Printed from http://www.genoa.org/meetings/boardminute/1431
on May 4, 2011 at 5:22am.

Planning Commission Meeting on March 8, 1999

Agenda:

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of a Special Use application, Site plan application, impact assessment and corresponding site plan for a proposed Discount Tire Store; located on a vacant parcel at the SW corner of Grand Oaks Drive and Grand River Avenue; Discount Tire. (Tabled from February 8, 1999 meeting)

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #2… Review of Site plan application, impact assessment, and corresponding site plan for a proposed 3,000 sq. ft. First National Bank building; located on 2.6 acres at Grand River East of Latson Road; 1^st National Bank/Boss Engineering.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 3…Preliminary review of Home Depot building elevations.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 4…Special Use application and impact assessment for special use approval for a proposed new facility for Zimmerman Masonry, petitioned by Brivar Construction Company, located off Dorr Road in Section 15:Brivar Construction.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 5…Review of Site plan application, impact assessment, special use application and corresponding site plan for a proposed car wash and oil change on the NE side of Grand River, North of 7885 West Grand River, petitioned by Gerald Waldecker.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 6…Review of site plan application and corresponding site plan for Lynch Carpets proposed storage building, located at 5205 East Grand River, Section 10: Lynch Carpets/Desine.

Minutes:

The following commission members were present constituting a quorum for transaction of business: Don Pobuda, Barbara Figurski, Jim Mortensen, Gary McCririe, Jerry Joseph and Bill Litogot. Also present was Michael Archinal, Township Manager; Jeff Purdy and Caryn Champine from The Strader Group; and Melissa Talley from McNamee, Porter, & Seeley. There were several persons in the audience.

The regular session of the Planning Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Pobuda at 7:05 p.m. Moved by McCririe, supported by Joseph to approve the Agenda with item #3 being tabled. During discussion, the Commissioners voiced their concern with the incompleteness and tardiness of materials regarding agenda item #6 (Lynch Carpets). Township staff and the Commissioners did not have an opportunity to review the materials before the meeting. They did not feel comfortable making any decisions or recommendations to the ZBA regarding this petitioner. Commissioner Figurski noted that the property had not been staked properly for the ZBA meeting, as well. With that, Commissioner McCririe amended his motion: Moved by McCririe, supported by Joseph to approve the Agenda with items #3 and #6 being tabled. Motion unanimously carried.

A call to the public was made to discuss items not on the agenda with no response. (The Board will not begin any new business after 10:00 p.m.)

1) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #1..REVIEW OF A SPECIAL USE APPLICATION,

SITE PLAN APPLICATION, IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CORRESPOND-

ING SITE PLAN FOR A PROPOSED DISCOUNT TIRE STORE; LOCATED

ON A VACANT PARCEL AT THE SW CORNER OF GRAND OAKS DRIVE

AND GRAND RIVER AVENUE; DISCOUNT TIRE. (Tabled from the

February 8, 1999 meeting.)

A. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SPECIAL USE APPLICATION.

B. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING IMPACT ASSESSMENT.

C. DISPOSITION OF SITE PLAN.

Mr. Rich Summons, the Project Manager for Discount Tire, stated the building had been turned so that the garage doors do not face Grand River, per the request of the Commissioners at an earlier meeting. Also, there is additional landscaping.

Mr. Jeff Purdy suggested adding three 6' tall evergreen trees to break up the blank wall of the building. The petitioner agreed to do this. Also, Mr. Purdy noted that appropriate access agreements and easements are needed.

Mr. Mike Dyer, the architect, stated the location of the drive had been moved further to the south, thus the detention basin was moved to the south off-site. This will require an easement. He added that Mr. Weiss had verbally agreed to grant one.

Ms. Melissa Talley noted the concrete pads for the base need to be 6". The petitioner agreed to this.

Commissioner Figurski noted that the top sheet of the plan needed an architectural seal and signature. Also, dimensions noted on page 6 of 6 do not agree with those noted on page 2 of 6. Which ones are correct? (Answer: page 2 of 6 is correct.) And, for the signage, page 4 of 6, the note should read "See sheet 2" not "See sheet 1".

Commissioner Litigot asked about the sign detail. The sign location is shown, but there is no detail. He noted it should be ground mounted and not bermed, and should match the materials of the building. The petitioner agreed to add sign detail to the plans. Commissioner Litogot also asked if the detention pond was fenced? (Answer: No.)

The building materials were reviewed.

Vice Chairman Pobuda made a call to the public at 7:25 p.m. with no response.

Commissioner McCririe asked how the used tire products will be disposed?

Mr. Dyer answered a totally enclosed building, just off the main building, will be used to house the tires. He will have a company come in weekly to take the tires away.

The Commissioners agreed the petitioner needed to obtain a letter from the Howell Fire Marshall noting that they are aware of the storage of tires on this site.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Joseph to recommend to the Township Board approval of the special use for Discount Tire with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment as presented.

2. Petitioner shall keep all used tire products in a locked building and have them removed by an approved hauler.

Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by Mortensen, supported by Figurski to recommend to the Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment for Discount Tire, dated 12/2/98, with the revision

of page 3, as supplied for the March 8, 1999 Planning Commission meeting. Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Mortensen to approve the site plan for Discount Tire Store with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the special use permit and Impact Assessment as modified.

2. Township engineer review and approval of all plans and specifications.

3. Petitioner shall provide a 66' wide easement, satisfactory to the township attorney in recordable form, for off-site drainage and road improvements.

4. All roof-top equipment shall be screened as to not be visible from adjacent properties.

5. Petitioner shall provide three additional 6' tall evergreen trees, placed in the front elevation of the property satisfactory to the township planners and depicted on the site plan prior to submission to the Township Board.

6. All plans are to be signed and sealed by a registered architect.

7. Page 6 of 6 is to be changed to match the dimensions contained on page 2 of 6.

8. The monument sign shall be constructed in the same materials as the building and placed on an elevation not exceeding the height of the curb of Grand River, and adhere to township zoning ordinances. Detail shall be provided on the plans prior to submission to the Township Board.

9. Petitioner shall provide a letter from the Howell Fire Marshall approving the plan and noting that used tires are to be stored on the site.

Motion unanimously carried.

2) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #2...REVIEW OF A SITE PLAN APPLICATION, IMPACT ASSESSMENT, AND CORRESPONDING SITE PLAN FOR A

PROPOSED 3,000 SQ. FT. FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING;

LOCATED ON 2.6 ACRES AT GRAND RIVER EAST OF LATSON

ROAD; FIRST NATIONAL BANK/BOSS ENGINEERING.

A. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING IMPACT ASSESSMENT.

B. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SITE PLAN.

Mr. Chris Lyngso from Boss Engineering stated the plan had been tabled at a previous meeting because of concerns with traffic circulation, landscaping and screening issues, and the number of drive-throughs. He noted the site is 2.13 acres now and the access drive was moved to allow for possible alignment to the future service drive to the north. There is a provision for another in/out to the future service drive at the northwest corner. The southeast access is out only. Mr. Lyngso stated the shared access drive is tapered from 31' to 39'. Striping will be provided to channel the traffic at the intersection.

Mr. Lyngso noted a letter from Ms. Birgit Lorentzen, dated March 4, 1999, regarding the completion of the road system and public utilities by purchasers who acquire the remaining property. In this regard, the 8' bike path will be constructed to the Detroit Edison corridor at the elevation of the bank. The north side will be constructed by the purchaser(s) of that parcel. The bank will be connecting the water main from Sears across the Detroit Edison corridor with an easement. The large detention area will be constructed by the next developer who will be using that detention area. The bank will build a private detention basin in the northwest corner of the site with a 6 to 1 side slope. The fourth "drive-through" lane (for the ATM) is on the agenda for the next ZBA meeting. More shrubs and shade trees have been added to screen parking and along the service drive, as well as around the detention basin. Two clusters of three trees each have been added to the southeast and southwest of the Grand River frontage. A rolling cart will be used for non-confidential waste. The bank has approached Detroit Edison for some tree clearing for site lines.

Ms. Janice Barnes from Ann Arbor Architects Collaborative presented and reviewed the building elevations and materials. The building will have a standard shingle roof, brick with a stone base, or maybe a split-faced block base. It will have accent bands, a dormer and glazed windows. A wall-mounted sign will be at the entrance elevation, but it hasn't been designed as of yet. The location of the ground sign is shown on page 4 of the site plan, but it has not been designed yet. She noted it would match the building materials.

The Commissioners noted the wall sign must have channel lettering and the ground sign can only be 60 square feet in area and must be internally lit per the PUD agreement.

Mr. Purdy noted that as these sites have been developed, a continuation of the bike path along Grand River has been required. He advised that the petitioner be required to continue the bike path to where Art Van's stops. He noted that the applicant is constructing a water main across the easement. He felt that the same situation applies to the bike paths along the frontage.

Mr. Lyngso stated it is somewhat impractical because of the embankment. The path would be 5 or 6' below Grand River. He proposed the bike path and pedestrian traffic be kept to the north only in this area, not along Grand River.

The Commissioners voiced their disagreement with the petitioner on this matter. Commissioner Litogot stated he felt there wasn't an option on the bike path. It has been required by applicants in the past.

Mr. Purdy stated that if there is a depression in that area, perhaps a boardwalk could be used, or fill could be provided to accommodate the bike path.

Commissioner McCririe stated he is very reluctant to start changing the agreements the township has with other developments in this area. He stated the petitioner and Ms. Lorentzen need to negotiate this. He felt the implication in Ms. Lorentzen's letter of March 4, 1999, that the township should construct the bike path across the Detroit Edison corridor using general funds was "ludicrous". Section 6.4 of the PUD Agreement sets out the terms on this matter. Perhaps there is a failure to communicate. He stated he didn't care how it gets done, but it needs to get done with this development.

Mr. Purdy also noted that the applicant would need to come back for site plan amendment approval for the lighting detail, as none has been provided.

Vice Chairman Pobuda asked why the ATM was not put somewhere else on the site?

Mr. Thomas Janego, Sr. V. P. of First National Bank, stated there are safety and security reasons for not having ATM's inside the building. The customer just drives up and feels more secure not having to get out of his/her car and walk in.

Commissioner McCririe stated he felt the site was large enough to accommodate the fourth drive-through for the ATM. There are appropriate stacking spaces, and the applicant has reconfigured the site to accommodate our previous requests. The other Commissioners agreed, except for Vice Chairman Pobuda, who wasn't quite sure.

Mr. Purdy suggested moving one of the trees out of the cluster of trees located on the southwest of the site and put that tree by the ground-mounted sign. This will provide better foliage along Grand River. The petitioner agreed. Mr. Purdy noted that, with the discussion tonight, the requirements in The Strader Group letter of February 16, 1999 have been addressed.

Ms. Talley noted that most of the critical issues in the McNamee, Porter & Seeley letter of February 17, 1999 have been addressed. The taper of the shared access drive needs to be looked at. Verification from MDOT will be needed. Sheets #2 and 3 show the south exit as right-turn only; these arrows should be eliminated from the plans.

Commissioner McCririe asked the petitioner if he was aware of the REU costs? (Answer: "Yes.")

Commissioner Litogot noted to the petitioner that if they ever come back for an expansion of the bank, they will be required to show additional parking spaces.

Commissioner McCririe complimented the petitioner on the development. He felt it would be a nice addition to Genoa Township.

Commissioner Joseph stated he was a little uncomfortable with approving the site plan without the lighting detail.

Mr. Purdy stated a site plan amendment could be submitted at a later date for the lighting. Site lighting is not required; however, with the nature of the petitioner's business (banking) lighting will obviously be installed.

Commissioner McCririe felt there would not be a problem with stipulating the lighting conditions in the motion.

Commissioner Mortensen stated he was a little nervous about having the last developer who buys this property having to put in so much infrastructure. Will it ever get done?

Commissioner McCririe noted that when the PUD area is done, these improvements will be in. The PUD Agreement stipulates this. They will be negotiated between Ms. Lorentzen and the purchasers.

Vice Chairman Pobuda made a call to the public at 8:45 p.m. with no response.

Moved by Mortensen, supported by Figurski to recommend to the Township Board the approval of the Impact Assessment for First National Bank as revised on 2/2/99 with the following conditions:

1. The document is to be reviewed and approved by the township attorney.

2. The first sentence of paragraph E on page 4 shall be modified to change the period to a comma and add "which at some future date may be proposed to the township but is not part of this project."

3. The last sentence of the first paragraph of paragraph F on page 5 will be revised to read: "Tentative hours of operation are 8:00 a.m. through 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. through 12:00 noon on Saturday, with 24-hour access to the ATM everyday of the year."

Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Joseph to approve the site plan for First National Bank, dated 2/3/99 revised 3/4/99, within the Lorentzen PUD with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment as modified.

2. Township engineer review and approval of all plans and specifications.

3. Bikepaths and ornamental lighting in the Detroit Edison easement area fronting Grand River shall be provided and installed as a specific condition of this site plan approval.

4. All site lighting is specifically excluded from approval and shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a later meeting.

5. Petitioner shall move one canopy tree from the southwest corner of the site and center it on the Grand River frontage of the site satisfactory to the township planner.

6. Petitioner shall provide a shared access agreement in recordable form satisfactory to the township attorney.

7. The taper on the south drive off the access driveway shall be redesigned satisfactory to the township engineer.

8. The right arrow on the south drive shall be removed from all plans.

9. Petitioner acknowledges the REU calculations for this district at $3,000.00 per REU for water plus $1,300.00 per acre, and the sewer REU is calculated at $3,100.00.

10. All signage shall specifically conform to the provisions in the PUD Agreement under section 7.2 and approved by the Township Manager.

Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by Mortensen, supported by Litogot to recommend to the ZBA that approval be granted to add a fourth lane for ATM use at First National Bank. Motion unanimously carried.

The meeting was recessed at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m.

3) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #3...SPECIAL USE APPLICATION AND

IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR SPECIAL USE APPROVAL FOR A

PROPOSED NEW FACILITY FOR ZIMMERMAN MASONRY,

PETITIONED BY BRIVAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, LOCATED

OFF DORR ROAD IN SECTION 15: BRIVAR CONSTRUCTION.

A. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SPECIAL USE.

B. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING IMPACT ASSESSMENT.

C. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SITE PLAN.

Mr. Steve Varilone of Brivar Construction introduced Dan and Beth Zimmerman who wish to relocate their masonry business. A 12,340 square foot building is proposed. It will be two levels. The architecture features a high-end facade consisting of brick office and decorative split-face masonry warehouse. The proposed outdoor storage is screened by a combination of wood fencing, masonry wall with wood gate and evergreen plantings. He stated changes have been made to the plans per the review letters of the township staff, but there are still a few items that need to be worked out.

Commissioner Mortensen asked if the overhead doors on the north side are visible from Dorr Road?

Mr. Varilone answered "No" they are 600 feet from Door Road and an 8' wood fence is on the east.

Ms. Caryn Champine from The Strader Group reviewed the remaining issues per the updated site plan dated 3/4/99. She stated the outdoor storage area should be paved, but the Planning Commission has the discretion to allow gravel. She was concerned with fluids from the vehicles leaking into the ground.

Mr. Varilone stated they strongly prefer the limestone gravel. Obviously, there are financial considerations. But, functionally, there is no intent to have long-term storage in the area. The equipment is mostly off-site, with it only being on-site occasionally. Maintenance of the vehicles will be done inside the building. They are concerned with tearing up asphalt when loading and unloading large pallets of masonry block. The sudden impact of the block being dropped on the ground will quickly deteriorate the asphalt. Also, any minor leaking onto an impervious surface will be more readily washed off into the water system. He also noted there is a precedent in the area for gravel storage areas.

Ms. Talley voiced her concern with a gravel area because the catch basin could clog with stones. Also, the pavement should have an increased thickness which would accommodate the vehicles, too.

Mr. Varilone stated the masonry business is for large commercial and industrial projects. Materials are delivered right to the site. Only "left-over" material is staged on site prior to its return to the supplier or to another job site. He reiterated that all repair and maintenance of vehicles will be done inside, and the pavement thickness is more than adequate for the vehicle use.

Commissioner Litogot noted that the Planning Commission has granted petitioners in the past to not have paved storage areas (i.e., Culver Construction, Smead & Sons). He didn't believe a paved storage area was necessary.

Commissioner Joseph stated he knew there have been others who were allowed gravel storage areas, but both consultants have concerns with the gravel.

Mr. Zimmerman noted that there were only two, 1-ton state trucks in use.

Commissioner Figurski voiced her concern with dust control. She asked how often do the vehicles go in and out?

Mr. Zimmerman answered the vehicles go in and out about twice a day.

Vice Chairman Pobuda stated he would like to see it paved.

Commissioner McCririe stated that given the scope of the business, he was not opposed to the gravel storage area. This is an industrial use in an industrial area. He felt the request was not unreasonable. But he wanted proper dust control measures to be taken. He also noted that point 16 on page 1 of the site plan regarding roof-top equipment should include language that it will not be visible from adjacent properties.

Ms. Champine stated the other major issue was the 8' screening fence along the storage area. The fence should be on the west side, too.

Mr. Varilone stated there is already a heavy tree line on that side and there will be no storage there.

The Commissioners agreed with Ms. Champine that the fence should be on all four sides of the storage area.

Ms. Talley stated that the pavement thickness is adequate now that she knows the types of vehicles that will be in use. But she still was concerned with the catch basin and gravel area. Some type of maintenance should be set in place.

Mr. Varilone suggested a concrete apron and an adequate sump. The Commissioners agreed with this.

Ms. Talley recommended the petitioner collect the storm water with storm sewer and direct it to the existing detention basin located on lot #6 (item #4 in her letter of 2/17/99). Mr. Varilone agreed to this.

The Commissioners discussed the 10-foot public utility easement along the roadway for possible future utility construction. Mr. Varilone stated they wish to defer this easement because of the location of the septic field. They are not opposed to the easement, but if an easement is shown on the plan, then the health department will require them to move the septic field. When the sewer and water comes in, they will abandon the septic. He stated Lorek Investments owns the property.

Mr. Archinal noted that it appears there is room within the access easement to accommodate the utilities in the future. The Commissioners agreed with this solution except for Commissioner Figurski.

Commissioner Figurski asked about the lighting.

Mr. Varilone stated lighting is proposed only on the building.

It was noted that they must be downward-directed shoebox fixtures. This detail must be provided before going to the Township Board.

Vice Chairman Pobuda made a call to the public at 9:40 p.m. with no response.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Litogot to recommend to the Township Board the issuance of a special use permit to Zimmerman Masonry with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment.

2. No repair or maintenance of vehicles shall occur outside of the building.

3. Normal dust control measures shall be performed to eliminate impact on adjacent properties.

Motion carried: 5 yes, 1 no with Figurski dissenting.

Moved by Litogot, supported by Joseph to recommend to the Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment, revised 3/4/99. During discussion, Ms. Champine noted that the petitioner had addressed the issues in item #15 of The Strader Group letter of 2/16/99 regarding the Impact Assessment. Motion carried: 5 yes, 1 no with Figurski dissenting.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Mortensen to recommend to the Township Board approval of the site plan, dated 3/4/99, for Zimmerman Masonry with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the special use permit as recommended.

2. Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment as revised.

3. Township engineer review and approval of all plans and specifications.

4. Petitioner shall revise page 1 of the site plan, General Notes #16, adding the words "and adjacent properties" and the end of the sentence.

5. Petitioner shall complete the 8' wood fence on the west side of the outdoor storage area.

6. Petitioner shall provide a concrete apron around the manhole in the storage area satisfactory to the township engineer.

7. Building materials and artist rendering are acceptable.

8. The storage yard shall be a gravel limestone surface.

9. Petitioner shall provide the additional landscaping cited in the February 16, 1999 letter from The Strader Group, specifically items #10, 11, and 12, satisfactory to the township planner and shall be depicted on the plans prior to submission to the Township Board.

Motion carried: 5 yes, 1 no with Figurski dissenting.

4) OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #4...REVIEW OF SITE PLAN APPLICATION,

IMPACT ASSESSMENT, SPECIAL USE APPLICATION AND

CORRESPONDING SITE PLAN FOR A PROPOSED CAR WASH AND

OIL CHANGE ON THE NE SIDE OF GRAND RIVER, NORTH OF

7885 WEST GRAND RIVER, PETITIONED BY GERALD WALDECKER.

A. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SPECIAL USE.

B. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING IMPACT ASSESSMENT.

C. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING SITE PLAN.

Mr. Jim Barnwell of Desine Engineering reviewed the site and the surrounding area. He noted that the owner of the abutting auto dealership, Mr. Gerry Waldecker, owns the subject property. A car wash, oil change business (three bays) and private office is proposed. There will be an entrance off of Grand River and one off Hacker Road. He stated that research shows that most of the traffic utilizing a development like this is from within a three mile radius. It will serve the general vicinity and will not generate lots of additional traffic. He noted that there was sufficient stacking for both the car wash and the oil change. They are asking to bank four parking spaces. Screening is provided in the northeast adjacent from the residential. They are proposing to split from the larger portion of the property. He reviewed the building elevations and materials.

Vice Chairman Pobuda asked if enough research had been done to affirm that such a business could work. Is there enough business in the community for this to work?

Mr. Gerry Waldecker stated he hired a consultant who worked on the feasibility study for 2 1/2 years. He paid a large amount of money for the study and it concludes that it will be successful.

Ms. Champine reviewed The Strader Group letter of 3/2/99. The petitioner agreed to items #3, 4, 5, 7 and 12. Item #6 (20' greenbelt in rear) was discussed. She stated this is not a setback requirement, but rather a landscape requirement and the Planning Commission can waive the requirement. The Commissioners agreed that the greenbelt as depicted on the plan was acceptable. They also agreed that the number of parking spaces was acceptable. Almost all the people using the site will not exit their cars. Parking is only needed for employees and any visitors to the private office. Mr. Waldecker stated no dumpster is proposed (item #9).

The Commissioners discussed the sidewalk (item #11). Mr. Barnwell stated the Waldecker dealership is another site and there are no sidewalks in that area at this time. They didn't believe they should be required to put in a sidewalk across the entire frontage of Mr. Waldecker's property.

Ms. Champine noted that this may be the only opportunity for sidewalks on these sites. The Commissioners agreed with the planner. They wanted to see a sidewalk across the entire parcel, including the dealership.

Mr. Waldecker stated that while he felt they have already "stepped up to the plate" on this development in its design, landscaping, etc., he would agree to putting in the sidewalks as requested.

The Commissioners thanked Mr. Waldecker for his commitment to the community.

Ms. Talley reviewed the McNamee, Porter & Seeley letter of March 5, 1999. She was concerned with the possibility of accidents at the southwest internal drive going in and out at Grand River (item #1).

Commissioner Figurski voiced her concern with an "awful lot crammed into one spot".

Commissioner Joseph stated that while he, too, felt it seemed a little tight, traffic on the site would be moving slowly. He didn't have a problem with it.

Commissioner Litogot suggested putting in some directional signs for the internal traffic.

Commissioner McCririe stated he thought the market would dictate some of these concerns. Although he, too, felt this was a pretty intensive use for the site.

After discussion, the petitioner agreed to put in directional signs.

Ms. Talley reviewed item #2 (prohibiting left-hand turns onto Grand River). Mr. Barnwell stated if everyone had to turn right, it would create more traffic congestion/problems on Bendix and at the Bendix/Hacker intersection.

The Commissioners agreed to allow left-turn movements onto Grand River.

Mr. Barnwell agreed with item #3 in the letter and stated they will add about 4' to the turning movement. He also agreed with items #6, 8, and 9.

Commissioner Figurski stated that she still hears complaints about the lighting at the dealership. She's very interested in the lighting on this site.

Mr. Waldecker stated more lighting detail will be forthcoming. They will have shoebox-type fixtures and the pole lighting shall be a maximum of 25'. Page DT1 of the plans will have to be changed. (It shows pole lighting at 30'.) It was noted there is a maximum of .1 foot candle at the property lines.

Commissioner Litogot asked about signage. He didn't want to see signs on the building, over the bays, itemizing the services/business.

Mr. Waldecker said there will only be one building sign and a monument sign. They will meet the ordinance.

Vice Chairman Pobuda voiced his concern with not having the sign detail. These are generally shown on the plan.

Mr. Archinal noted that signs are something he issues permits for on a regular basis. They are pretty straight forward.

Mr. Purdy noted that any motion made could include sign requirements. He noted only channel lettering is allowed.

Vice Chairman Pobuda made a call to the public at 10:50 p.m.

Ms. Renee Schmokal, 2717 Hacker, voiced her concern with the traffic on Hacker Road. She didn't see the need for an exit there. Also, it will cause additional traffic at the Bendix intersection. She believed that people travel more than three miles to use such services. It will increase traffic. She also voiced her concern with the noise.

Mr. Barnwell stated the site should not generate that much more traffic. It is more of a "drive-by" traffic. Also, the access to Hacker Road will help alleviate the traffic at the Bendix intersection. There is plenty of stacking on site to keep the traffic from congesting on the roads. Regarding noise, he noted that the car wash is located quite a distance from the residential area which is across Hacker Road. All the mechanisms for the car wash are internal. And the site is not conducive to high-speed traffic.

Commissioner Litogot noted that this is a commercial district. And, actually, something more noisy than a car wash could be put there.

Ms. Schmokal asked if some type of sound barrier couldn't be put up adjacent to the residential area. Also, she was concerned with the children and pets in the area with the increased traffic on Hacker. She felt a study needed to be done for traffic on Hacker Road.

Commissioner McCririe questioned how the site would change the traffic already on Hacker Road? He also stated that it was not the responsibility of the petitioner to provide a traffic study for traffic already on Hacker Road. No matter what the use might be on this parcel, it makes good common sense to have a second access on the site.

Vice Chairman Pobuda noted that in dealing with new developments on Grand River in the past, other accesses has been looked for to alleviate traffic on Grand River. This was done at the new Meijer store (i.e., Latson Road). Also, he noted that a car wash will not be going at maximum peak everyday.

With no other comments, the call to the public was closed at 11:04 p.m.

Commissioner McCririe asked about item #10 in The Strader Group letter (additional landscaping in front of overhead door). While he very much appreciated Mr. Waldecker's gesture on the sidewalk, he has always objected to garage doors facing Grand River, no matter what the project. He believed the plans could be adjusted to mitigate the problem.

Mr. Purdy noted that evergreens were required at the other car wash that was approved recently. He felt four evergreens would be needed. Having a combination of trees will provide some "filler" down low when the canopies eventually grow up.

Mr. Waldecker agreed to add the evergreen trees.

Moved by Joseph, supported by Litogot to recommend to the Township Board the approval of the special use permit for Classic Car Wash. Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by Joseph, supported by Litogot to recommend to the Township Board the approval of the Impact Assessment dated 2/4/99 for Classic Car Wash with the following changes:

1. Page 3, add "Hazardous materials will be handled in

accordance with the Pollution Incident Prevention Plan dated

1/28/99."

2. Page 5, letter K, eliminate the "wall-packs" wording and add "Exterior

site lighting shall be building-mounted and down-directed."

Motion unanimously carried.

Moved by McCririe, supported by Litogot to recommend to the Township Board the approval of the site plan for Classic Car Wash with the following conditions:

1. Township Board approval of the special use permit as requested.

2. Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment as modified.

3. Township engineer review and approval of all plans and specifications.

4. Petitioner shall add 14 canopy trees on the south property line satisfactory to the township planner and depicted on the plans prior to submission to the Township Board.

5. Petitioner shall provide a 5' sidewalk along the entire frontage of the site including the dealership property.

6. Landscaping on rear of site adjacent to the Edison substation is acceptable as depicted.

7. Four banked parking spaces as depicted are acceptable.

8. Building materials as presented are acceptable.

9. The canopy over the car wash exit is to be reduced at least by 4' to allow proper turning movements.

10. Site lighting of pole mounted lights shall be a maximum of 25' tall, maintaining a .1 foot candle at the property lines with a photometric plan submitted satisfactory to the township planner.

11. Any signs shall be limited to the area shown on the plan, shall have channel lettering and be satisfactory to the township planners and engineers.

12. Petitioner shall provide four additional evergreen trees on the Grand River frontage satisfactory to the township planner and depicted on the plans prior to submission to the Township Board.

13. Petitioner shall provide on-site directional and stop signs satisfactory to the township engineer.

Motion carried: 5 yes, 1 no with Figurski dissenting.

ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS

Mr. Purdy announced that there will be a joint meeting with the Township Board on Monday, March 29, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. to discuss ordinance amendments.

Moved by Litogot, supported by Figurski to approve the minutes of the February 22, 1999 meeting as written. Motion unanimously carried.

Commissioner McCririe wished to note for the record the "fine job that is being done on the minutes".

Mr. Archinal suggested that future site plans be forwarded to the fire marshall for review and input. The Commissioners agreed with this suggestion. Also, Mr. Archinal stated it appeared that a place for signage review needed to be added to the site plan application. The Commissioners agreed with this, too.

There will be a meeting on Monday, March 22, 1999 at 6:30 p.m.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:17 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Dia M. Moulton

Recording Secretary