Council tables North Shoemaker annexation after zoning dispute; staff flags separate Shoemaker Landing plan

At a Sept. 22 work session, Salisbury planning staff and the mayor’s office briefed council on two proposed annexations along Shoemaker Drive and the North Shoemaker area, and council voted to table the North Shoemaker annexation pending a developer presentation and additional information.

North Shoemaker Drive (12.465 acres; townhouse proposal)

Associate planner Zach White told council the parcel under consideration is roughly 12.465 acres and that the petitioner initially sought R8A zoning that would allow townhouses and apartments. City staff recommended R10S — a single‑family district with a clustering ("S") option that preserves 10,000 sq. ft. lot standards but permits clustered lots and dedicated open space to accommodate site constraints such as overhead utility easements. The planning commission recommended R10A, a different variant that allows townhouses and apartments.

Staff and multiple council members said the recommendation reflects a desire to preserve the established single‑family character along Shoemaker Pond and to avoid introducing apartment buildings next to low‑density neighborhoods. Several residents at the meeting, including Carolyn Wolgamuth, urged R10 (single‑family) to protect Shoemaker Pond and nearby neighborhoods from increased stormwater run‑off and higher traffic.

Council action: The council voted to table the annexation and requested a developer presentation and additional information, including clarifications on unit counts, stormwater mitigation and affordable‑housing commitments. The motion to table was moved and seconded and approved by voice vote.

Shoemaker Landing LLC (7.58 acres; apartment proposal)

Staff also presented a separate annexation petition from Shoemaker Landing LLC for a 7.58‑acre parcel on the north side of Shoemaker Drive. The petitioner proposes five three‑story apartment buildings totaling 132 units (about 17.4 units per acre) and requested a Planned Residential Development (PRD) designation to reach 20 units per acre.

City staff told council the proposal as submitted does not meet the PRD standards in city code — which require a PRD to provide a variety of housing styles, significant open space, recreational areas and environmental preservation — and that the applicant should either select an existing residential zone or substantially add PRD elements to comply with the code. Council members asked staff to bring the applicant before council for a fuller presentation; no decision was made on the Shoemaker Landing annexation at the meeting.

Why it matters

Two annexations proposed for the same corridor would substantially raise residential density near Shoemaker Pond and adjacent single‑family neighborhoods. Residents and council members cited (1) potential stormwater impacts on Shoemaker Pond, (2) compatibility with neighborhood character, and (3) whether the city should seek affordable‑housing concessions or clear developer commitments prior to annexation approvals.

Next steps

Council asked staff to schedule developer presentations, provide a clearer comparison of the three zoning options (developer’s R8A, planning commission’s R10A, and staff’s R10S), and return with stormwater analyses and any proposed affordable‑housing requirements. Council indicated it prefers these items to return together for a fuller public discussion.