Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission reviews draft industrial zoning amendments, performance standards and parcel mapping
Summary
Commissioners reviewed proposed changes to industrial zoning (parking, buffers, bulk-storage limits, lighting and particulates), discussed table formatting and cross-references to Chapter 5 environmental rules, and began mapping LIP parcels into LI or GI districts; staff will reformat tables and bring drafts and maps back to upcoming meetings.
At the March 25 meeting, Walkersville Planning Commission members reviewed draft zoning amendments intended to refine industrial district rules including parking, yard buffers, exceptions and performance standards.
Susan (staff) summarized edits to the industrial sections, noting the industrial height limit remains in the district table and that an exceptions section (88-58) already permits limited higher heights for certain institutional/public buildings. She said staff will prepare a preliminary map showing which parcels in the LIP district would migrate to LI or GI under the proposed changes.
Commission members discussed several technical points staff will revise. They asked Susan to reformat a difficult-to-read table that currently lists front-yard and rear-yard buffer allowances and suggested clearer bulleting for the LI and GI distinctions. Commissioners also asked whether parking is allowed in the front buffer for LI vs GI and requested an updated map to show parcel impacts.
John (commissioner) raised several code harmonization issues: bus-repair facilities appear under wholesaling in one section and he suggested they be categorized under commercial/automotive; he also requested a quantified limitation for bulk storage (e.g., 1,000 or 5,000 gallons) rather than leaving “bulk storage” undefined. Staff and commissioners agreed bulk-storage numeric caps may need to be set in Section 88-16 to avoid contradiction and to harmonize limits across chapters.
Performance standards drew detailed discussion. Commissioners debated whether dust and particulate controls should be required across all districts or limited to industrial zones and whether the ordinance should explicitly require compliance with state and federal air rules or simply cross-reference Chapter 5. Susan and others recommended separating equipment-related air-emissions controls (permitting/permits) from operational particulate-control measures (e.g., wetting exposed soils) to make enforcement and plan review clearer.
Other items included potential administrative handling of small food-vendor permits such as the Whistle Stop cafe at the railroad and upcoming agenda items (a subdivision concept on George Street and continued industrial-district edits). Staff said Lonza and the Whistle Stop vendor will return to future meetings; the commission scheduled follow-up sessions on April 8 and April 22 for mapping and continued amendments.
The meeting produced no ordinance adoptions; instead staff were directed to fix table formatting, draft parcel maps for LIP reassignments, check lighting standards against the town’s design manual, and draft numeric limits for bulk storage for commissioner review.
