Planning
Commission Minutes
MINUTES
Cascade Charter Township Planning Commission
Monday, September 15, 2008
7:00 p.m.
ARTICLE 1. Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:00
p.m.
Members Present: Hammond, Koessel, Lewis, Logue, McDonald, Pennington,
Robinson, Sperla
Members Absent: Waalkes (excused)
Others Present: Planning Director Peterson, Recording Secretary Hern,
and Members of the Public.
ARTICLE 2. Chairman McDonald led the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag.
ARTICLE 3. Chairman McDonald requested a motion for the approval of
the September 15, 2008 agenda noting the tabled case, The Design
Forum, from last week's meeting has returned before the Planning
Commission with their case.
Member Lewis motioned to approve the September 15th Agenda with the
addition of Case # 08-2952: The Design Forum located at 6000 28th
Street as Article 4.5, supported by Member Robinson. All in favor with
none opposed, the motion carried.
ARTICLE 4. Case # 08-2945: Russ Spees
Address of Property: 6010/6080 28th Street
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: The Applicant is requesting to revise the existing
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) 88 at 6010 28th Street in order to
include the property at 6080 28th Street.
Planning Director Peterson noted the property is located on the
south side of 28th Street just west of Lucerne. The Applicant is
requesting to amend existing PUD 88 (6010 28th Street) and expand to
include 6080 28th Street.
In terms of the size of the building, it is still approximately the
same size as seen in the original plan; the old building that was
approved was 22,000-s.f. and the new building is 24,000-s.f. The
Applicant still has the building in the back to the south that has not
changed and essentially there will be three (3) buildings in this
development on approximately nine (9) acres.
The Township reviewed the Basic Plan on July 21, 2008 and gave the
Applicant a short list of items to address prior to the Public
Hearing. The following are the items the Applicant also plans to
address at this meeting:
1. Have FTCH review the storm water and utilities plan.
2. Have the Developer provide a photometric lighting plan.
3. Provide a completed landscaping plan.
4. Have their architect review the retail building separation issue.
5. Revise the plan to include the pedestrian access into and through
the site.
Both the Kent County Drain Office and the Township Engineer are
reviewing the site. It appears that the site will work for storm water
and utility purposes. The Township Engineer has also received
additional information regarding the site and is now more comfortable
with the development. Other final design issues can be worked out when
the Developer returns to the Commission for Site Plan approval.
Some concern was also expressed about traffic flow through the
site. The Applicant has indicated that they will show how the traffic
flow will work as a result of these changes. The drive around the west
end of the building is one-way and too narrow and at lunch hour, it
can start to pose traffic flow issues. With the two sites together
now, it would help alleviate the traffic flow concerns.
Staff recommends that the Preliminary Plan be approved.
Member Hammond requested Staff to elaborate more on the issues with
the storm water and utilities. FTCH's report refers to the Applicant
receiving preliminary approval from the Kent County Drain Commission (KCDC)
for the discharge rate of the storm water to the regional detention
basin. The remainder of the detention requirements must be met with
onsite detention. Planning Director Peterson noted the Applicant has
additional detention on site, one is located in the front area and one
behind this building, in between the two (2) buildings.
Member Hammond asked where the regional detention is located and
Planning Director Peterson said it starts with the pipe under 28th
Street and goes north.
Chairman McDonald noted some discussions regarding the pedestrian
walkway and the topographical study asked if the details would be
included in the final Site Plan review and Planning Director Peterson
said yes.
Applicant Mike Houseman of Houseman Construction said both the
engineers from Exxel Engineering and the Township are comfortable with
the new drain system.
Applicant Houseman said they did review the traffic flow on-site
noting Panera Bread and Wendy's on the site plan. He said the area
does become congested but primarily due to people trying to find
parking to Panera Bread or to get to Wendy's. He said the area is very
tight, even for one-way traffic. Once the project is completed a new
wide road with additional parking will be installed. If people drive
in the back, the Developer is opening up a couple of the curb areas to
allow for more room and smoother traffic flow.
Member Lewis asked the Applicant how wide the road is between the
two (2) buildings that they will be directing traffic through and the
Applicant said the road is the standard 24-feet wide for two (2) lane
traffic. Planning Director Peterson noted that the Township's standard
is 18-feet wide.
Member Lewis expressed his concerns for the people in the rear and
trying to access the site. Applicant Houseman noted that in Phase II
of the plan, there is a drive in the rear. Member Lewis said that
there seems to be a lot of parking spaces for the rear building and
those cars will need to get to the rear building by driving on the
road between the two (2) buildings. Applicant Houseman noted the width
of the road between the two (2) buildings and understands that the
road meets requirements. He asked if the Applicant is comfortable with
the road and they said they are.
Member Robinson asked approximately how many people turn left in
that area to get to Wendy's and Applicant Houseman said approximately
thirty-five during the lunch hour. Member Robinson asked if traffic
waiting to turn left would also impede the traffic flow and Applicant
Houseman does not believe so.
Chairman McDonald asked if the drive to Lucerne is an exit only and
Planning Director Peterson said it is functional both ways.
Member Koessel asked if the building in the rear is office as he
believes the building was originally approved for office use. Planning
Director Peterson said the Township did not restrict the building to
specifically for office use.
Member Koessel believes that the last time the Applicant was before
the Commission, he needed an easement to gain access to the drive in
the southwest corner to access Tahoe Drive. He also believes that at
that meeting the Applicant indicated the only way the easement would
be granted was if the rear building were to be retail. Mr. Houseman
noted that the adjacent property owner has a building he leases for
office and the property owner told them that if they build an office
building, chances are the Applicant would not be allowed the easement
rights.
Planning Director Peterson noted that the Township would require
the Applicant to build their half of the drive to the easement line.
Planning Director Peterson noted that when a cross-access is done,
normally the Township obtains agreement from each half to allow for
the connection. If the neighbor comes in for an approval, the Township
would also require them to complete their half. At this time, the
Township is asking the Applicant to complete their half.
Member Koessel clarified that at this time, the Applicant does not
know nor does the Township, if the rear building would be utilized for
office or retail and Planning Director Peterson said that is correct.
The Applicant, however, would complete their half of the connection
and when the adjacent property owner comes to the Township for an
approval, he would then be required to complete his half. Member
Koessel noted that the adjacent property owner might not come in for
approval.
Mr. Houseman said they have proposed the current parking with the
rear building being designated as either office or retail. They have
contacted the property owners in the rear of the site for access to
Tahoe Drive and Mr. George Wante indicated at that time that the
easement might be granted if the building were to be used for retail.
Mr. Houseman noted they have not received any inquiries for office in
the rear building only retail.
Mr. Houseman noted there are two (2) other drives to access the
property if the building becomes an office. Planning Director Peterson
noted that if there was a connection in the rear of the site and if
the parking were turned, would the Commission be more comfortable with
the site plan? He noted that the east entrance is a full open drive
with angled parking and the parking could be perpendicular parking
allowing two-way traffic through.
Mr. Houseman noted there are plenty of ways to open the parking to
create better traffic flow if the rear drive does not go through as
there is ample parking on the site. Chairman McDonald supported
readjusting the parking by the east entrance to allow for two-way
traffic flow.
Member Pennington supports the parking adjustments and has
witnessed the traffic flow but is very concerned about the
intersection behind the two (2) buildings as there seems to be a lot
of conflicting movement in the area with traffic and pedestrians and
suggested moving the drive more south to align with the traffic lanes
and ease congestion. Member Hammond agrees with Member Pennington in
opening up the drive to allow two-way traffic.
Member Koessel noted that Russ Spees and his group have been
wonderful to work with. He believes the traffic flow onto and exiting
the site can be worked out but before the Planning Commission can vote
on the site plan they need to see what the Developer would like to do
instead of drawing the plans in. He suggested that the Planning
Commission table the case until they can review the site plan that
includes the changes made this evening.
Applicant Houseman asked if the Commission could grant preliminary
approval of the site plan submitted with the condition of addressing
the ingress/egress issues and the concerns of the on-site
intersection. Planning Director Peterson said he could start the text
for the rezoned P.U.D. and insert the final language once the issues
have been resolved.
Member Koessel asked if the Applicant would keep the process going
anyway and the Applicant said they would and they could be ready at
the next meeting.
Chairman McDonald asked if preliminary approval were granted would
the Planning Commission still be able to deny the request if the
changes did not improve the Commission's concerns or if Wendy's did
not approve of the changes and Planning Director Peterson said the
site plan could be rejected at the next meeting.
Member Robinson motioned to open the Public Hearing, supported by
Member Lewis. All in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was
opened.
Chairman McDonald asked Staff if any letters or phone calls were
received regarding the case and Planning Director Peterson said no.
Kurt Ojala of Hindeman Company, located on Charlevoix Drive, said
he has a flooding issue at 6000 28th Street and during heavy rainfall,
the water approaches the building. His concern is with the added water
from this project as there is already an issue. Mr. Houseman said the
site is currently draining and when the project is completed, the
water will be directed better as it is now free-flowing. He noted
catch basins that will help channel the water and the flow of the
water. The development should improve the water flow.
Member Robinson motioned to close the Public Hearing, supported by
Member Lewis. All in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was
closed.
Member Lewis motioned for approval of the Applicant's request for
preliminary site plan approval with the condition that the Applicant
address the concerns regarding internal traffic movement as discussed.
Member Logue questioned if a sub-committee should be developed to
help ensure that the project will be satisfactory to the Commission
when it returns for site plan approval. Member Sperla noted that Staff
seems comfortable with moving forward with the case as it can be
denied during the site plan approval process and trusts Staff to work
with the Applicant to resolve the issues.
Member Robinson supported the motion.
Member Hammond said he heard some other water runoff concerns
raised this evening and asked if the details for the storm water would
be available at the final site plan review or only available once the
case goes before the Township Board? Planning Director Peterson said
details should be available at the next meeting and Member Hammond
said he would like to review the details. Planning Director Peterson
said there should not be any changes to the current storm water plan
and he can have the Township Engineer submit a formal report.
Chairman McDonald requested a roll call vote:
Commissioner Koessel, yes
Commissioner Hammond, yes
Commissioner Sperla, yes
Commissioner Robinson, yes
Commissioner McDonald, yes
Commissioner Lewis, yes
Commissioner Logue, no
Commissioner Pennington, yes
Seven (7) in favor of the motion with one (1) opposed. Motion
carried.
ARTICLE 4.5. Case # 08-2952: The Design Forum
Address of Property: 6000 28th Street
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: The Applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit to
construct an addition to an accessory building larger than 832-square
feet.
Chairman McDonald noted that this case was tabled at the last
meeting.
Member Lewis motioned to remove the case from the table, supported
by Member Koessel. All in favor, none opposed. Case # 08-2952: The
Design Forum was removed from the table.
Planning Director Peterson noted this case was tabled at the last
meeting, asking the Applicant to obtain additional comments from the
Centennial Park Business Association regarding the accessory building.
Planning Director Peterson did send the comments received from the
Association to the Planning Commission for their review. Only one (1)
comment was received against the project from Dan Weirsma
Member Hammond noted that he does work with the architect involved
with this case in his profession and does not believe it is a conflict
of interest but wanted to bring this before the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission agreed there is no conflict of interest.
Member Koessel asked if most of the letters received are from Board
Members of the Association and Mr. Kurt Ojala said they are. Member
Koessel noted the last sentence in Mr. Weirsma's letter is concerned
with setting precedence within the park and Mr. Ojala if there is a
concern in setting precedence. Mr. Ojala said he is not concerned with
setting precedence and the Association prior to coming before the
Planning Commission will review each request after this one on a
case-by-case basis.
Member Koessel noted the property does have thick landscaping and
the building is well screened from view, making the request unique.
Member Sperla asked where Mr. Weirsma's property is located in
relation to the accessory building and Mr. Ojala said he owns Cook
Plaza across from the retention pond.
Member Koessel motioned to approve the Applicant's request for a
Special Use to construct an accessory building larger than 832-s.f.
with the following conditions:
1. The Applicant is to build a brick exterior on the building.
2. Staff's conditions as previously recommended.
3. The building is not allowed for any lease or rental of any nature.
4. No private storage use for owners/employees of their vehicles or
recreational craft.
Member Logue supported the motion. All in favor with none opposed.
Motion carried.
ARTICLE 5. Any Other Business
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for any other business.
Member Lewis noted a business "Wee Play" on 28th Street
that has some temporary signs in their vehicles and Planning Director
Peterson said the Township will look into the situation.
Member Koessel asked Staff if the Township Manager has spoken with
him and said that the Township Board has asked the Township to address
two (2) issues regarding residential: one is the storage of junk
stored in vehicles (i.e. Laraway Lake Drive property) and many
complaints are being received; the second is the parking of vehicles
in front of a business that has signage on the vehicle (i.e. Biggby's).
ARTICLE 8. Adjournment
Chairman McDonald requested a motion for adjournment.
Member Lewis supported by Member Robinson moved to adjourn. The
motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 8:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jack Lewis, Secretary
Lisa Hern, Recording Secretary
Government
~ Departments ~
Community
Business ~
Reference Desk ~
What's Happening
Help ~
Home ~ Search ~ Site Map
Comments? Feedback? Questions? Click here to send an email.
Site Use Policy
This page last modified
06/08/04.
All information © 2003-2004Cascade Township, Michigan
|
Site
Design/Development by
 |
|
