Kentwood Committees & Boards
Planning Commission (Back to index)
Minutes for 09/26/2006APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE KENTWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 26, 2006, 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 Swanson.
C. Roll Call:
Members Present: Betsy Artz, Laurie Sheldon, Ray Poyner, Dan Holtrop, Nancy McIntyre-Evenocheck, Ed Swanson, and Chris Winczewski.
Members Absent: Abed Itani, Frank VanderHoff (with notification)
Others Present: City Attorney Jeff Sluggett, Community Development Director Terry Schweitzer, Economic Development Planner Lisa Golder, Planner Joe Pung, Planner Debargha Sengupta, Staff Secretary Monique Collier, the press, the applicants and ten citizens.
Motion by Secretary Winczewski, supported by Commissioner Artz, to excuse Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff from the September 26, 2006 meeting
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
D. Approval of the Minutes of September 12, 2006 and Findings of Fact for: Case #23-06 - Heritage Pointe (East Paris Professional Complex) Final Site Plan of a PUD located on the South East corner of Burton and East Paris; Case # 26-06 ? Wildflower Creek Major Change to a PUD located at North side of 52nd Street across from Bailey?s Grove Drive.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck noted that on page 6 and throughout Case #27-06 the spelling of Cindy Haines is misspelled and the correct spelling should be Cindi Haynes.
Motion by Secretary Winczewski, supported by Vice-Chair Swanson, to approve the Minutes of September 12, 2006 and the Findings of Fact for: Case #23-06 - Heritage Pointe (East Paris Professional Complex) Final Site Plan of a PUD located on the South East corner of Burton and East Paris; Case # 26-06 ? Wildflower Creek Major Change to a PUD located at North side of 52nd Street across from Bailey?s Grove Drive with the noted corrections.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent ?
E. Approval of the Agenda
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck changed Other Business so that Section 34 Planning would be in Conference room #119 and treated as item number 4.
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Secretary Winczewski, to approve the agenda for the September 26, 2006 meeting as modified.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
F. Acknowledge visitors wishing to speak to non-agenda items.
There was no public comment.
G. Old Business
Case #24-06 - CBS Partners Site Plan Review located at 2300 44th Street SE ? requested by applicant to be tabled to the October 10, 2006 meeting
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Artz, to adjourn the public hearing to the October 10, 2006 meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0)-
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
Case #25-06 ? T-Mobile Special Land Use and Site Plan Review located at 5592 S. ?Division ? requested by applicant to be tabled to the October 24, 2006 meeting.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Artz, to adjourn the public hearing to the October 24, 2006 meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent
Case #27-06 - Camp Bow Wow Special Land Use and Site Plan Review located at 4150 40th Street SE
Planner Golder introduced the request. She stated that at the initial Public Hearing, there were concerns from the adjacent property owner about the amount of noise he would hear. She stated that the applicant has made changes to the plan to make the adjacent owner more comfortable. The applicant has flipped the building to reduce noise. The outdoor play area is 100 feet from the common property line. Planner Golder stated that the applicant hired a sound engineer who took audio data from both the proposed site and the Troy site of an existing Camp Bow Wow. The sound engineer made recommendations as to how the sound could be mitigated. Planner Golder stated that the applicant has decided to place two berms on the site and that there would be a fence and landscaping on top of the berms. Planner Golder stated that the applicants have changed the type of door they had. They now have a dutch style door so that the top can be open and the bottom closed and vice versa. They are reducing the amount of noise that can get out through an open door. They contacted several other tenants that are near other existing Camp Bow Wow properties and obtained written statements that they do not have any issues with the noise coming from the dogs. Planner Golder stated that in her Special Land Use recommendation the 3rd condition should be a basis. Staff is recommending approval on conditions 1-2 and basis points 1-4 of the Special Land Use and Conditions 1-3 and basis point 1-2 of the Site Plan Review.
Don Degroot with Excel Engineering provided more specific detail to what was done to the Site Plan and the measures used to mitigate the sound impact to the property owner to the east. Mr. Degroot stated that a berm is to be constructed along the easterly side of the site and the berm will be a minimum of four foot in height and there will be landscaping provided on each side of that berm. He stated that on the top of that berm would be a solid eight-foot high fence. In addition, a berm adjacent to the dog recreation area will be installed similar to the one to the east. He stated that along the entire perimeter of the recreation area would also be a solid 8 ft high fence. The dog recreation area will be 100 ft from the property line a total of 134 feet from the adjacent building. He stated that the doggie day care building was originally on the easterly side of the side. It has now been turned around so that parking is on the east and the building was moved as far to the west as possible.
Craig Baker with First Companies added that one thing to note is the elevation of Mr. Young?s building. He stated that it is 4 feet below the floor elevation of Camp Bow Wow. Mr. Baker stated that the glass on Mr. Young?s west side of the building begins at 3 feet above ground. Mr. Baker stated that since Camp Bow Wow is at a higher elevation, noise will be further reduced.
Kendrick VanWhite, President of Acoustics by Design, Professional Engineer in the State of Michigan, stated that they were retained by the applicant to take noise measurements of the site. Mr. VanWhite stated that he found audible measurements to be 63-66 dBa. He stated that they also did a review with the City of Kentwood?s noise ordinance and they did not find anything that had quantitative noise limits. He stated that they visited another facility in Troy and made measurements at approximately 100 feet from that facility with dogs outside barking. He stated that they found the noise levels there to be 59 to 60 dBa, less than the background level that is at the proposed site. He stated that with the background noise level 63-66 dBa, they are confident that it is in compliance with any noise ordinance. He stated that they have made sure that the noise level is mitigated and they are confident that it will mitigate the noise levels an additional 5 dba, which will be even less than the 59 dBa they measured at the Troy facility.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened up the public hearing.
Andy Young, from Bass and Associates located at 4180 40th the adjacent property owner was present. He stated that Mr. Baker and Mr. and Mrs. Haynes have worked very hard with him on the project. He stated that he went to Troy and visited that location. He stated that he told Cindi Haynes that he thinks it is unfair to compare that location to this one. He stated that it is an older area and the buildings are very close on one side and they won?t be anywhere near that close and it is tough to evaluate that situation. He stated that he is happy with what they have done to try to mitigate the noise. He stated that his only issue is that if he can hear the dogs when he is inside his building. He stated that Craig Baker has assured him that he will not hear the dogs in his building. He stated he is willing to move forward with them, but he has also been assured that he will not hear the dogs in his building.
Karen Hazel, 2047 Wolfboro, Kentwood, stated that she is familiar with Camp Bow Wow and thinks this is great location. She stated that she encourages the commission to approve Camp Bow Wow for this area.
Mike Etherton, 3594 Runningbrook SE, Kentwood. He stated that he is in support of Camp Bow Wow and he thinks the community needs this facility.
Debbie Murphy, 5455 Bonnie, Kentwood, stated that she is in support of the project and thinks it is a fabulous place.
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Artz to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (7-0)-
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent ?
Commissioner Holtrop, Commissioner Sheldon, Commissioner Artz and Vice-Chair Swanson stated that the applicants have done a good job and they are in support of the project.
Secretary Winczewski?s concern was whether or not it would be prudent to add a condition to say that the use shall be consistent with the franchise agreement and rules of the Camp Bow Wow franchise. Attorney Sluggett stated that he thinks that?s fine but he isn?t sure that all the commissioners have looked at all the provisions to the extent they feel is necessary as part of the Special Land Use approval. Attorney Sluggett thinks it is a legitimate condition. Secretary Winczewski stated that he would like to see this as a condition. Attorney Sluggett stated if the condition were imposed another operator could come in and they would not have to be a Camp Bow Wow, but they would have to follow the same rules.
Vice-Chair Swanson asked if that is covered under the discussion at the work session and public hearings. Attorney Sluggett stated that it would be a basis. Attorney Sluggett stated that if you want to add it as a condition he would not reference the discussions that occurred. Attorney Sluggett stated that it would be desirable to reference a specific document or plan something along the lines where specific operational conditions are called out.
Secretary Winczewski asked if the applicant would be willing to submit a franchise agreement to the City. Cindi Haynes stated that they would.
Commissioner Poyner stated that he likes the extra effort that they put in, but his concern was assurance Mr. Young got from the applicants that he won?t hear the dogs. He was curious as to how they can provide the assurance that there will not be any noise. Mr. Craig Baker stated that the decibel levels were reviewed with Mr. Young as it relates to the source, the fences, and the berms as it hits the building. Mr. Baker stated that they looked at the building material and finish on the inside of the office and based on the information Mr. VanWhite explained that the decibel level as it hits the building as a certain point. By the time the noise enters the building it will be at or below the ambient level in an office. Mr. Baker stated that he told Mr. Young that they couldn?t give a guarantee. Mr. Baker stated that if you have normal office noise in your office you are not going to hear the dogs. Commissioner Poyner stated that the answer is adequate and he is in support of the project.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated that she is glad that they were able to work the noise issue with the adjacent property owner. She stated that her concern is on the Site Plan Review. She feels that part of a condition should be to replace the landscaping if dies and that the fence should be kept in good condition.
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Holtrop, to grant conditional approval of the Special Land Use kennel as described in case No. 27-06 in Planner Golder?s memo dated 9-21-06. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-2 and Basis points 1-4 condition 3 shall include the conditions of the Camp Bow Wow franchise agreement and basis point 4 the Special Land Use kennel otherwise meets the requirements of Section 15.02 and 15.04 R of the Zoning Ordinance.
- Motion carried (7-0)-
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent-
Motion by Vice-Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Artz, to grant conditional approval to the Site Plan in Case #27-06 in Planner Golders?s memo dated 9-21-06. Approval is conditioned on the following conditions 1-3 and basis point 1-2 and adding a condition 4 requiring the landscaping and fence to be maintained and kept up to an appropriate level.
- Motion Carried (7-0)-
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
H. Public Hearing
There were no Public Hearings.
I. Work Session
There were no Work Sessions.
J. New Business
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner Poyner, to set public hearing date of October 24, 2006 for: Case #28- 06 ? Puddingstone Plaza ? rezoning of .651 acres (28,350 sq ft) from C-4 Office to C-2 Community Commercial located at 1996 -44th Street ; Case #29-06 ? Petsmart Petshotel ? Special Land Use and Site Plan Review located at 3950 28th Street
- Motion Carried (7-0)-
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
K. Other Business
1. Developer Feedback
Director Schweitzer discussed the Feedback on the proposed Escrow Fee and Citizen Participation /Outreach Zoning Ordinance Requirements. Director Schweitzer stated that when this was last bought up at a work session commissioners wanted developer feedback. Director Schweitzer stated that with regards to the Escrow fee the developers have had enough experience in the Greater Grand Rapids Area where developers have been acquainted with this. He gathered from their comments that they were concerned and did not want to have it set up as a blank check where the City would be spending their money without any control on their part. Director Schweitzer stated that he believes that if it is properly administered that should not be a concern. He stated that by modifying the manner in which it is provided in the ordinance that we can provide a greater level of assurance that there will be some internal controls to address. Regarding the Citizen participation Outreach Requirements, Director Schweitzer stated that the developers that are more experienced with making contact with applicants in advance with the project didn?t seem as concerned with it. Director Schweitzer stated that his impression was that he we didn?t need to legislate when and whether the developer meets with the neighbors.
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that he thinks developers are worrying about the blank check and he thinks it is a good way to go and he thinks it will save the developers money although they may not believe that. Vice-Chair Swanson stated that he doesn?t have a problem with escrow fees.
Secretary Winczewski stated that he agrees and he doesn?t think they need to be concerned that we will take a blank check and go get traffic or a wetland studies when they aren?t warranted.
All commissioners agreed
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck asked staff to work with the City Attorney and try to come up with something and then they will take another look at that.
With Regards to the Citizen Participation, Secretary Winczewski stated that he thinks that there should be required Citizen Participation before the public hearing and if we decide not to pursue that then he would hope that the Planning Commission would be much more decisive in its views if they hear something they don?t like in a public hearing. If something were heard in a public hearing that the commission doesn?t like then he would suggest tabling it and doing further research. He stated that he would like to see before they come to a public hearing that both sides have already talked.
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that he thinks we are doing it right now and to continue what we are doing. He stated that he thinks it is important that staff advise applicants of the value of meeting with neighbors ahead of time.
Commissioner Sheldon stated that she doesn?t think that it is something necessary at this time. She thinks that based on the feedback from the developers that if you are a good developer then you are doing your job. She thinks that over the past few weeks the commission has seen some good work as far as communication between the developers and neighbors and she doesn?t think a new ordinance requirement is necessary.
Director Schweitzer stated that the City of Auburn Hill has a process established and they have provided us with examples of documentation that they look for to provide evidence that the applicant has attempted to meet with the neighbors. He stated that administratively their staff is looking for some type of document of evidence before it is set for the public hearing.
Discussion Ensued amongst staff and commissioners.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated that she thinks we do a good job now between Luz Committee and staff. She stated that it sounds like most of the commissioners are not in favor of the Citizen Participation requirement at this time and she is willing to abide by that. If commissioners feel that we are seeing problems they need to step up and table action and get it talked out.
Planner Golder stated that she wouldn?t want a developer to go too the people to early because staff can work out a lot before then to work out the problems. She stated that it helps to diffuse things if they get the information beforehand.
Commissioner Poyner stated that if the neighbors can?t see the entire project laid out they might draw conclusions early and slow down the process. He liked giving the applicant an opportunity to lay it out work with staff and staff would have an idea of what the issues would be with the neighbors and then present.
Planner Golder stated that she was not concerned with slowing it down but there are timelines that need to be stuck with. She stated that if they see it after they revise it and to get it to how staff likes it they are more comfortable with it.
The commission decided not to pursue a citizen participation requirement at this time.
2. Commissioners Comments
Commissioners had no comments
3. Staff?s Comments
Staff had no comments
4. Section 34 Planning
A workshop was conducted involving the planning commission, staff and two citizens.
L. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Vice-Chair Swanson, to adjourn the meeting.
- Motion Carried (7-0) ?
- Commissioner Itani and Commissioner VanderHoff absent -
Meeting adjourned at 10:00pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Chris Winczewski, Secretary
|