Kentwood Committees & Boards
Planning Commission (Back to index)
Minutes for 06/10/2008APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE KENTWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 10, 2008, 7:30 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
A. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
B. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Artz.
C. Roll Call:
Members Present: Betsy Artz, Dan Holtrop (arrived late), Nancie McIntyre-Evenocheck, Laurie Sheldon, Frank Vander Hoff, Don Yokom, and Chris Winczewski.
Members Absent: Abed Itani and Johngerlyn Young
Others Present: City Attorney Jeff Sluggett, Community Development Director Terry Schweitzer, Economic Development Planner Lisa Golder, Planner Joe Pung, Staff Secretary Monique Collier, the press and about 40 residents.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to excuse Commissioners Itani and Young from the meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
D. Approval of the Minutes and Findings of Fact
Motion by Commissioner Arztz, supported by Vice Chair Winczewski, to approve the Minutes of May 27, 2008 and the Findings of Fact for: Case #6-08 DJ?s Lawn Service ? Major Site Plan Change for a Special Land Use contractor?s yard located at 4720 ? 52nd Street
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
E. Approval of the Agenda
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Vice Chair Winczewski to approve the agenda for the June 10, 2008 meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
F. Acknowledge visitors wishing to speak to non-agenda items.
There was no public comment.
G. Old Business
Case #17-07 ? Menard?s-Special Land Use Open Air Business Garden Center/Outside Yard Area and Site Plan Review located north of 28th Street, midway between East Paris Avenue and Patterson Avenue
Staff was in receipt of an email from the applicant requesting that the request be tabled to June 24, 2008.
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Commissioner Yokom, to table Case #17-07 Menard?s to the June 24, 2008 meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
H. Public Hearing
Case #7-08 Fox Ford Mazda- Special Land Use and Site Plan Review for an Open Air Business Vehicle Sales located at 3570 28th Street SE
Tom Rothwell, Bob Petko, and Nancy Connor were present to represent Fox Ford and Domestic Real Estate Holdings. Mr. Rothwell stated they received input from the planning commission and staff and have taken their comments and incorporated them into the revised site plan. He stated they have reduced the number of variance request to the zoning board of appeals from five to three. Mr. Rothwell stated they have now met the lot coverage ratio requirement as well as the landscape requirement. He stated they are still seeking variances regarding lot width, parking and buffer zone B (which is the side and rear yard setback dimensions.)
Mr. Rothwell stated they have Progressive Architecture coming up with a design plan for their site that will allow them to create a more friendly and aesthetically pleasing design for the facility. He stated they are trying to enhance the entrance from 28th Street next to Pizza Hut and the former Don Pablos. He stated they want to create a boulevard and use some creative paving techniques and materials and add some additional landscaping. He stated there are some limitations to their plans because of easements that are in place; however they upgraded the fa?ade main of the facility Ford/Mazda.
Mr. Rothwell stated they purchased Don Pablos to enhance the visibility of their dealership. He stated their purpose was to take the Don Pablos building down to compliment what they are trying to do at Fox Ford. He stated they are sliding the new vehicle sales building back to create better lines for vision. He stated it will be a much smaller building than what is there now; their building will be about 2,700 square feet. He stated their lot coverage will be less, they will add more landscaping, the parking is about the same, but they have reduced some of the parking spaces from the last work session. He stated they think this is a good addition to 28th Street and it will be a good looking building.
Bob Petko, also representing Fox Ford, presented a slide show. He stated what they have done in addition to staff and planning comments from the last work session is; opened up the drive to the south for through traffic on both sides and opened up parking. He stated they have increased their green coverage to get them over the minimum 25% green coverage threshold. He stated they have eliminated all of the bad spaces and turned the whole rear of the site to a green space. He stated they have about 2,500 square feet more open space than what the former Don Pablos site had. He stated they have slightly more parking.
Planner Golder stated she is recommending condition approval of the special land use open air business car dealership and also conditional approval of the site plan dated June 4, 2008.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner Artz, to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
Commissioner Yokom stated they have done a good job and is in favor of the project.
Commissioner Artz stated she likes what the applicant has done and wants to know what kind of lighting they plan to have. Mr. Petko stated they will meet the requirements of the ordinance. Artz asked about signage and if they will be looking for signage on 28th Street. Mr. Petko stated in the greenspace at the front of the site is the existing Don Pablos sign. They plan to use the existing sign and will meet all requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Secretary Sheldon asked where the customer parking will be. Mr. Petko stated they will have 7 parking spaces for customer parking and they will go to the zoning board of appeals showing they will not need 27 spaces for a 100 car display lot. Sheldon asked where the dumpsters are located. Mr. Petko stated they do not anticipate a lot of trash, they don?t have that kind of waste where a dumpster will be needed; there will be no car repair, oil changes etc.
Vice Chair Winczewski questioned who had ownership of the two easements. Mr. Rothwell stated there are three easements and they have ownership. Winczewski suggested since it is completely owned by them, they can get rid of one of the curb cuts to alleviate the side yard buffer requirements and route all traffic through the west. Mr. Rothwell stated they are obligated under the easements to keep them open and to serve other property owners and businesses. Winczewski asked if they have looked into joining the properties and if so can they get around it. Attorney Jeff Sluggett stated there may be other grantees of those easements with have rights to use them and whether they combine the lots may not impact those property owner?s rights.
Vice Chair Winczewski asked about the building in the back of the lot. He questioned whether it was intentional or if it is functional to have the building towards the back of the lot. Mr. Petko stated it isn?t a parking lot; it is vehicle display and they are displaying products. Mr. Petko stated they are trying to meet the intent of the ordinance and offer a level of screening and streetscape environment and still make their product available. Mr. Petko stated having the building up front tends to hide the vehicles. Winczewski stated he doesn?t have a problem with the special land use but the site plan review he would like to see the elimination of the east easement if possible.
McIntyre-Evenocheck noted that as a condition we should have no cars displayed on the landscaped areas. She stated her other concern was the approval of the building elevations.
Motion by Vice Chair Winczewski, supported by Commissioner Holtrop, to grant conditional approval of the Special Land Use Open Air Business car dealership as described in Case No. 7-08. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-3 and basis points 1-5 as described in Golder?s memo dated 6/4/08.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
Motion by Vice Chair Winczewski, supported by Commissioner Vanderhoff, to grant conditional approval of the site plan dated June 4, 2008 for Fox Ford Mazda open air car dealership as described in Case No. 7-08 Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-6 and basis points 1-3 with condition 3 to be subject to approval by staff as described in Golder?s memo dated 6/4/08
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
Case #8-08 -Burton Street/ Patterson Ave. Mini Storage ? I-1 Light Industrial Conditional Zoning for a site currently zoned R1-C Single Family Residential located on the north side of Burton Street at Patterson Ave.
Planner Golder introduced the request. She stated this is a conditional rezoning of 6 acres of land from R1-C Single Family Residential to I-1 Light Industrial located north of Burton Street west of Patterson Ave extended. Golder stated under conditional zoning the developer has to offer conditions to the commission. She stated the developer?s proposed conditions are: no outdoor storage allowed; the storage buildings can?t exceed 15 feet in height; the buildings will not come closer than 50 feet from the west and southern boundary where the homes are; dumpsters would be within storage units none will be outside; lighting on the sides of the buildings are directed downward; no new signage on the expressway; the exterior will meet the requirements for industrial buildings and they are working with Cascade Township. Golder stated there is a letter from Cascade Township and they are considering it. Cascade Township is concerned about having that use on the site, so the applicant has removed all the storage units that were proposed on Cascade Township, only portraying the access drive. Golder stated if this application should continue, Cascade Township would have to look for a rezoning or conditional rezoning on their property or variance to allow for the commercial road to go through that area. She stated staff is recommending denial to the city commission of the proposed conditional rezoning of 6 acres of property from R1-C Single Family Residential to I-1 Light Industrial as described in her memo dated 6/2/08
Doug Stalsonburg, Exxel Engineering was there to represent the request. He stated they met with the LUZ committee twice and when the project was discussed the question was whether self storage better and more compatible in the neighborhood than what could be developed there under what the property is Master Planned. He stated they walked away from the LUZ committee with some encouragement that they should proceed to further develop the plan and the conditions of zoning that would make it compatible with neighbors and also a suggestion to have a neighborhood meeting. He stated the property is zoned residential; the master plan stated the property should be medium density residential/office. He stated Cascade Township has done the same, theirs is zoned Office/Service. He questioned whether or not we could come up with a use other than what could be developed under the master plan. He stated they believe they have developed a plan that could be better for the neighborhood in terms of the self storage because of less traffic; low traffic volume; not a lot of noise and no dumpster/ trash pick up. He stated they also developed some plans and cross section of the property from the west to be screened. He stated they believe this use with the proper conditions can be a better fit for the neighbors/neighborhood.
Mr. Stalsonsburg stated the industrial zoning is inconsistent with the master plan the industrial district is the only district that allows for self storage; but, with the type of conditions they are willing to attach to the project he thinks it is less inconsistent than perceived under straight industrial zoning. He stated the property could be developed residential but the topography along the west side of the development (the most logical place for the street) would be right along the property line. He stated he thinks it will be less desirable than what he is proposing. Mr. Stalsonburg stated when they met with Cascade Township, Planning Director Steve Peterson stated they would ask for a similar use and rezoning in Cascade. He stated the second request was the road Cascade Township is holding out hoping that some day will be an entry ramp to I96 but MDOT and the Road Commission has said no, Cascade does not want to give up and if the property is developed; Steve Peterson would like to see provisions for both ramps and it would use the entire property.
John Slagboom stated they made some changes to the plans. He stated they added berms, deciduous trees and pine trees. He stated he is trying to work with the planning commission as to what would be acceptable and being very sensitive to the residential area as well. Mr. Slagboom read reasons as to why they should be able have the proposed use on the site.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
Comments were offered by:
Sherry Kaspe, 2374 Pine Run Ct.; Mike Shinevar, 2326 Pine Run Ct; Curtis King, 2278 Pine Run Ct.; Brad Elderidge, 4757 Burton; Yu Kuangping, 2350 Pine Run Ct.; David Woods, 6143 28th Street; Bincy Teodorescu, 2314 Pine Run Ct; Singh Dilbagh, 2290 Pine Run Ct.; Jim Stotenbur, 2268 Pine Run Ct. Their main concerns were the change in the zoning, more traffic, noise, bringing property values down; don?t like they are cutting down trees, they like the residential feel and it would be inconsistent with the neighborhood.
David Vos, 2206 Shiloh Point Dr. noted the positives of the project. He stated future questions of how the property will be developed will be answered; their property values will increase; property will be blocked by a chain link fence; if is zoned industrial he can also request rezoning because he owns 10 acres and think he would have a personal gain from it; the sound barrier will help with the traffic on the highway; nuisance of wild animals would be controlled. He stated disadvantage inconsistent of why they bought their property; inconsistent with the future master plan.
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Secretary, Sheldon to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
Secrfetary Sheldon stated there were two letters submitted from David Woods and Ben and Courtney Carlson who are in opposition to the request.
Secretary Sheldon stated she respects the time that was put into the request and how they have been working with the neighbors. However, she stated she doesn?t think it is the right fit and will not support its approval.
Commissioner VanderHoff stated he will be against the request because the planning department is and none of the residents have spoken in favor of the project.
Vice Chair Winczewski stated he agrees with the lack of support from the neighbors that plays an important factor. He stated it has only been on the market since 2004. He stated he doesn?t think they can say residential/office could not go in this area and he doesn?t think an I-1 rezoning is necessary. He stated he has to agree with the residents until we see that residential/office is not possible we don?t have the right to change the zoning.
Commissioner Holtrop stated his concern from day one would be the berming and given the elevation change he doesn?t think the berming that is proposed will be enough to screen from the west.
Commissioner Artz stated she would have to vote for denial.
Commissioner Yokom stated he would have to vote for denial due to the public?s input.
Charir McIntyre-Evenocheck stated staff has clearly shown this is not consistent with the Master Plan. She stated she understands the developer claims they can not build on the site due to wetlands, but it has been done before, wetlands are mitigated and things have been developed. She stated she doesn?t believe this is the right neighborhood for this kind of operation.
Motion by Commission Artz, supported by Secretary Sheldon, to recommend to the city commission denial of the proposed conditional rezoning of 6 acres of property from R1-C Single Family Residential to I-1 Light Industrial (with conditions offered by developer) as described in Case No. 8-08. Denial is based on basis points 1-9 as described in Golder?s memo dated 6/2/08
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
Case #9-08 -East African Grocery Store ? Special Land Use Convenience Store and Site Plan Review located at 2975- 28th Street SE (northeast corner of 28th Street at Ridgemoor Dr.)
Planner Pung introduced the request. He stated the request is to locate a convenience store in the lower level of an existing 11,000 square foot building. He stated there were no major issues from the work session and that it meets the special land use standards of the zoning ordinance. Pung stated he is recommending approval of the special land use with basis points 1-4 and conditional approval of the site plan with conditions 1-2 and basis point 1-4.
Arne Larson, with Driesenga and Associates, was present to represent the request. He stated this will be an ethnic food, bulk ingredients store. He stated this will not be the typical convenience store where there will be a lot of traffic. He stated they will be meeting with the city regarding parking in the right of way. He stated as far as signage they will get a sign permit according to the sign ordinance once the specifics of the signs have been developed.
Store tenant Mr. Mohammad stated he has no plans to sell alcohol, lottery or cigarettes that is against his religion, there will strictly be ethnic food.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
Carol Weston- Ross from 2764 Ridgemoor and 2716 Ridgemoor stated she was initially concerned because she didn?t know the nature of the convenience store. But now they are not selling alcohol, and cigarettes she isn?t concerned as much.
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and young absent -
Attorney Jeff Sluggett stated in light of the comments; he was wondering if some kind of condition would be appropriate representation of the applicants, in terms of the nature of the enterprise.
Commissioners Holtrop, Artz, Sheldon, Yokom, VanderHoff, and Winczewski were all in favor and stated it looks good.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated the reason this is being categorized as a convenience store is because of the square footage of the location. She indicated that she thinks it looks good also.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner Yokom, to grant approval of the Special Land Use Convenience Store as described in Case 9-08 East African Grocery Store. Approval is conditioned on basis point 1-4 and adding condition to read as follows: ?Use limited to these activities affirmatively represented at this evenings meeting by applicant.?
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to grant conditional approval of the site plan dated May 19, 2008 as described in Case 9-08, East African Grocery Store. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-2 and basis points 1-4 as described in Pung?s memo dated 5/29/08.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
Case #10-08 Assorted Zoning and Regulatory Ordinance Amendments
Director Schweitzer stated any changes to the zoning laws requires action by the city commission. The city commission is obliged to seek out and obtain recommendation from the planning commission on the proposed changes. He stated there will be a city commission public hearing on July 1, 2008. He stated there will be A City Commission ordinance committee meeting on June 24, 2008 so the city commission has time to get acquainted with the proposed changes and have discussion about their implications so they will be prepared for the hearing on the proposed changes.
Assisted Living
Schweitzer stated a letter was sent out to a number of people who own property and reside in the vicinity of the area of Burton Street/ Forest Hill Ave. He stated one of the proposed zoning ordinance changes was to change the definition of the assisted living facility. He stated with this project special care was taken to notify the neighbors that the change is being considered.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
Dave Dunakin 2497 Bluff Meadows stated he wishes they had more time to prepare. Diane Fryer, 2594, Forest Bluff Court had concerns also, they stated they received a letter on June 6th that was very vague and didn?t have detail of what the changes were. They felt the city is making a lot of concessions to Guardian Angel. They don?t think it is right to change the law to fit one group. The density bothers them and also the imposition upon their space.
Lois Devries, 2504 Forest Bluff Ct. asked if there were any other entities this proposal would benefit besides Guardian Angel. Schweitzer stated there isn?t any other request pending that would be affected by this it is more of a matter of trying to get some consistency on how our zoning regulations relate to the state laws. Ms. Devries stated she was uncomfortable with the request. She stated even though these are individual homes they are six unrelated individuals; it is not a family situation, they need zoning setbacks, there are too many buildings on one property. She stated she finds it bothersome. She stated she knows their association would be opposed to it.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck suggested she would like to take this particular piece off the amendment proposal and send it back to the zoning ordinance committee and have them take a look at it. She stated she is confused when reading the language too.
Vice Chair Winczewski stated when it is sent back can they get a comparison of what the setbacks are now and what they are going to be and also compare residential.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to refer the Assisted Living 2.02.A portion of the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments back to the Zoning Ordinance Committee.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
Street Frontage
Schweitzer stated we are proposing a definition of Street Frontage that has been lacking.
Accessory uses
Schweitzer stated Section 3.16.C.2 relates to accessory uses are permitted only in connection with, incidental to and on the same lot with a principal use or main building. He stated we would like that to be modified so that in an industrial and commercial setting freestanding use for parking will be a permitted use.
Wind Energy
Schweitzer stated with Wind Energy the intent is to promote the safe effective and efficient use of small wind energy systems installed to reduce the on-site consumption of utility supplied electricity. He stated the Gerald R Ford International Airport have a zoning Ordinance Height and Lighting requirement and the city wants to cite their regulations in terms of the review that would have to be taken into account for wind energy systems. He also suggested the number of wind energy systems allowed in the commercial, office and industrial districts be expressed in terms of two per building.
Side Yard requirements.
Schweitzer stated this is an effort to make it more user friendly.
Convenience Stores
Schweitzer stated we are suggesting that it be treated as a permitted use in the C-2 district
Rear Yard Requirements for Industrial uses
He stated we want to clear it up so that it will be limited to those sites that are immediately adjacent to a residential or commercial use or fronting on a public street.
Signs in PUD Districts
Schweitzer stated people have come to the planning commission indicating that it is a PUD district and why we aren?t allowing some flexibility to be afforded to the developer to allow for considerations on the standard sign requirements. He stated with this provision, if enacted, will give the planning/ city commission the ability to consider deviations from our general requirements for signs for a PUD developer.
Building Walls over 100 feet
Schweitzer stated building walls over one hundred feet in length shall be broken up with varying building lines, windows, architectural accents and trees. The City is proposing that the sides of industrial warehouse or manufacturing buildings that do not face a public or private street be exempted from this requirement.
Open Air Businesses
Schweitzer stated Border Scape B comes into play surrounding outside storage for open air business areas, more in keeping with open air sales of nursery products. He stated he doesn?t believe it was intended to apply to vehicle sales to have border scape B prescribed with no latitude given to the planning commission to look at the surrounding uses and the design of the surrounding properties. He stated this change would give this discretion to the planning commission under special land use review. It would give the planning commission the discretion on a specific case by case basis a buffer zone would be desirable on an open air request.
Winczewski suggested should we have a clarification on Open Air Business difference between normal and auto sales business in terms of parking requirements. Schweitzer stated they may be desirable. It will be researched and compare with the requirements specified by the State for vehicle sales.
Discussion ensued concerning the desirability of taking
Section 15.04.T.3 out of the Zoning Ordinance Text amendments as well as the parking for open air vehicle sales, and referring it back to the committee.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to refer section 15.04.T.3 and open air business sales back to the zoning ordinance committee.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
Electronic Message Centers
Schweitzer stated instead of allowing for changes once a day this would allow for changes in the message as frequent as every 5 minutes. Concerns are with motorist driving down the road and seeing what the next message will be.
Winczewski?s concern was whether or not we are defining the change. He stated some signs can appear as if you can have fireworks going off, rearranging the screen etc. He thinks we should have some language indicating the change has to occur within the five minutes. Schweitzer stated in the Highway Advertising Act it specifies that each change is complete in one second or less and that may be the type of language to introduce to respond to that concern a well.
Discussion ensued.
Motion by Secretary Sheldon, supported by Vice Chair Winczewski to refer Electronic Message Center 16.04AA, 16.05.B and 16.05.D back to the zoning ordinance committee.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
Parking Setback in the C-5 Zone
It would be desirable to specify less stringent parking setback for C-5. The intent of this includes a consideration for the difficulty of developing lots with shallow depth common to residential uses/districts.
Alternates for the Zoning Board of Appeals
Schweitzer stated the City Commission may appoint up to two alternate members for the same term as regular members to the Zoning Board of Appeals. An alternate member may be called as specified to serve as a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the absence of a regular member if the regular member will be unable to attend 1 or more meetings.
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she has a concern because we already don?t have enough ZBA members and we have to have alternatives for them but now you are taking another person out of the equation and she has some issues. She stated ZBA is an important board. She stated she would like to remove the planning commissioner as being an alternate.
Sheldon stated she would like to keep the planning commissioner as an alternate to the ZBA and thinks it would add a great benefit and allow for the ZBA to have insight into Planning Commission meetings.
Discussion Ensued
Schweitzer stated the other set of amendments are regulatory ordinance amendments that are related to changes in State Law.
Winczewski stated he feels that when you ride through the neighborhoods he thinks it is the curbs that make them beautiful, the better the curbs the better for the city. He asked if roll curbs go far enough for storm water. Schweitzer stated for normal rain events it does but for extreme rain it will overwhelm the system.
Discussion ensued.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Secretary Sheldon, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent ?
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Secretary Sheldon, to recommend to the city commission to amend the City of Kentwood Zoning Ordinance No. 9-02, as amended consistent with Schweitzer?s memo 6-4-08 minus the removed amendments and including the wind energy modifications contained within the June 9, 2008 memo.
- Motion Failed (2-5) ?
- Artz, Yokom, VanderHoff, Winczewski, McIntyre-Evenocheck opposed -
- Itani and Young absent -
Motion by Vice Chair Winczewski, supported by VanderHoff to recommend to the City Commission to amend the City of Kentwood Zoning Ordinance No. 9-02, as amended removing the ordinances that have been referred to the zoning ordinance committee and changing the wording of section 21.02. A to remove ?one of whom may be a member of the planning commission.?
- Motion Carried (5-2) ?
- Holtrop, Sheldon opposed
- Itani and Young absent ?
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to recommend to the City Commission approval of Amendments to the City of Kentwood Code of Ordinances to be effective September 2, 2008 as referred to in Schweitzer?s memo 6-4-08 removing the basis alluding the exception of dual service on the Zoning Board of Appeals does not allow a Planning Commissioner to serve on any other city board.
- Motion Carried ( 7-0) ?
- Itani and Young absent -
I. Work Session
Case #11-08 ? Heritage Pointe ? Rezoning from R1-C Single Family Residential to O-PUD Office Planned Unit Development and Final Site Plan Review of a PUD Phase located at Burton and East Paris
Planner Pung introduced the request. He stated Heritage has picked up .5 acres and would like to rezone to O-PUD Office PUD and merge with the existing PUD to allow them to create a full service drive and add additional parking. He stated currently they have a right in right out drive. He stated Fire and Engineering are in favor. He stated the only issue is the parking is too close to the residence immediately to the southeast. He stated they have to re-establish the pedestrian connection; looking for information on the landscaping and berming; lighting plan; PUD agreement and if any trees that are preserved to have them identified as part of the landscape plan.
The Commissioners had no concerns regarding the rezoning.
Case #12-08 ? Arie Nol ? Major Site Plan Change for a Special Land Use Major Repair Establishment located at 5189 Eastern Ave. SE
Planner Golder introduced the request. She stated some of the issues were: the parking calculation should be checked; building materials percentages and samples needed and additional landscaping along rear lot line.
Vice Chair Winczewski stated he doesn?t like extending the non conforming use but it would make infeasible.
Secretary Sheldon stated as long as the issues by staff are taken care of she is okay with the plan.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated her concerns are parking and she knows cars are being parked along the north side on the fence and the eastern portion of the new storage area as well as on 52nd street next to the current building. She stated if they are going to have parking there to show it on the plan. She stated if it is not on the plan and they are parking cars there it will be a concern.
Case #14-08 ? MVP Sportsplex ? Final Site Plan Review of a PUD Phase located at 4035 Burton Street SE
Planner Golder introduced the request. She stated the request is for a parking area that is behind the building at the MVP complex. She stated part of the PUD was if they developed the deferred parking and used it they would have to present plans to the planning commission in accordance with chapter 17. She stated they are paving part of it. She stated her only comment is that it was requested at the initial PUD approval that the neighbors would not see the tennis building from their site. She asked the applicants to take a look to see if the landscaping was complete according to the plan.
Tom Sinke with AMDG Architects was there to represent the request. He stated they pulled out the old landscaping plan and counted the trees that were there and there were 13 shade trees on the old landscaping plan and 13 are out there; 22 6 foot tall evergreens and 30 are out there; 14 evergreens on the plan and 14 are out there; 17 ornamentals and 23 are out there. He stated they have met and exceeded what was shown on the approved plan.
Commissioner Sheldon stated this was much needed and she is glad to see it.
Commissioner McIntyre-Evenocheck stated to work with staff and if landscaping seems to be an issue the neighbors will show up.
J. New Business
There was no new business
K. Other Business
1. Commissioners? Comments
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated the reason why she let the residents speak and say the same thing is because the request for Burton St./Patterson was a denial and in just in case it goes beyond city commission we allowed the residents to speak.
2. Staff?s Comments
Schweitzer stated the Growing Communities Conference is Thursday June 19, 2008
Golder stated Menard?s is coming back on the 24th and she asked how comfortable the Planning Commission would be with a public hearing. The consensus opinion was to go into the hearing if the modified site plan is submitted in a timely manner.
L. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Commissioner Sheldon, to adjourn the meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Itani and young absent-
Meeting adjourned at 10:15p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Laurie Sheldon, Secretary
|