Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/2022 - Minutes ROANOKE COUNTY + PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES DECEMBER 20, 2022 Commissioners Present: Mr. Kelly McMurray, Chairman Mr. Troy Henderson, Vice-Chairman Mr. Wayne Bower Mr. Rick James Mr. Jim Woltz Staff Present: Mr. Phillip Thompson, Secretary Ms. Rachel Lower, Senior Assistant County Attorney Mr. Lionel Cruz-Cruz Ms. Cecelia Thomas, Recording Secretary Call to Order Mr. McMurray called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Approval of Agenda Mr. Woltz made a motion to approve the agenda, which passed 5-0. Approval of Minutes Mr. Bower made a motion to approve the minutes from October 11, 2022, which passed 5-0. Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance Mr. Woltz led the invocation. Public Hearings 1. The petition of Panda Storage Rentals and Sales to obtain a special use permit for equipment sales and rentals and a special use permit for a mini-warehouse on approximately 4.82 acres on land zoned C-2, High Intensity Commercial District, located in the 5300 block of West Main Street and the 5400 block of Pleasant Run Drive, Catawba Magisterial District. Mr. Cruz-Cruz presented the application to the Planning Commission. He reviewed the existing zoning, and the future land use designation. Mr. James questioned the small piece of the parcel that is neighborhood conservation. Mr. Cruz-Cruz noted that it is only the small piece of the parcel that is designated neighborhood conservation. Mr. James questioned if it may be a mapping error. Mr. Cruz-Cruz noted that he does not believe so, but he would include it regardless since it is what citizens would view in the County system. Mr. Woltz asked the applicant to explain their plans for the surface for the interior roads, and what materials the road would be made out of. He also asked the applicant to address ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 20, 2022 the plans they have for lighting. Andrew Lumsden, 5724 Spring Meadow Court, with Lumsden and Associates answered for the applicant stating that they will follow the County's ordinance for lighting. He noted that a lighting plan had not been created yet, but once they get to the final phase they will have to provide a plan to be approved by the County. Mr. Lumsden noted that they will meet the standards in the County ordinance for the internal roads. He noted that they will have gravel with a surface coating of asphalt. Mr. Woltz questioned if the area for the parking of the Recreational Vehicles would also be surface coated. Mr. Woltz noted that he would want to see the interior roads being surface treated. Mr. James questioned what the applicant still has to do regarding plans if this application moves forward. Mr. Lumsden noted that this is a concept plan. He stated that assuming this is approved, they will work with Development Services on a full scale plan. It will have an in depth development plan, landscape plan, and a stormwater management plan. Mr. Woltz questioned the on site storage containers inquiring as to whether or not they are using new or used containers. David Goodman, 3243 West Ridge Road, the applicant explained that he purchases containers and retrofits them as storage containers. Mr. Woltz questioned if they will be painted. Mr. Goodman noted that if he orders them new they come painted beige, if they are used they are painted to match the existing beige containers. Mr. Woltz questioned if those containers leave the site, or primarily on site. Mr. Goodman noted that his business is primarily rentals. Mr. Woltz noted that those are not where he would go for permanent storage, but there are some on site if people want to rent a storage unit that is permanent to the site. Mr. Henderson questioned what the rear entrance off of Pleasant Run Drive would be used for. Mr. Goodman noted that his primary entrance would be off of 460. He noted that the back entrance would be used 5-10% of the time. Mr. Lumsden noted that if you come off of West Main Street it is a straight shot to the back parking area. Mr. McMurray asked Mr. Goodman if he had any concerns that the area would be used as a cut through. Mr. Goodman answered he did not see that being a concern, and that he planned on having the entire property fenced. Mr. Woltz asked if he was planning on doing any other rentals. Mr. Goodman noted that he only intends to sell containers. Mr. Thompson asked the applicant if he is planning on having two gates, and to elaborate on what kind of fencing he intends to have. Mr. Goodman noted that he is intending to have a chain link fence around the entire property with a code locked gate off of 460, Mr. James asked staff to clarify that this is a special use permit for equipment sales and rental. He noted that they are talking about the storage units only. Mr. Thompson explained that the mini warehouses special use permit is for on site storage. The sale and rental of the containers is the equipment sales and rental special use permit. There are two special use permits being requested. Mr. McMurray opened the public hearing. Shirley Chittum, 5872 Viewpoint Avenue, explained her hesitancy for this business to open on West Main Street with rear access to the property from a residential area. She explained that her main concern was safety. She noted that there is a certain time of day on Big Hill when you are temporarily blinded by the sun right where the proposed entrance Page 2 of 6 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 20,2022 to Panda Storage and Rentals will be. She noted her concern with traffic and noted that there are 3 school bus stops adjoining the property. She explained her concerns regarding retention ponds. She noted that there are two industrial parks within a mile radius. She questioned security for the property and questioned whether or not there would be refrigeration units running all night. She noted that there are too many questions, and no answers for this application to be a good fit for this property. Bobby Oyler, 1839 Bridle Lane, explained that she owns the lot that abuts the property being discussed. She explained that her father bought the land in 1976, and saw development coming. She noted that they received a notice of violation in late August on their land. She noted that it was determined that the company next door was parking their commercial vehicles on her property. She stated that her and her sisters are opposed to this development and anything that would park their construction vehicles on her property. She noted all of the traffic that passes this property, and questioned if this is the best use of the property for travelers. She noted that the property would be better served by a fast- food restaurant that the community could use after ball games. She questioned how they would ever market their acre between paving companies. Michael Butler, 5405 Pleasant Run Drive, noted that he is building on land that adjoins this property. He noted that he is a truck driver and that he is sure that all of these trucks are going to be coming through from Route 11 to Pleasant Run Drive. He explained that this means every single truck is going to come out on a road that is not meant for that kind of traffic. He noted the traffic will cause potholes. He mentioned seeing a child riding a bike on Pleasant Run Drive that morning and questioned if increasing the traffic was good for her safety. He noted concerns about the drainage from Scenery Drive through Pleasant Run Drive. He explained that it is one big bowl. He noted concerns about the road surface. He explained that the road surface will break up under the weight of tractor- trailers. He explained his concerns about the noise, stating that the Department of Transportation requires him to have ten hours of sleep a night. James Weeks, 5938 Viewpoint Avenue, noted that he has a petition with 37 signatures in opposition to the project. He believes it will go against the concept plan that the County has. He explained that he is continuing to canvas the area to get more signatures against this project. He states that the project does not add value to the community, and does not support it. He finds it to be an impediment to the neighborhood. Across the street, Shaw Development Corporation has done a site plan for 25 homes. He explained that no one within a half mile radius has boat or RV that would need to be parked there. He stated that he does not know anyone who would store their belongings there. He expressed concerns about safety due to the lighting on the site. He explained that there are four other locations between Glenvar and Salem that would be a better location for this. He stated that this is clearly a proposal that should have been dead on arrival, and to approve it further would be an obscenity to the community. George Taylor, 1917 Bunua Road, noted concerns about 20-foot tall storage containers with a five foot fence or with a layer of deciduous or coniferous trees. He questioned how long it will take the trees in the buffer to reach 20 feet to hide the containers. He mentioned his concems about tractor-trailers on Pleasant Run Drive. He noted the road is not made Page 3 of 6 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 20,2022 for that kind of traffic. He noted concerns regarding stormwater runoff and noise. He noted that he is unsure of what the hours of operation are going to be. He explained that his home will be directly in the path of light, noise, and dust. He has overall concerns about the entire project. Lloyd Statzer, 5959 Viewpoint Avenue, noted that he is in objection to this application. He acknowledged many of his concerns had already been stated. He noted that there is no buffer on Pleasant Run Drive. He stated that there will be people looking directly into the property that live across from it. He noted that there is a bus stop in front of where the entrance is supposed to be off Pleasant Run Drive. He noted that the people who live around it are still going to be affected by the lighting and the noise no matter the buffer. He noted that on West Main Street that there is not enough vision to get in front of the traffic. He noted that it is a traffic hazard. He noted that is an eyesore and will devalue the community. He noted that there are potholes on Pleasant Run Drive, and it can not take the traffic of tractor-trailers. Mr. McMurray closed the public hearing. Mr. Cruz-Cruz reviewed the ordinance regarding external lighting. Mr. Woltz questioned the frontage of the property that is across from residential zoning. Mr. Thompson noted that zoning across the street is not considered when requiring buffers. However, the Planning Commission reserves the right to request conditions that they believe would lessen the impact of a development on the surrounding area. Mr. James questioned if VDOT had any concerns or comments about the need for a second entrance, but he did not see any listed in the packet. Mr. Thompson noted that there were no comments about it due to both entrances not being on the same road. Mr. McMurray questioned if the road quality of Pleasant Run Drive was addressed in the packet. Mr. Cruz-Cruz noted that it was not mentioned. Mr. McMurray questioned if that is something that would be addressed further in the process. Mr.Thompson noted that the condition of the road would not deter VDOT from having an entrance on the road. VDOT would need to maintain the road. Mr. Woltz questioned if the applicant would be opposed to extending the screening over to next to the entrance. Mr. Lumsden noted that there is a ten-foot right-of-way buffer all along that road. Mr. Woltz questioned how many sales and how many off site transportation of the containers does he predict to sell a year. Mr. Goodman said probably in the neighborhood on average two pickups/two deliveries a day. Mr. Goodman noted that the idea is to keep them rented. Mr. Henderson asked him how many trucks he operates now moving the containers. Mr. Goodman noted he operates one truck and one rollback. Mr. Henderson asked how many more vehicles he anticipates to add with this business. Mr. Goodman noted he hopes to add another truck in the next few years. Mr. Henderson questioned what moves at night with this business. Mr. Goodman noted that nothing happens at night. He noted that he is pretty much by appointment only. Mr. Henderson noted that with construction containers he thinks of construction storage, but is unsure of what happens at night. Mr. Goodman noted that nothing happens at night. Mr. Henderson asked how many employees would operate on this site. Mr. Goodman noted there are two full-time employees and 3 part-time employees. Mr. Bower noted they Page 4 of 6 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 20,2022 heard some concerns about truck weight on the roads. Mr. Goodman noted that he is only licensed for 44,000 pounds. He noted that he does not haul anything that is loaded. Mr. Bower questioned whether all of the containers will be the same color. Mr. Goodman noted that all of the on-site storage containers will be the same color. Mr. Bower questioned stormwater retention. Mr. Lumsden reviewed the proposed plan for stormwater and explained that all captured stormwater would have to be released at pre-existing conditions. Mr. Bower questioned if he is planning on having any refrigeration units. Mr. Goodman noted that he has them, but they do not run at night. He noted that they are only ever used on-site by whoever is renting them. Mr. Bower questioned the hours of operation, and asked if he has specific hours. Mr. Goodman noted that he does not have set hours. He noted that he does all of the moving of the containers himself. He noted that if he is receiving any shipments they would need to be delivered between normal operating hours (9-5) or by appointment only. Mr. Bower questioned the height of the fence. Mr. Lumsden noted that if they go with the 30-foot buffer that requires a 6-foot opaque fence. The five-foot fence that is being discussed is the security fence. Mr. Henderson noted that he is trying to figure out the trucks are loaded. Mr. Goodman noted that ideally they are being moved with the tractor-trailer. Mr. Henderson then stated that the lot on the concept plan is never going to be that full or Mr. Goodman will not be able to move the tractor-trailers. Mr. Goodman confirmed that most likely it will not be that full. Mr. Henderson asked Mr. Goodman if he needed access to Pleasant Run Drive, or if he just wanted it. Mr. Goodman noted that he sees it as ideal to have a second entrance. He noted that it is not going to be his main entrance, but it is something he would like to have. Mr. James questioned if Mr. Goodman would be taking containers out of the back entrance. Mr. Goodman noted that entrance he would most likely use for vehicles with his rollback is the main entrance. Mr. James questioned that anyone who came in via the keypad would not be able to leave the property on the Pleasant Run Drive entrance. Mr. Goodman confirmed this. Mr. Henderson made a motion to Approve with the three conditions submitted by staff, and the two additional conditions: Suggested Conditions (Equipment Sales and Rental): 1. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the concept plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated October 19 2022, subject to any changes required during the comprehensive site plan review process. 2. On-site storage containers shall not be stacked more than two (2) containers high and shall not exceed 20 feet in height. Suggested Conditions (Mini-Warehouse): 1. The site shall be developed in general conformance with the concept plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated October 19 2022, subject to any changes required during the comprehensive site plan review process. Page 5 of 6 ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 20, 2022 Additional Conditions Requested by Planning Commission for both special use permits (Equipment Sales and Rentals and Mini-Warehouse): 1. The site shall be secured at all times by secured fencing. 2. The only 24-hour access to the site shall by the entrance drive off-of US Route 11/460 as shown on the concept plan prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated October 29, 2022. The motion passed 5-0. Citizens' Comments There were none. Comments of Planning Commissioners and Planning Staff Mr. McMurray thanked the citizens in attendance. Mr. Woltz noted that he hopes that the citizens will recognize the time and effort the Planning Commission dedicate to make decisions in concurrence with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. James noted that the Planning Commission is appointed by the Board of Supervisors is a land use body, and that their job is to consider if it is in conformance with the Future Land Use designation. Final Orders The Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on Barnett Properties, LLC's request to rezone 9.83 acres that was approved at the Planning Commission's December 6th meeting. They had 19 citizens speak (18 opposed with 1 in support), and was approved 3-2. Mr. McMurray adjourned the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: spa Cecelia Thomas Rec. • . - -cretary, Roanoke County Planning Commission Philip ThVpson Secretary, Roanoke ounty Planning Commission Kelly urray Chair an, Roanoke County Planning Commission Page 6 of 6