MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON
COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
1. Roll Call
PRESENT: Eyre,
Kozakiewicz, Gaynor, Mead, Rapanos, Senesac, and Svenson
ABSENT: Plotzke
OTHERS PRESENT: Daryl Poprave, City Planner;
Debbie Marquardt, Technical Secretary and 9 others.
2. Approval
of Minutes
Regular Meeting of
It was moved by Eyre and supported by Svenson to approve the minutes of
July 12th with the mentioned corrections. The minutes were
unanimously approved.
3. Public
Hearings
Steve Rapanos requested that
he be permitted to abstain because he is related to
the
petitioner.
It was moved by Kozakiewicz
and seconded by Svenson to accept the request from
Steve Rapanos to abstain from
Zoning Petitions No. 522 and No. 523 given the land
owner
is his father, John Rapanos.
Motion passes unanimously.
A. Zoning Petition No. 522 – Consideration
of a petition initiated by the Planning
Commission to rezone
approximately 1.09 acres located at the south side of the
parcel
at
City
of
B. Zoning Petition No. 523 – Consideration
of a petition initiated by John Rapanos
to
rezone approximately 1.14 acres located at the west side of the parcel at 2810
transcript.]
C. Conditional Use Permit No. 20
– Consideration of a petition initiated by Faulk
& Foster on behalf
of IPCS Wireless for conditional use permit approval to allow
collocation
of telecommunications equipment and increase of tower height at
4. Public Comments (not
related to agenda items)
None
5. Old Business
A. Site Plan No. 248 – Consideration of a petition initiated by Ayres Associates, on
behalf of Jeff and Shelly Weckesser, for site plan approval to allow
construction of Danburry Place Townhouses, a 12 unit
residential development located north of Universal Drive and west of Hedgewood Drive.
Daryl Poprave oriented everyone to
the location of the site. The property
has a gravel road bed and water and sewer and the road will be changed to a cul
de sac style. The zoning is high density
Residential B. On the new plan a fence
is added if it is required to get council approved. The southern most parking spot has been
removed because it was in the 25’ front yard set back. They are still way over on the parking. A pedestrian path would be provided.
Ray Senesac asked Daryl about the
walkway through the parking area. If
there were any issues related to that?
Since there is a short distance on the cul de sac and the number of units are low there won’t be much traffic on this
street. The west side of the property
has driveways right up to the street.
The only other option would be to wrap it around the rear of the
units. As long as this is a cul de sac
and not a through street it should be safe.
Doug Stevens, Ayres Associates,
spoke on the sidewalk going through the entry drive. Now they have concrete sidewalk. Doug stated that the walkway is the same as a
sidewalk and they plan to put it on one side since there is minimal traffic.
Rapanos asked about the remaining
parking space in a 25 foot setback. He
wanted to know what these guest parking spaces accomplish. He would like to remove excess parking.
Daryl stated that when you have
guests over there is no on-street parking so you will need the extra
spaces.
Rapanos stated that people will park
on the street even if it is against the rules.
He stated that sidewalk is more important then parking.
Doug Stevens stated that the garage counts
as two spaces, the driveway counts for another and then spaces for the guests.
Senesac stated that if the fire
department sees cars parked and they couldn’t get down the street they can call
the police and have them towed.
Eyre said that if no parking is
allowed on the street they need parking.
The driveways aren’t long enough and there might be some parking on the
sidewalk. The ordinance won’t allow
parking on the street.
Rapanos stated that off-street
parking is met but the existing sidewalk isn’t being met.
Svenson stated that she agrees with
Steve for sidewalk.
Svenson asked if it would be a
problem if the sidewalk was moved closer to the street.
Daryl said that it is a private
street and they could place it anywhere on their property.
Kozakiewicz stated that the
engineers probably looked at this plan and this was the best way to fit it
in. Elderly housing doesn’t like or want
sidewalks.
The petitioner stated that the
sidewalk was just put on the west side.
Placing it adjacent to the road would lengthen the parking spaces and
there would be more of a gap. They could
make the four additional guest spaces four foot deeper. The sidewalk next to the road shouldn’t be an
issue. East side or west side, there
wasn’t a lot of thought involved they put a walk in to meet requirements.
Rapanos stated that they should put
the sidewalk next to the road. He asked
about a fence.
Stevens stated they need to verify
the volume required for today’s storm water standards for the detention pond
and it may increase or decrease in size.
There are trees in the back lot for a buffer.
Eyre stated that a fence would
define the line and screen the detention pond right out the windows.
Rapanos asked about trees instead of
a fence.
The detention pond is designed to
drain and it will not need a fence.
Mead asked about refuse pickup.
Since this is a private street it
could be picked up at the curb side. The
street would have to meet specifications for a truck to go down it on a
contract basis. A dumpster would be
allowed but would need to be screened.
It was moved by Svenson and seconded
by Mead to recommend Site Plan No. 248 Danburry Place
with the contingency items:
1. A
fire hydrant needs to be placed on the cul-de-sac.
2. On-street
parking on
3. A
storm water detention and site grading plan is provided for the development.
4. The public sidewalk on
5. Interior pedestrian circulation is a
sidewalk on the east side of
6. The parking space that encroaches
within the front yard setback is eliminated.
7. Landscaping is installed on the west
side of the property adjacent to the storm water detention at 75% obscuration
screening, minimum six foot tall evergreens.
8. Extending the guest off street parking
spaces on the east side of
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre,
Kozakiewicz, Gaynor, Mead, Rapanos, Senesac and Svenson
NAY: None
ABSENT: Plotzke
Motion passes unanimously.
B. Conditional Use Permit No. 19 – Consideration of a petition initiated by Midland
Church of Christ for conditional use permit approval to allow a place of
worship at 1700 East Patrick Road.
Daryl Poprave gave site location and
a brief review. Steve Rapanos had asked
at the previous meeting about the liquor license at the Valley Produce
store. There is a 500 foot radius and
since they are already there they had the permit before the church and they are
allowed to exist and continue. If they
went out of business and sold their license, and a restaurant would move it,
that restaurant would have to be located outside the 500 foot radius or get the
consent from the church. Valley Produce
is located 250 feet from the church. If
it is the same type of business were to move in there, they could continue
serving alcohol. If the bar was outside
the 250 foot radius, they could allow serving.
Carol Svenson asked if any other
businesses are located in that 500 foot radius.
Daryl Poprave stated that there is
Valley Produce, a veterinarian clinic, Tony’s Restaurant and a dentist
office.
Roger Mead thinks this is a great
use of an existing building. You can’t
have enough churches. Everyone agreed.
It was moved by Mead and seconded by
Eyre to recommend approval to City Council for Conditional Use Permit No. 19.
The vote proceeded as follows:
YEA: Eyre,
Kozakiewicz, Gaynor, Mead, Rapanos, Senesac and Svenson
NAY: None
ABSENT: Plotzke
Motion passes unanimously.
C. Circle
Daryl showed the map for the Circle
There are two criteria, one is a legal description and the other is a map
to describe the boundaries. The legal
description has been developed and is 4 ˝ pages long. The Engineering Department is checking the
description. The map must meet the
description.
This issue will not be taken up at the August 9th meeting for
a couple of reasons. The City is hiring
some planning consultants for work on a master plan and doing an amendment at
the same time. To alleviate some confusion
in notification we would like to notice them together. They won’t have any public hearings until
October or November but we want to do it right the first time. It won’t be rolled into the master plan. We just want to be sure the notification is right. This is an informational report tonight so
you understand we are moving forward with the process.
This sets back their time line back by six months. Special assessments would be levied in
2007. Those assessments will go out in
the 2006 summer tax bill and due in September and the first disbursement would
be in December of that year.
Rapanos asked if the boundaries are set or if they could change. It could be changed up to the night of the
hearing and amend the district. This
group has been working for five years and one or two lots could change.
6. New Business
None
7. Communications
8. Report
of the Chairman
None
9.
Report of the
July 25th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
ACTION
ITEMS
§ Final Plat - Broadhead Estates No. 2
August 8th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
ACTION
ITEMS
§ Site Plan No. 248 – W of Hedgewood Dr. and N of Universal Dr.; Ayres Associates for Jeff & Shelly Weckesser for site of 6 duplex structures.
§
Conditional Use Permit
August 9th
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
ACTION
ITEMS
§
Zoning Petition
§
Zoning Petition
§ Conditional Use Permit No. 20 - Consideration of a petition initiated by Faulk & Foster on behalf of IPCA Wireless for conditional use permit approval to allow collocation of telecommunications equipment and increase of tower height at 1730 N Saginaw Road.
§ 7-11 Hours of Operation Report
§
Michigan Department of Transportation
Presentation –
August 23rd
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
None
ACTION
ITEMS
§
Michigan Department of Transportation –
§ Electronic Signs Report
July 19th
§
No. 05-05 – Amish Reflections for an area/dimension
variance to permit FY setback encroachment at
§
No. 05-10 – Harry Kokkinakis
on behalf of Buffalo Wild Wings for an area/dimension variance to permit two
wall signs in addition to total allowed wall signage at
§
No. 05-11 – Ryan Anderson for an area/dimension
variance to allow a six foot all fence to be located in a required side street
yard setback at
August 16th
§
No. 05-12 – Speedway SuperAmerica
for an area/dimension variance to permit an increase in the
amount of site signage
permitted and to increase the intensity of under canopy lighting and
§
No. 05-13 – The King’s Daughters Home for an
area/dimension variance to permit an increase in
the amount of
site signage permitted at
§
No. 05-14 – Dollar Daze for an administrative
appeal of a City Council approval of a site plan
with additional
landscaping requirements at
§
Michigan Association of Planning annual conference
is scheduled from 9-14 to 9-17
10. Adjourn
Adjournment at approximately
Respectfully submitted,
Daryl Poprave
City Planner
MINUTES