac.
4.546 Ac.
10.041 Ac.
0.751 Ac.
0.829 Ac.
0.907 Ac.
0.910 Ac.
9.18 Ac. +/-
1.007 Ac.
0.777 Ac.
0.819 Ac.
0.985 Ac.
0 200 400100
Feet±1 inch = 200 feet ITEM DJUNE 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION693-733 Ambler Lane
CITY OF SALEM
Community Development DepartmentP.O. Box 869Salem, Virginia 24153-0869Phone: (540) 375-3032
Tax Parcels 271-1-1.1 thru 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1 thru 271-1-2.5, 271-1-1, 271-1-3 & 290-1-1 Buildings Parcels City Limits
Commercial
Downtown
Economic Development Area
Industrial
Institutional
Mixed Use
Public Parks and Recreational
Residential
Transitional
Tax Parcels 271-1-1.1 thru 271-1-1.6, 271-1-2.1 thru 271-1-2.5, 271-1-1, 271-1-3 & 290-1-1 Buildings Parcels City Limits