Minutes
6:30 PM June 12, 2008 City Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT: Marti Shamberger, Peter DeMasters, Tim Stranko,
Barbara Ferrell,
MEMBERS ABSENT: Sam Loretta, Jennifer Selin
STAFF: Lisa Mardis, Deputy Director
I.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Shamberger called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM
II. MATTERS OF BUSINESS:
A. Approval of May 8, 2008 minutes: Stranko moved to accept the minutes as
submitted; seconded by Martis. The
motion carried unanimously.
B. Approval of May 15, 2008
minutes: Stranko questioned the
Deputy Planner regarding the absence of a correspondence he had emailed Staff. Mardis advised that his printed correspondence
has been placed in the related file but not part of the minutes. Stranko moved
to accept the minutes as submitted; seconded by Greever. DeMasters and Martis abstained from the vote
since they did not attend the special meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
III. OLD BUSINESS: None
IV. NEW BUSINESS:
A.
S08-10.11 / Glenmark –
Mardis
read the Staff Report stating that the petitioner seeks to develop a 36,100 ft2
office building between the old Chrysler dealership and Construction Supply Co
on
• The majority of the
building will be occupied as office space for the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA). The use is
considered a “Government Facility” and permitted by-right in the B-2 District.
• Approximately 1,900 ft2
of the building will be occupied by a federal credit union. The use is considered a “Financial Services
Establishment” and permitted by-right in the B-2 District.
• Because the site and
building will be privately developed and privately owned, the development is
not exempt from the City’s Planning & Zoning Code.
• The United States
Government Services Administration (GSA) is required to include several safety
and security design elements for sites/buildings occupied by federal
agencies. Some of these design elements
required variances, which were approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals on
October 24, 2007. These approvals
included:
- V07-37, which permits the site to include parking that exceeds
the number of parking spaces. Federal
minimum parking requirements exceed the City’s maximum parking standard. There will also be a secured parking area for
government vehicles.
- V07-38, which permits the building to exceed the maximum front
setback standard. Federal design
standards require a minimum of 20 feet between the building and any street or
driveway as well as separated parking for customers and employees.
- V07-39, which permits parking between the street and front
façade, again to accommodate the federal requirement that customer parking be
separated from employee parking.
• The petitioner has
indicated that the development will seek certification from the U.S. Green
Building Council as a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®)
Green Building Rating System™ project.
The petitioner met with the Technical Review Team on Tuesday, June 10,
2008. All requested/suggested
modifications were agreed to by the petitioner.
Stranko stated he is a member of the
law firm representing the
petitioner, and, as such, refused himself from consideration of the
application and excused himself from the room during
this portion of the meeting.
Appearing on behalf of the petitioner
was Paul Walker,
Shamberger questioned if there will be ingress/egress onto
Martis stated he is pleased that the building will contain LEED components
and asked if there were any other LEED buildings in the county.
Martis questioned whether or not all USDA buildings are starting to be
LEED certified. Ms. Stawarz reported that all new construction will be required
to be LEED certified.
Shamberger
asked for public comments. There being
none, the public portion was closed.
Mardis
stated that staff recommends
approval with the following conditions:
1. That the six (6)
recommended site plan modifications identified in the Planning Department’s
Final Planning & Zoning Code Consistency Report dated June 11, 2008 be
included in the petitioner’s final site plan submission.
2. That the Landscape Plan
be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to installation and
occupancy. Variance approval must be
obtained should the Landscape Plan not conform to the performance standards set
forth in the City’s Planning & Zoning Code.
3. That a Sign Plan be
submitted with the building and/or electrical permit application(s) for
same. Variance approval must be obtained
should the Sign Plan not conform to the performance standards set forth in the
City’s Planning & Zoning Code.
4. That a Lighting Plan be
submitted with the building and/or electrical permit application(s) for review
and approval by the Planning Director.
Variance approval must be obtained should the Lighting Plan not conform
to the performance standards set forth in the City’s Planning & Zoning
Code.
5. That a Pedestrian
Circulation Plan be submitted with the building permit application for review
and approval by the Planning Director.
6. That all related
variance petitions granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals on October 24, 2007
be activated prior to the expiration of same.
7. That the development
meets all applicable Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) related Building
Code standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Chief Code
Official.
8. That rooftop equipment
shall be screened or enclosed so that same is not visible from Earl Core Road
and that said rooftop equipment, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director,
be screened or enclosed in building material matching the structure or is
visually compatible with the structure.
9. That fencing to enclose
the secured parking area, if used, shall meet Supplemental Regulations
controlling same provided in Article 1331.08 (B)(5).
10. That, to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director, wheel stops and/or extended curbs be provided for all
parking spaces in the front parking area and for all parking spaces facing
landscaping to prevent cars from parking from damaging landscape materials.
11. That the petitioner
obtains all appropriate access permitting from the West Virginia Division of
Highways.
12. That stop signs be
installed at ingress/egress points in accordance with the Manual Uniform Traffic
Control Device and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
13. That a final Site Plan be
submitted prior to building permit issuance and include all required elements
and be organized as set forth in Article 1385.08 of the Planning & Zoning
Code.
Martis moved to approve the application with staff’s recommendations;
seconded by DeMasters. The motion
carried unanimously. (Stranko then returned to the meeting).
B.
MNS08-12 / Tarantini / 656 &
Mardis
read the staff report and stated that the petitioner seeks to subdivide 20 feet
from parcel #110 and combine it with parcel #109; the new parcels exceed the
R-1A District minimum lot area standard of 3,500 ft2 and minimum lot frontage
standard of 30 feet. No encroachments
will be created by the proposed subdivision.
The petitioner, Josephine Tarantini, was present to speak on behalf of
the petition. She stated she concurred with the staff report.
Shamberger asked for public comment.
There being none, the public portion was closed.
Mardis
stated that staff recommends approval with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant
submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the
State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the Planning Commission
President’s signature; and,
2. That the final plat is
filed at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting
the condition set forth above.
Stranko moved for approval with staff’s conditions; seconded by Martis.
The motion carried unanimously.
C.
MNSO8-13 /
Mardis
stated that the petitioner requested to be represented by Staff.
Mardis read the staff report and affirmed that the petitioner seeks to
merge three existing parcels into one new parcel for realty located on
Shamberger asked for public comment.
There being none, the public portion was closed.
Mardis
stated that staff recommends approval with the following conditions:
1. That the applicant submit
three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the State
of West Virginia, of the final plat for the Planning Commission President’s
signature; and,
2. That the final plat is filed
at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting the
condition set forth above.
DeMasters moved to approve the petition with conditions set forth by
staff; seconded by Martis. The motion carried unanimously.
D.
MNS08.14 / Leech /
Mardis
stated that the petitioner requested to be represented by Staff.
Mardis read the staff report and stated that the petitioner seeks to
subdivide 35 feet from the western edge of parcel #40 and 15 feet from the
eastern edge of parcel #43 to be combined with the previously merged parcels
#41 & 42 for realty located on Riverview Drive, with a total area of
approximately 34,500 ft2 or .792 acres. She
continued that the newly created and remnant parcels exceed the R-1 District
minimum lot area standard of 7,200 ft2 and minimum lot frontage standard of 70
feet. And that no encroachments will be created by the proposed subdivision.
Mardis clarified that the petitioner is purchasing property from owners
of either side of the Leech property. It is their intention to add a sliver of
property from parcel 40 to parcels 41 and 42. Presently there are two houses on the Leech property;
both structures will be razed and removed.
Shamberger
asked for public comment. There being
none, the public portion was closed
Mardis
stated that staff recommends approval with the following conditions:
1. That, prior to the
issuance of a any Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed single-family
dwelling, the existing residential structure be razed so that a non-conforming
parcel is not created by containing two principal structures;
2. That the applicant
submit three (3) paper copies, signed and sealed by a surveyor licensed in the
State of West Virginia, of the final plat for the Planning Commission
President’s signature; and,
3. That the final plat is
filed at the Monongalia County Courthouse within thirty (30) days of meeting
the condition set forth above.
Stranko moved for approval subject to conditions set forth by staff; seconded
by Greever. The motion carried unanimously.
V. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Public Comment.
Bryan Edwards, speaking ppearing on his
own behalf. on behalf of himself. Was hoping the
motion He
continued that was hopeful that the motion against
B. Staff
Comments.
1. Traffic Commission: Dr. Martis spoke regarding the Traffic Commission
Resolution. Martis stated that the present code states that a
Planning Commission member, or its representative, is an ex-officio member of the Traffic
Commission; the organization has actually expanded to a Transportation Commission since
the City now has a Bicycle Board and Pedestrian Commission that reports to the
Traffic Commission. He continued that a Planning Commission
member should be made a permanent voting member of the Traffic Commission. It was stated that information from the Planning
Commission and Traffic Commission should be shared. Mardis then read the resolution. She advised it
will go to the Traffic Commission and then to City Council. Stranko moved that the resolution
should be forwarded to the Traffic Commission for their consideration and then
to City
Council with favorable remarks by the Planning Commission; Seconded
by Greever.
The motion passed unanimously.
2. Training Workshop: Mardis spoke on a memo that
was previously sent to all Planning Commission members
to consider dates for a training workshop. It was decided that the workshop will be held
on July 1,
2008 at 6:30 in the
Stranko moved to adjourn at 7:14 pm; seconded by DeMasters. The motion
carried unanimously.