Morrison makes exception for steel plant

The Morrison Planning Commission voted to approve a height variance of 16 ft. for the McNeilus Steel building that is scheduled to be built on W. Maple Street.

In February, Morrison voted to approve the rezoning of land from agricultural to industrial for McNeilus Steel. At the meeting Tuesday night, a public hearing was held to hear concerns regarding the variance request. Before public comments, UCDD Staff Planner Tommy Lee explained what the request was. The maximum height allowance is 35 ft. and McNeilus Steel's building will be 51 ft.

"What we have is a submission of site plan from Plan LLC to construct an industrial facility for property located on W. Maple Street. During preliminary review, it appeared that the site plan had complied with most of the requirements of the zoning ordinance including screening requirements and parking and drainage requirements. We were made aware that the building height would be in violation of article three, section 11 of the zoning ordinances which states for all structures the maximum building height shall be 35 ft. According to the site plan presented by Plan LLC, the building height would be 51 ft. at its maximum, thus 16 ft. would be the variance requested," said Lee.

Joe Ledford, principal, Industrial Services at MBI Companies located in Knoxville, said there were many reasons for needing the height increase of 16 ft. including the fact that the company uses cranes. Ledford also provided members of the commission with sketches and explained how trees will be planted to buffer the building from residential houses.

"We fortunately do a lot of industrial work and we are involved in a lot of communities. Your zoning ordinance was established in 1996, so it is kind of dated to what is really happening in industry today," said Ledford. "In most communities that have an updated zoning, they set a maximum building height at the setback line, but then they give allowances that every foot your building gets away from that setback line it gains elevation in height."

Attorney Craig Johnson, who is representing some Morrison residents, presented an expert planning opinion by Cecelia Ward, AICP President. In the report her conclusion is, "The applicant's requested height variance is not warranted under the Town of Morrison Zoning Code. As such, the granting of the requested height variance would be in violation of the Town of Morrison zoning regulations as it applies to the standards of review for a variance request."

Johnson asked the commission if they were aware why Morrison has a height requirement in the zoning ordinance.

"My first question, and it is a rhetorical question, does anybody on the board know why we have a height requirement in the zoning ordinance? I didn't think so," said Johnson. "What we have had happen is, in my opinion and it is my opinion that resulted in my clients asking me to file a lawsuit, is you have zoned a piece of property to some incompatible use within other zoned areas. Just as they feared, now there are extra things being added to their requests. Obviously there is a distinction between light and heavy industry, but if you have cranes that require a height of 51 ft., which is almost a 50 percent height variance than what you normally allow, that seems to me to be more than light industry."

Johnson also said his clients requested through public records a site plan, and it was just handed out at the meeting.

"The good thing is, even though my clients requested through public records requests a site plan, and I just heard that there was one, the public has never seen it. Here we are tonight, if you are having a public meeting, your variance application says you are supposed to put a site plan with it, but it gets handed out tonight to the board publicly," said Johnson. "Again, does anybody on the board know why you have a height restriction? It might be something you want to look into. Just saying."

Matt Pilcher, who is a member of the Morrison Fire Department, expressed his concerns regarding fire safety.

"One of the concerns as a firefighter in this town is I don't have a ladder that can support this facility. It is a fairly large facility and if it is on fire we are being asked to risk a lot to go into a large facility that could be blacked out and try to find a victim or put out the fire in the structure. If there is a fire at this structure, we would probably try and access the fire from the roof. We would cut a hole in the roof and spray water on the focal point of the fire in this situation. The issue is nobody could get on the roof. The closest ladder that is tall enough is McMinnville or Manchester. A structure fire doubles in size every minute, so by the time a structure fire is identified, it is usually pretty well engulfed and the closest truck would be 20 minutes away before we could support a fire in that facility," said Pilcher.

"Mr. Pilcher brings up a great point and one I think needs to be addressed. In response to Mr. Johnson's question, yeah I would imagine that the reason there are height restrictions is due to fire. Mr. Ledford, hearing what you hear from Mr. Pilcher, what fire suppression methods will you have for this building?" asked Lee.

"Based on the building code, there is no fire suppression requirements within the warehouse based on the materials that they store. It is a metal storage facility with little to no combustibles," said Ledford.

Lee asked if sprinkler systems were required and Ledford said the building codes do not require sprinklers in the warehouse.

After hearing the concerns, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to approve the height variance of 16 ft.