Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/15/2006 - Planning Commission - Minutes - Regular APPROVED MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION February 15, 2006 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 February 15, 2006, there being present the following members of said Commission, to wit: Terrance D. Murphy, Jimmy W. Robertson, Vicki G. Daulton and Bruce N. Thomasson (Gardner W. Smith – absent); with Terrance D. Murphy, Vice 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. Van Allman, Jr., Interim City Engineer; Charles B. Aldridge Sr., Acting Building Official and Zoning Administrator; and William C. Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; and the following business was transacted: ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSION MEMBER THOMASSON, AND DULY CARRIED, the minutes of the regular meeting and work session held on December 1 4 , 2005, were approved as written – the roll call vote: all present - aye. In re: Request of Thomas H. & Barbara G. Eldridge, property owners, and JKL, LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 0.616 acre portion of the property located at 1628 South Colorado Street (Tax Map #245-1-8) from RSF Residential Single Family District to LM Light Manufacturing District The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time has been set to hold a public hearing to consider the request of Thomas H. & Barbara G. Eldridge, property owners, and JKL, LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 0.616 acre portion of the property located at 1628 South Colorado Street (Tax Map #245-1-8) from RSF Residential Single Family District to LM Light Manufacturing District; and 2 WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary further reported that notice of such hearing had been published in the February 2 and 9, 2006, issues of the Salem Times-Register, and adjoining property owners were notified by letter mailed February 3, 2006; and WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the proposed site is approximately 0.616 acres and is situated southwest of the property located at 221 South Yorkshire Street; currently there are two tenants occupying the building: JDSU (formerly Acterna Company) and Accellent (formerly Noble-MET); JDSU is involved in research, development, and design for the telecommunications industry; Accellent manufactures biomedical and electronic micro-tubes used for surgery; the contract purchaser is proposing an expansion to the existing building in order to accommodate the growth of the current businesses; with the expansion of the building, additional parking will be necessary; consequently, JKL LLC is proposing to purchase a portion of the property to the rear to accommodate this parking addition; since the 0.616-acre parcel, which is vacant land, is zoned RSF, the zoning would need to be changed to LM; and the vacation and combination plat included with the submittal can be approved administratively by City staff once the property has been rezoned; and WHEREAS, Jack Ellinwood of Engineering Concepts Inc., representing the contract purchaser, appeared before the Commission explaining the request to rezone from RSF Residential Single Family District to LM Light Manufacturing District; he noted that Mr. Bill Hume of Interactive Design Group, architect and member of the design team assisting in the rezoning request, was also in attendance; he noted that Mr. Leon Harris of JKL LLC, contract purchaser, has been contacted by the two tenants who currently occupy the building about expanding the building due to the growth of their businesses; in order to accommodate the proposed expansion, Mr. Harris realized the need to purchase some additional land adjacent to his property so he approached the Eldridges about the purchase of a portion of their property; he pointed out to the Commission the location of the proposed parcel on the drawing submitted with the petition; he 3 further noted that Mr. Harris plans to construct an approximately 20,000-square foot addition on the rear of the building, and in order to accommodate parking, they are requesting the rezoning of this small tract adjacent to the existing property; he further discussed the parking requirements and the amount of parking that would be provided once the addition is completed; he also discussed the buffer yard requirements and noted that they are proposing a 15’ buffer; and he further discussed the storm water management and utilities for the project; and WHEREAS, there was some discussion regarding the entrance into the existing building; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson asked if this property was previously used as a farm as he had noted two large buildings located near the property to be rezoned; Mr. Ellinwood noted the Eldridge’s property was a farm and that they want to keep those buildings so this was a determining factor of where to locate the new division line; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Daulton asked whether the proposed parking would be located to the front of the building, and Mr. Ellinwood noted that there is existing parking in front of the building now, and the proposed addition will take some of those spaces so they are proposing to relocate those spaces; Mr. Ellinwood also noted they have honored any existing easements that run across the property; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Thomasson asked Mr. Ellinwood if the proposed addition would be tied architecturally into the existing building, and Mr. Ellinwood stated that to his knowledge it would be almost identical; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Daulton asked if JKL LLC, the contract purchaser, has any plans to include any landscaping around the portion of the existing building that fronts on Apperson Drive, particularly where the air conditioning units are located; Mr. 4 Ellinwood noted he did not believe they plan to do any landscaping around the existing building, but they will certainly meet all the code requirements for screening with the new facility; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Daulton asked Mr. Ellinwood how large the proposed addition would be, and Mr. Ellinwood stated it would be approximately 20,000 square feet; Commission Member Daulton noted she thought there was a provision in the zoning ordinance that requires that an existing use comply with the new landscaping provisions if there is an addition or new structure added to that existing use; she stated that since the addition would be added to the existing building, then would they have to comply; she questioned if this would be addressed or would it be an issue; and WHEREAS, Chuck Aldridge, Acting Building Official and Zoning Administrator, noted that he did not believe we could require them to make any changes to the existing landscaping and buffering; and WHEREAS, Mr. Ellinwood noted that if the City has that requirement in the ordinance, then he is sure that Mr. Harris will do whatever is necessary to get the facility expanded; further, any plans associated with the final construction permits would have to meet the current zoning and site plan codes, etc.; and WHEREAS, Melinda Payne, Director of Planning and Development, asked Commission Member Daulton if she was referring to the existing building, and she stated that this was correct; Mrs. Daulton noted that in the old zoning ordinance we had a requirement that stated if a building was enlarged or changed in excess of a certain square footage, then the landscaping required must be brought up to the current standards; and WHEREAS, there was further discussion regarding the landscaping requirements; and 5 WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked Mr. Ellinwood what would the addition be used for, and Mr. Ellinwood noted that the addition will facilitate additional manufacturing space, offices, storage, etc.; Vice Chairman Murphy noted that it would be used for a combination of things and not just storage space as he had heard; he noted that he counted 95 existing parking spaces and had questioned why 78 new spaces would be required; and WHEREAS, Chuck Aldridge, Acting Building Official and Zoning Administrator, stated that one space is required for every 100 square feet of space for offices and one space per every 300 square feet for warehouses; so, he believes that what is shown on the plans will be more than adequate for the addition; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy commended Accellent (formerly Noble-MET) for their continued growth, and he understands that they are “busting at the seams” now; he noted that this is a great business for the City and that the City would love to be able to accommodate the business as it currently exists; further, he asked if this expansion will take care of some of their needs for additional space or will they have to revisit the issue in another year or two; Mr. Ellinwood noted that he could not answer Mr. Murphy’s questions, but he stated the proposed expansion is a direct result of conversations Mr. Harris has had with the tenants of these spaces; and WHEREAS, Bill Hume of Interactive Design Group, architect, appeared before the Commission stating that Accellent currently leases the majority of the existing building, and the proposed addition is to accommodate them since the company’s primary goal is stay in Salem; and WHEREAS, Mr. Ellinwood noted that the expansion meets the immediate needs; with regards to the parking spaces shown on the concept plan, he noted there are space requirements as far as the zoning ordinance is concerned, but then there is also the human 6 resource requirement that comes into the picture and sometimes that requirement is greater than the minimum space requirement; further, he believes that there is still room for expansion; and WHEREAS, Mr. Hume noted that when they looked at this project they tried to accommodate their needs, and this should give them room to grow for the next two years; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson questioned if most of the parking is utilized by people working in the building, and Mr. Hume noted that they have very little traffic and probably 98% is used by the people working there; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked if construction would begin immediately, and Mr. Hume noted that this would be up to Accellent once the rezoning is complete; and WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy asked the City Engineer if the City anticipates any problems with the existing storm water management facility that is in place behind the industrial park, and Chuck VanAllman, City Engineer, noted that the City will work with the engineers to make sure that the facility can handle the additional runoff; further, the City Engineer noted that when the facility was installed, it was designed for ultimate build-out; and WHEREAS, the Assistant City Manager and Executive Secretary noted after researching the zoning ordinance with regards to Mrs. Daulton’s question, it appears if a site plan will be required for the project, then all of the ordinance applies and so the landscaping that is required in the ordinance would be a part of that site plan; Mr. Ellinwood noted that this would be a condition before they would be issued any construction permits, and if it is part of the ordinance, then they will comply; and WHEREAS, the Assistant City Attorney noted that they will have to comply with the ordinance, if it is required, and he does not think that a proffer is necessary for the rezoning; and 7 WHEREAS, Chuck Aldridge noted that once the property is rezoned, the site plan would have to be reviewed by staff, and this would be a consideration at that time; and WHEREAS, Mr. Ellinwood further noted that if this is a zoning requirement, then they will make sure they comply with the landscaping requirements when they submit the site plan for the project; and WHEREAS, Thomas Eldridge, property owner, appeared before the Commission and asked if someone could clarify the rezoning request for him; Vice Chairman Murphy noted the request is to rezone a 0.616 acre portion of the property located at 1628 South Colorado Street from RSF Residential Single Family District to LM Light Manufacturing District, and the remaining property will remain Residential Single Family zoning; and WHEREAS, Mr. Ellinwood noted that the Eldridge’s remaining acreage is shown on the plat submitted with the request; 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 Thomas H. & Barbara G. Eldridge, property owners, and JKL, LLC, contract purchaser, for rezoning a 0.616 acre portion of the property located at 1628 South Colorado Street (Tax Map #245-1-8) from RSF Residential Single Family District to LM Light Manufacturing District be approved – the roll call vote: all present - aye. In re: Request for final approval of a proposed subdivision plat filed by Wiley Development, property owner, for a 35.06-acre parcel located on the eastern side of Electric Road (VA Route 419) immediately south of its intersection with Lynchburg Turnpike (Preliminary approval granted at the October 12, 2005, meeting.) 8 The Executive Secretary reported the Commission has received a request for final approval of a proposed subdivision plat filed by Wiley Development, property owner, for a 35.06-acre parcel located on the eastern side of Electric Road (VA Route 419) immediately south of its intersection with Lynchburg Turnpike (Preliminary approval granted at the October 12, 2005, meeting); and WHEREAS, the staff noted the following: reminder from the October 12, 2005, meeting: over half of this property lies within the floodway of Masons Creek; new Tract “4” on the plan contains this portion of the property; the developer/contract purchaser is proposing a new public street in order to develop this property; the engineers for this project have provided the City with the construction details necessary to meet the City’s requirements for the new public street and utilities; at the time of this report those plans are being reviewed by the necessary departments, and staff anticipates approval as presented with a few minor corrections; and WHEREAS, Paul Wiley of 928 Saddle Drive, property owner, appeared before the Commission explaining the request to subdivide this parcel into four tracts; he noted that all the utility plans, etc., have been submitted to staff, and those are currently under review; he further noted that the largest parcel, Tract 4, will be utilized by the City of Salem Parks and Recreation Department since all of this parcel is in the floodway; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wiley discussed sewer improvements that will take place with this property; he plans to start a building on the small tract, Tract 2, and he noted that this development will be a more upscale commerce park as he had discussed at the last meeting; he is having a set of specifications written for the remaining parcels which will require more upscale finishes, etc. for those buildings; he noted that he had brought with him a set of renderings for the first building, and he presented those plans to the Commission; and he further discussed the plans with the Commission; and 9 WHEREAS, Commission Member Thomasson asked Mr. Wiley if he intended to maintain the architectural integrity throughout the development, and Mr. Wiley noted that this was correct; and WHEREAS, there was further discussion regarding the historic significance of the naming of the commerce center; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson asked Mr. Wiley if he would have an office at this location, and Mr. Wiley noted that if everything goes the way he would like it to, then he plans to sell his existing building on Roanoke Street and build on one of the tracts; and WHEREAS, there was further discussion regarding the plans for St. John Place Commerce Center; and WHEREAS, no other person(s) appeared related to said request; ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSION MEMBER THOMASSON, AND DULY CARRIED, the request for final approval of a proposed subdivision plat filed by Wiley Development, property owner, for a 35.06-acre parcel located on the eastern side of Electric Road (VA Route 419) immediately south of its intersection with Lynchburg Turnpike is hereby approved and the Executive Secretary and City Engineer are hereby authorized to endorse such final approval on said final plat in accordance with The Code of the City of Salem, Virginia – the roll call vote: all present - aye. In re: Discussion regarding work sessions WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy noted there had been some recent discussion regarding when to hold the Commission’s work sessions, and he recalled when the Commission first started having work sessions that it was decided to hold those meetings at lunch; he noted he thought the reason for having them at lunch was so that if 10 there were questions that could not be answered during the work session, it would give staff ample time to go back and research before the regular meeting; personally, he feels that it is better to have the work sessions at lunch for that particular reason; he further noted there was also discussion that when there were no agenda items that the Commission would still meet to do some future planning and discuss upcoming issues, etc.; he noted that during the Comprehensive Plan review the Commission had discussed developing bylaws and this has not been done; and he feels the Commission needs to move forward with this; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Thomasson noted that he likes the lunch work sessions, and he would rather keep it that way; also, he agreed with Vice Chairman Murphy that the Commission should meet for work sessions even if there are no items on the agenda; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Daulton noted that she agreed; and WHEREAS, Commission Member Robertson noted that when he was contacted by Judy Hough, Executive Secretary CAP, about the work sessions he relayed to her that he would go along with what the group would like to do, but he noted that he recalled several situations when questions and issues came up at the work sessions that needed to be addressed before the regular meeting; in his opinion, he feels in most cases it is beneficial to have lunch work sessions, but he will go with the majority; further, if there is an issue or request that is fairly easy, then possibly Ms. Payne can make the call whether the Commission needs to have a work session or not; and WHEREAS, Melinda Payne, Director of Planning and Development, noted that when Mrs. Hough contacted the Commission with regards to work sessions, it was purely to see if we could make it more convenient for the Commission particularly when staff feels the item(s) are not controversial; she further noted staff was just trying to make it more convenient for the Commission, not more convenient for staff, because the meetings are in the middle of the 11 day; she noted that a lot of times at these sessions there is a lot of discussion about other things not related to the meeting, and she thought it might be easier to have the work sessions just before the regular meeting so that it did not break up their day; if the Commission would like to continue with the lunch sessions, then that is fine with staff; WHEREAS, Vice Chairman Murphy noted, without input from Chairman Smith, it appears the four members present at this meeting would rather keep the work sessions at lunch at least for the next year; he also feels it might be more convenient for staff as well. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the same on motion adjourned at 7:45 p.m.