Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/13/2007 - Planning Commission - Minutes - RegularAPPROVED MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION June 13, 2007 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 June 13, 2007, there being present the following members of said Commission, to wit: Gardner W. Smith, Terrance D. Murphy, Jimmy W. Robertson, and Bruce N. Thomasson (Vicki G. Daulton – absent); with Gardner W. Smith, Chairman, 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. VanAllman, City Engineer; Charles B. Aldridge, Sr., Acting Building Official and Zoning Administrator; Benjamin W. Tripp, Planner; and William C. Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; and the following business was transacted: ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSION MEMBER ROBERTSON, AND DULY CARRIED, the minutes of the regular meeting and work session held on May 16 , 2007, were approved as written – the roll call vote: all present – aye. In re: Request of Garrett P. Smith, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 730 Apperson Drive (Tax Map #247-3-3) from RSF Residential Single Family District to RB Residential Business District The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public hearing to consider the request of Garrett P. Smith, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 730 Apperson Drive (Tax Map #247-3-3) from RSF Residential Single Family District to RB Residential Business District; and WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had been published in the May 31 and June 7, 2007, issues of the Salem Times-Register, and adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed June 1, 2007; and 2 WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of one parcel located along Apperson Drive directly east of the American Legion property; the parcel is approximately .54 acres; currently, it is occupied by a one-story single family residence, with paved driveway and parking area in the rear; the applicant has stated that due to the increasingly commercial nature of Apperson Drive, he is unable to rent the property as a residence and would like to convert it to commercial use; the proposed insurance agency expects approximately 5 to 10 cars per day with 1 or 2 vehicles parked at the office at any given time; additional parking will be installed in the front yard around and beneath the existing maple trees; improvements to be made to the property include landscaping, awnings, and new doors and windows; the contract purchaser also states that they will install a lighted sign along the road as well as a second lighted sign on the building itself, as permitted; this property is entirely located in the 500-year Roanoke River Flood Zone; in accordance with Section 106-400 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, a Site Plan shall be prepared for this property and submitted to staff for review because of the conversion from residential use to commercial use; the applicant has not stated how much additional parking he intends to install; depending on the number of spaces and square footage of impervious surface, they may be required to install storm water management facilities; and WHEREAS, Garrett Smith of 719 Maryland Avenue, property owner, appeared before the Commission explaining the request to rezone this property from RSF Residential Single Family District to RB Residential Business District; he noted that he has a buyer for the property, and the purchaser is interested in using it for an insurance office; he further noted that a lot of the properties on Apperson are going commercial, and he believes that the proposed insurance office would be a great buffer for the residential homes in this area; and 3 WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson asked Mr. Smith if he could explain how he planned to handle the additional parking that is proposed, and Mr. Smith noted that John Flick, contract purchaser, was present and he could explain this; and WHEREAS, John Flick of 5653 Club Lane, Roanoke, contract purchaser, appeared before the Commission noting that he does not have a lot of traffic at the business at one time; he expects maybe one or two cars at any given time, which would be approximately 10 cars max throughout the day; he intends to install an asphalt parking lot as required by the zoning ordinance in the back of the building, and in the front, he will install some landscaping and gravel where people can pull in; further, he plans to dress up the front of the building with awnings and shrubbery; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked Mr. Flick if he was aware of the requirements of the sign ordinance, and Mr. Flick noted that he was aware of the restrictions with regards to signs; Vice Chairman Murphy asked Mr. Aldridge if he could address the parking lot requirements, and Mr. Aldridge noted that any off-street parking requires a minimum of surface treatment; Mr. Flick noted that he was not aware that he could not have a gravel lot, but that he would use asphalt for the parking in the front; Vice Chairman Murphy asked Mr. Flick if he planned to preserve the trees; Mr. Flick noted that he planned to preserve the trees, and that this was one of the reasons he did not want to have the asphalt in the front; and WHEREAS, no other person(s) appeared related to said request; ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSION MEMBER ROBERTSON, 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 Garrett P. Smith, property owner, for rezoning the property located at 730 Apperson Drive (Tax Map #247-3-3) from RSF Residential Single Family District to RB Residential Business District be approved as presented – 4 the roll call vote: all present – aye. In re: Request of Frank C. Young Heirs, property owners, and M & G LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning an approximate 9.28-acre parcel located on Polar Lane (Tax Map #10-1-1) from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single Family District The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public hearing to consider the request of Frank C. Young Heirs, property owners, and M & G LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning an approximate 9.28-acre parcel located on Polar Lane (Tax Map #10-1-1) from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single Family District; and WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had been published in the May 31 and June 7, 2007, issues of the Salem Times-Register, and adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed June 1, 2007; and WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subject property consists of one parcel located off Polar Lane and is directly south of Interstate 81; the property, approximately 9.28 acres, is currently occupied by a barn and is zoned Agricultural; this request is to rezone the property from AG to RSF; the contract purchaser, M & G LLC, wishes to build an 11-lot residential subdivision, with lots ranging from 13,000 sq. ft. to 115,000 sq. ft. (.29 ac to 2.65 ac); once subdivided, the lots will be sold for the purpose of the buyers building custom homes; restrictive covenants will be put into effect governing minimum house sizes and building materials; the engineers also state the developer will install and dedicate a new road to serve the subdivision that will meet City of Salem Right of Way requirements; the engineers state that the list of restrictive covenants is under development and has not been included in the information sent to staff; and 5 WHEREAS, Richard Goodpasture of Fairview Trail, Roanoke, contract purchaser, appeared before the Commission explaining the request to rezone this property from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single Family District; he noted that he grew up in Salem, and he saw this as an opportunity to be able to relocate his family back into Salem; he plans to develop the property and will retain one of those lots to build his family a homeplace in Salem; and WHEREAS, Sean Horne of Balzer and Associates Inc., Roanoke, representing the contract purchaser, appeared before the Commission explaining the proposed rezoning request; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy noted that the City has concerns regarding sight distance, sewer & water service, and minimum road frontage for some of the lots; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted that sewer is available to serve the property on Polar Lane, and he noted on a map of the area how they planned to serve the property; with regards to water service, he stated that there is an existing 8” water line in Polar Lane; further, he met with Melvin Doughty, Director of Sewer and Water, on a couple of occasions, and it appears that everything will be fine for servicing the lots with water as well as providing the minimum required fire flow; he noted that there are some improvements to the water service for this area proposed in the future, which will benefit this development; he further noted he has revised the plan for the proposed development, and it should not be a problem to provide proper road frontage for all of the lots; he stated that the lots in question also have road frontage on Polar Lane; with regards to the line of sight, he stated he has done some measuring, and it appears they can provide 250’ in each direction; he further discussed the grading, etc. required for the sight distance at this location; and 6 WHEREAS, Chairman Smith noted that providing the sewer in this terrain will be an interesting challenge, and Mr. Horne noted he was correct; Mr. Horne stated that the developer would probably have to step it up the hill with some drop manholes, which is pretty typical of what they do when they run into something steep; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked if the road frontage on the unimproved portion of Polar Lane would meet the requirements for road frontage; Executive Secretary Jay Taliaferro noted that Lots 7 & 8 might not meet the reverse frontage requirements because they would front on two streets; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne asked what was the reverse frontage requirement, and Mr. Taliaferro noted that any time a new lot is created they are only supposed to front on one street; and WHEREAS, there was further discussion regarding road frontage and the fact that Polar Lane is a dedicated city street; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Thomasson questioned a lot price of $165,000, which was noted in the letter presented to the Commission in their packet; Mr. Goodpasture noted the development would be similar to “The Hill” subdivision and would have restrictive covenants, etc.; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted the developer has established a minimum dwelling size of approximately 2,500 square feet for one story and 3,200 square feet for more than one story; the average total value of the house and lot will be $400,000 to $600,000; building requirements are: brick or stone on the foundations; hardy board, brick, or stone for the finishing materials; architectural shingles; paved driveways; stone landscaped entranceway; split rail fencing, etc.; and 7 WHEREAS, Mr. Goodpasture noted that they are not trying to maximize the number of lots, which is why some of them are fairly large; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted that all of the lots are well above the minimum square footage required; he further noted that most of the lots in the adjacent neighborhood are nice size lots so they are trying to match the character of these lots; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson noted that at the work session the Commission discussed the fact that the proposed I-81 widening would probably bring the roadway reasonably close to the first six lots, and he was not sure how much room they would have adjacent to the right of way; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted that if right of way was extended one-half again the existing width, it would still leave the buildable area and the houses on top of the hill; further, he noted that he did not see it as being a real concern with regards to taking out homes but more of an issue of taking out the back yards; he has recently prepared several developments in Roanoke County and Botetourt County adjacent to I-81 and trying to get an answer about the widening is next to impossible at this point; also, there is 200’ plus behind the proposed houses before you get to the existing right of way; and WHEREAS, Barbara Reedy Booker of 316 Polar Lane appeared before the Commission noting she had three things she wanted the Commission to consider; first, they already have a problem with traffic in this area and people going too fast through the neighborhood; second, the density of the proposed development will increase the amount of traffic on Polar Lane; and third, the construction traffic; she noted that she was required to put in a cul-de-sac on Penguin Lane for construction traffic when she did Phase 2 of her development; and 8 WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted there will be additional traffic on the road, but they are not packing in the homes so they are trying to minimize that the best they can; with regards to construction traffic, basically the road will sit with the existing grade, and it will not require a lot of dirt movement in order to put the road in; further, he noted there will probably be an initial surge of construction traffic for the water, sewer, and road; after that, since the developer will sell most of the lots, they do not anticipate to have eleven houses under construction at the same time; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy noted that Polar Lane is going to require some major work in the future, and he is not certain that for this project that the developer can be held accountable for the existing problems with the road; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked staff if there were any concerns with regards to storm water management, and Chuck VanAllman, Director of Engineering, noted that the developer would have to follow the City’s current ordinance, and he did not anticipate any real issues with regards to this development; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted that they have some options, and these will be discussed with staff in the engineering design of the development; he noted that he thought they would want to put it down low, but they have some steeper slopes and will have to study these; he further discussed several options for the storm water management; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson noted Mrs. Booker’s comment about having to put in a cul-de-sac for construction traffic, but he thought this development would require a cul-de-sac when the grading is done; Mr. Horne noted since Mr. Goodpasture will be selling lots so he would think we will have the improvements in place before anyone starts building; and 9 WHEREAS, Mrs. Booker noted that Mr. Horne did not answer her question about the construction traffic; she noted that she still has a lot of people turning around in front of her driveway, and the plan for the proposed development shows the entrance for the road right in front of her house, which will be a problem for her; and WHEREAS, Cheryl Jorgensen-Earp of 351 Polar Lane appeared before the Commission stating she is concerned about the development and would love for it to remain undeveloped, but she realizes that this is life; she just wonders if there is something she should be concerned about with regards to ground water, etc.; and WHEREAS, Chairman Smith noted that the storm water regulations require the developer to manage the runoff from the development, and they cannot increase the existing runoff; the developer and engineers must devise a plan that will either detain or retain the water runoff; he further noted that the developer will be required to connect the houses to the existing sewer and water, and this should not interrupt her service; and WHEREAS, Mr. Horne noted that the majority of the drains will be created by the road, which will have curb and gutter and a storm sewer system; further, they cannot direct any additional runoff in any direction than already exists there now; further, he discussed the construction traffic and parking for the construction vehicles; and WHEREAS, Chairman Smith noted that it is fair to say that there will be increased traffic associated with the construction of the proposed development, and he encouraged Mr. Horne to speak with Mrs. Booker about the traffic and parking; and WHEREAS, Riley Elliott of 320 Polar Lane appeared before the Commission asking if the development would have a neighborhood association to ensure the proposed houses will be comparable in value with the others in the development; Mr. Horne noted that 10 there would be a neighborhood association, and this would be covered in the covenants and restrictions; further, each homeowner will receive a copy of the agreement and will be a member of the homeowners’ association; and WHEREAS, Mr. VanAllman noted that the homeowners’ association will also be required to maintain the storm water management facilities; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson asked if an easement would be necessary in order to run the sewer line down the side of one of the lots, and Mr. Horne noted that this will be shown on the subdivision plat; and ON MOTION MADE BY VICE CHAIRMAN MURPHY, 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 Frank C. Young Heirs, property owners, and M & G LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning an approximate 9.28-acre parcel located on Polar Lane (Tax Map #10-1 -1) from AG Agricultural District to RSF Residential Single Family District be approved with the following being noted: all lots shall meet the zoning requirements for minimum road frontage and the line of sight distance being approved by staff – the roll call vote: all present – aye. WHEREAS, Chairman Smith noted that there were a couple of guests in attendance at the meeting; John Vitello, boy scout, and Mark Vitello, Scoutmaster of Boy Scouts of America Troup 221, appeared before the Commission and noted that they were present to see the Commission in operation. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the same on motion adjourned at 7:35 p.m.