HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/15/2015 - Planning Commission - Minutes - RegularAPPROVED MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 15, 2015
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Salem, Virginia, was held in
Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, at 7:00 p.m., on April 15, 2015, there
being present all the following members of said Commission, to wit: Vicki G. Daulton, Bruce N.
Thomasson, Samuel R. Carter, III, and Denise P. King (Jimmy W. Robertson – absent) with Vicki
G. Daulton, Chair, presiding; together with James E. Taliaferro, II, Assistant City Manager and
Executive Secretary, ex officio member of said Commission; Melinda J. Payne, Director of
Planning and Development; Charles E. Van Allman, Jr., City Engineer; Benjamin W. Tripp,
Planner; Judy L. Hough, Planner; Mary Ellen Wines, Deputy Zoning Administrator/ Secretary;
and William C. Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; and the following business was transacted:
The March 11, 2015, work session and regular meeting minutes were approved as
written.
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Sonal P. and Pinkesh R. Patel,
property owners, and Jatin Patel, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 2.67 acre
parcel located in the 1200 block of Thompson Memorial Drive (Tax Map # 20-
2-4) from RSF Residential Single Family District to HBD Highway Business
District (Contract purchaser has requested a continuance to the May 13
meeting.)
The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public
hearing to consider the request of Sonal P. and Pinkesh R. Patel, property owners, and Jatin
Patel, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 2.67 acre parcel located in the 1200 block of
Thompson Memorial Drive (Tax Map #20-2-4) from RSF Residential Single Family District to HBD
Highway Business District (contract purchaser has requested a continuance to the May 13
meeting); and
WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had
been published in the April 2 and 9, 2015, issues of the Salem Times Register, and adjoining
property owners were notified by letter mailed on April 3, 2015; and
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property is located at the corner of
Thompson Memorial Drive and Penguin Lane; it consists of 2.674 acres, which is divided by
Penguin Lane, and is currently vacant; this request is to rezone the property to allow the
construction of a convenience store with gas pumps and an additional commercial outparcel;
the engineers and contract purchaser held a community meeting with residents of the
neighborhoods on Penguin and Polar Lanes on April 1st; after the meeting, the engineers and
2
contract purchaser decided they needed more time to address concerns and comments from
the meeting; therefore, they are requesting to continue the petition to the May 13, 2015,
Planning Commission meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary noted the petitioner has requested the item be
continued until the May 13th meeting; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked if there will be a formal presentation tonight; Melinda
Payne noted the petitioner and his engineers requested the continuance after meeting with
some of the residents who live in the community as they felt they needed to do further work on
the plans before presenting to the Commission; and
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISIONER KING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
THOMASSON, AND DULY CARRIED, the request of Sonal P. and Pinkesh R. Patel, property
owners, and Jatin Patel, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 2.67 acre parcel located in the 1200
block of Thompson Memorial Drive (Tax Map #20-2-4) from RSF Residential Single Family
District to HBD Highway Business District is hereby continued to the May 13, 2015, Planning
Commission meeting – the roll call vote: all present - aye.
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Mechanical Development
Company, Inc., property owner, and Launching Pad Trampoline Park, lessee,
for the issuance of an Use Not Provided for Permit to allow an indoor
trampoline park and family entertainment center on the property located at
1300 Intervale Drive (Tax Map # 250-1-1.2)
The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public
hearing to consider the request of Mechanical Development Company, Inc., property owner,
and Launching Pad Trampoline Park, lessee, for the issuance of an Use Not Provided for Permit
to allow an indoor trampoline park and family entertainment center on the property located at
1300 Intervale Drive (Tax Map #250-1-1.2); and
WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had
been published in the April 2 and 9, 2015, issues of the Salem Times Register, and adjoining
property owners were notified by letter mailed on April 3, 2015; and
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of a 3.7 acre parcel
located in the cul-de-sac of Intervale Drive; the parcel is occupied by a large single-story
industrial building; this request is for an Use Not Provided For Permit to allow an indoor
trampoline park and family entertainment center; the lessee has been trying to locate a
3
suitable building in the Roanoke Valley to open a second location of a family-owned business
known as the “Launching Pad Trampoline Park” located in Raleigh, North Carolina; the business
requires clear ceiling heights of at least 19 feet, which eliminates most commercial buildings in
Salem; and staff searched to find a location with their requirements but most buildings were
not suitable for the business; and
WHEREAS, Kevin Sisson, owner of the Launching Pad Trampoline Park, lessee, appeared
before the Commission explaining the Use Not Provided for Permit request; he noted that they
are looking to expand their business and have identified Salem as a great location; they believe
the building on Intervale Drive will work and meets a lot of their requirements necessary for the
trampoline park; he noted he would be happy to address any questions the Commission might
have or if they would like further information about the business; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked how many people would he anticipate having in
the building at one time; Mr. Sisson noted that there would be approximately 200 at one time;
he noted that the way it works is that there are trampoline platforms and trampoline beds; as a
safety precaution, there is only one person jumping on a bed at a time; so the capacity in the
building is limited to the number of people that would be jumping on the trampoline beds; the
way the layout would work in the building it would be roughly 200 people; he further noted
that most people would jump for an hour and then maybe stay and play in the arcade or the
other activities and then leave; so most people are in the building for an hour and a half to two
hours and then the next group comes in; she noted that in the letter furnished by the property
owner, that they intend to realign the parking lot in the rear; she asked how many parking
spaces do they anticipate will be in the lot; Mr. Sisson noted that they do not have this
information yet; he was on site earlier in the day meeting with a civil engineer and working
through this; he further noted they anticipate making the entrance to the building in the rear of
the existing structure since the parking is in the back; so in essence, the loading dock will be
turned into the front entrance of their building; so everyone will park in the rear and then come
up to a new entry way that will be made through the loading dock; Mrs. King asked if they
anticipate using the driveway that is currently on the westerly side of the property, and Mr.
Sisson noted that this was correct; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked the petitioner about the hours of operation; Mr. Sisson
noted they have not decided completely on the hours but the thing to remember about the
business is that it is focused on kids, it is a weekend business; they will drive 90-95% of their
traffic from Friday evening through Sunday; this is the reality of the business and this is what
they do at their current location in Raleigh; they struggle like movie theaters and other
businesses to get people to come in during the week because the children are in school; there is
not a lot of weekday traffic; he thinks they will be closed two days during the week, likely
4
Tuesday and Wednesday, so they will be open 5 days; Thursday they might be open from noon
to 8; Friday from noon to 10; Saturday probably 10 to 10; Sunday from noon to 6; and Monday
from noon to 8; he noted that Friday through Sunday is the critical time; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked Mr. Sisson if they have trampolines that are
angled on the walls; he noted that he has seen these; Mr. Sisson said they have this type, and
he explained the different types of trampolines and how they work; he further noted they will
have about 12,000 square feet of trampolines with different activities; Mr. Thomasson asked
about the safety and he added he thought there would be daily maintenance; Mr. Sisson noted
that he was absolutely correct about the daily maintenance; he stated they do a before open
check and an after close check – they have people crawling under the trampolines to check
springs, trampoline beds, etc.; he noted that this is a big part of the process; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked Mr. Sisson if he had relatives or family in Salem or what
brought him to Salem; he noted he does not have family here; they live in Raleigh, and he was
basically looking for a good place to expand taking into account demographics and the
competition; in addition, he needed to take into account driving distance and with a three hour
drive to Salem, this is about all he could stand for a long period of time; he was familiar with the
area as many years ago he worked in Roanoke for about a year; he further noted that the issue
with the business is that it is very difficult to find a building, i.e. parking, tall ceilings, 25,000-
30,000+ square feet, column spacing far enough apart; so, it is not easy to find a building and
taking into account all these factors this was how he ended up in Salem; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked how many parks they currently have, and Mr.
Sisson noted that they just have the one in Raleigh; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Carter asked if the trampolines are built into the existing floor,
and Mr. Sisson noted that they are not but they are raised; they are built up to a platform that
is four feet above the ground; the participants step up onto the platform and access all the
trampoline courts from the platform; so there is 12,000 square feet of trampoline courts all
accessed from a platform that is probably about 4,000 square feet; this is a rough figure as they
do not have all the details worked out yet; going back to the safety question, the way their
trampolines are built is every individual trampoline bed in addition to having about 140 springs
that bolts the bed to a metal frame, they also have redundant beds under every trampoline so
that if for some reason the trampoline bed splits there is another one underneath; the
important thing is that we do not want people hitting the floor so if one splits there is another
one underneath; but, again, they are 4’ in the air; and
WHEREAS, Andy Travers, General Manager of Roanoke Valley Wine Company, appeared
5
before the Commission in opposition to the request; he noted that their business is located at
1250 Intervale Drive, adjacent to this property; the President of their company, Beth
Crittenden, submitted a letter last week outlining a few of the concerns that she has about the
proposed business; he noted that he wanted to address a couple highlights of the letter and to
make sure the Commission received the letter; it was noted that the Commission did receive
Mrs. Crittenden’s letter; he noted that they firmly believe and love the idea of Mr. Sisson’s
business and they are certainly pro-business; the Crittendens came to Salem some 20 years ago
and were able to grow their business here in this office park; he thought it was interesting that
the questions the Commission have asked tonight were about safety because we are going to
have children and folks seeking recreation at this property; their primary concern is that the
zoning laws exist for a very good reason; as pointed out in the zoning laws for Salem in the
article general provisions, one of the very first things identified is safety, and they think this is
very important; they are very concerned about having small children and people not familiar
with the area around an industrial area that is commonly populated by large trucks, over the
road truckers that are also unfamiliar with the area coming into the office park for the first
time; he further noted that Roanoke Valley Wine is not the only one in the area and they are
not the biggest one either; the Reader Link office building gets several times the amount of
tractor trailer traffic that they get; there is also the moving company around the corner and the
heating and air conditioning company that has lots of traffic going to and from their locations;
another thing that is concerning is the plan to have the primary parking and access located in
the rear of the building; Roanoke Valley Wine shares this driveway with this property and the
driveway is only 20’ wide; one of the photos submitted with the letter shows a truck and not
even a large truck, only able to go down this particular part; the pathway is not wide and it is
not two way and it has limited visibility into the parking lot and also coming out into the cul de
sac; he noted that it is not safe for children to be running around here; a couple other points
and these are specifically related to his review of the general provisions of the zoning
ordinance, one is related to convenience and access – he would suggest the proposed business
would reduce the convenience and access for some of the existing businesses located in the
park; these are good businesses that have been there a while and are growing and contributing
to the tax structure; another item that is spelled out in the provisions is the reason the zoning
laws exist is to reduce and prevent congestion in public streets; they are making the point that
the existing street, Intervale Drive, which feeds these properties is currently often congested
with traffic such as trailer traffic that is going to and from the businesses planning for deliveries
on Monday mornings and other days during the week; even though they are not open on
Saturday and Sunday, there are over the road drivers that often come in to their property on
those days to stage trucks for delivery; that also occurs at the Reader Link property; another
point is to facilitate the creation of a convenient and harmonious community; he believes that
this type of recreation center at this location, which is nearly a mile into this industrial area not
visible to common public access, would be a business disruption more than anything else; he
6
noted that he lives in the community and has two children himself and several employees who
also have children and they share these concerns; he would like to think that their drivers are
safe when they are out on the road, and he would like to promote safety the best that he can;
and
WHEREAS, no other person(s) appeared related to said request;
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked Mr. Sisson if he wanted to address Mr. Travers’
comments; Mr. Sisson noted that he admittedly does not know the area that well as he has only
been here three times to see the building each time during the week days, and today was the
first time that he saw a truck so he was not sure when the pictures were taken and how much
traffic there is; he noted that he has four children of his own and he runs a business and he is
the one that is going to be liable if a child gets run over; he would not want to go to a place
where his children would be in danger of getting run over by a truck; another thing to keep in
mind is that it is not just here – there are probably about 350 trampoline parks in the country
and 95% of them are located in industrial areas because of the building needs; they cannot find
a building anywhere else that meets these requirements; so there are people all over the
country dealing with these issues; one thing he liked about this particular industrial area is that
it is not nearly as industrial as a lot of other places he has looked at; he described some of the
other parks he has driven through; this park is literally two blocks off of Route 419 and the first
block is residential and then we get into the industrial area; to him, this area does not feel like
an industrial area like a lot of other industrial areas where 95% of the trampoline parks are
built; he does not know about the trucks staging deliveries because he does not know what this
means; he is not sure if this means they are staging the deliveries in the back lot of 1300
Intervale Drive but they certainly should not be and he does not believe they have an easement
to do that; he thinks what it comes down to is that they can share the drive isle; his customers
will drive through the drive isle and then go to the back parking lot to park; the fear of the
trucks coming down the drive isle and running over the children, the children do not have any
reason to be going back out to the drive isle; the entrance to the business will be on the back
loading dock; he believes that this is a little bit overblown; he noted that most of their traffic
will be on the weekends, and Mr. Travers noted that they are not open on Saturday and
Sunday; he does not think there will be a whole lot of conflicts; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked if there was any plan to have some sort of barrier
between the parking lot and the loading dock entry from the wine company’s property; Mr.
Sisson noted this was an interesting question and they actually had discussed this today when
he meet with the engineers at the property; he noted if there is a 30’ easement they could put
up a barrier along this line at the wine company’s loading dock; legally he thinks they can do
that but from looking at their trucks there would be no way for them to get in or out of their
7
loading docks if they did this; so obviously they want to try to avoid that; so as a neighborly
thing he thinks they will try to avoid that; Commissioner King asked about the right of way
agreement for the driveway; the Commission was shown a plat that shows this right of way; she
asked staff how wide it was and it was noted the width is 30’; she noted that Mr. Travers said it
is only 20’ wide; and
WHEREAS, John Powell of Mechanical Development appeared before the Commission;
he noted the easement is 30’ and he is guessing that at the narrowest part of the driveway
which is up at the front of the buildings that it is 20’; but it is a 30’ right of way from the
property line between the two properties; Commissioner King asked if there was any limitation
as to what it could be used for, and Mr. Powell noted that it is for “pedestrian and motor
vehicle ingress and egress”; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked if the property is well lit since the business will
be open later on the weekends; Mr. Sisson noted that he has not seen it at night so he does not
know, but it is on their list to put lights up as needed; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Carter asked Chuck Van Allman if there was enough room to
get in the required number of parking spaces; Mr. Van Allman noted that it appears that they
will need 67 parking spaces and it looks like they should be able to get this many spaces; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked if this includes the parking for the employees as
she recalls from the letter submitted with the request that there might be 60 to 65 employees
and she assumes that he will only have maybe half of them there at any one time; Mr. Sisson
noted that at the most there would only be half; and
WHEREAS, Mary Ellen Wines noted that according to the zoning ordinance they would
need to have a space for every three people in the building based on the maximum occupancy
of the building; so, if they are going to have 200 people in the building, then this would be
approximately 67 spaces plus employees; however, they will know the exact amount needed
until they receive the Building Official’s occupancy load, etc.; Commissioner Carter noted there
is an area on the other side of the building which could be included also; Mrs. Wines noted this
was correct; she stated this could be used for employees and then the back portion could be
used for patrons; and Mr. Van Allman noted that there is room in the back to expand if needed;
ON MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIR THOMASSON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
CARTER, AND DULY CARRIED, the Planning Commission of the City of Salem doth recommend to
the Council of the City of Salem that the request of Mechanical Development Company, Inc.,
8
property owner, and Launching Pad Trampoline Park, lessee, for the issuance of an Use Not
Provided for Permit to allow an indoor trampoline park and family entertainment center on the
property located at 1300 Intervale Drive (Tax Map #250-1-1.2) be approved – the roll call vote:
all present - aye.
In re: Hold public hearing to consider the request of TLF McClung LLC, property
owner, and Salem Area Ecumenical Ministries, lessee, for the issuance of an
Use Not Provided for Permit to allow the relocation of Salem Community
Clothes Closet, a ministry of Salem Area Ecumenical Ministries to provide
free clothing for needy citizens, on the property located at 825 S. Colorado
Street (Tax Map # 184-3-12)
The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public
hearing to consider the request of TLF McClung LLC, property owner, and Salem Area
Ecumenical Ministries, lessee, for the issuance of an Use Not Provided for Permit to allow the
relocation of Salem Community Clothes Closet, a ministry of Salem Area Ecumenical Ministries
to provide free clothing for needy citizens, on the property located at 825 S. Colorado Street
(Tax Map # 184-3-12); and
WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had
been published in the April 2 and 9, 2015, issues of the Salem Times Register, and adjoining
property owners were notified by letter mailed on April 3, 2015; and
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of .287-acre parcel
located on the northwest corner of the South Colorado Street and Seventh Street intersection;
the parcel is occupied by a large single story industrial building with attached two-story office
building; this request is for an Use Not Provided For Permit to allow the relocation of Salem
Community Clothes Closet, a ministry of Salem Area Ecumenical Ministries to provide free
clothing for needy citizens; the Clothes Closet has been located in donated space on Chapman
Street for the last sixteen years; the Salem Area Ecumenical Ministries was notified earlier this
year they would have to vacate their space by May 10 due to the Food Pantry needing room to
expand; they have searched for appropriate space but were limited in their search; the
property at 825 S. Colorado Street meets all their criteria for space, accessibility, and location;
and
WHEREAS, Kitty Tate of 217 Waverly Avenue, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the
Salem Ecumenical Ministries, appeared before the Commission explaining the Use Not Provided
for Permit request; she noted the Salem Ecumenical Ministries among other things, supervises
9
the operation of the Salem Clothes Closet; she discussed some of the history of the Clothes
Closet, which started in the basement of First United Methodist Church; the most recent home
of the Clothes Closet has been a space on Chapman Street, where it has been for 16 years; in
February of this year, they were notified by Novozymes that they would have to vacate the
premises by May 10; since that time, they have been scouring the City trying to find a location;
she noted the Planning and Development office has been invaluable helping them look at
properties that might work for them; she noted that they need proximity to the Food Pantry
because they serve the same clients; only about one half of the clients they serve have
transportation so they also need proximity to the bus line; they also need accessibility and
parking, which they really do not have at the current location; one of their members contacted
the McClungs and a couple of the Board members took a tour of their building and liked what
they saw; she noted that looked at numerous properties and of all the properties they have
seen, this was the only one that fit all the requirements they had except that it needs this
permit; she requested the Commission consider their request for the Use Not Provided for
Permit; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked if they would be using the showroom only or the
showroom and the office building at the front on Colorado Street; Mrs. Tate noted they have
talked to the property owners about using part of the showroom and the conference room,
which is part of the office building; she noted that it will be somewhere around 2,500 square
feet; they have been in a little under 1,500 square feet for a long time and need the additional
space; Commissioner King asked if everyone, including volunteers, would enter through the
showroom door, and Mrs. Tate noted that there is more than one showroom door; she noted
that there is an entrance at the west end of the building where the donations could be dropped
off and then the main door would be used for the clients or customers; Commissioner King
noted on the drawing submitted there is an area in front of the showroom which fronts onto
South Colorado Street; she asked if this area would be used for parking for the Clothes Closet,
and Mrs. Tate noted that they would not be using that area; and
WHEREAS, no other person(s) appeared related to said request;
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER CARTER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KING,
AND DULY CARRIED, the Planning Commission of the City of Salem doth recommend to the
Council of the City of Salem that the request of TLF McClung LLC, property owner, and Salem
Area Ecumenical Ministries, lessee, for the issuance of an Use Not Provided for Permit to allow
the relocation of Salem Community Clothes Closet, a ministry of Salem Area Ecumenical
Ministries to provide free clothing for needy citizens, on the property located at 825 S. Colorado
Street (Tax Map # 184-3-12) be approved – the roll call vote: all present - aye.
10
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the same on motion
adjourned at 7:32 p.m.