on May 4, 2011 at 5:54am.
Planning Commission Meeting on August 13, 2007
CALL TO ORDER:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
DISCUSSION: of Agenda items of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission
DISCUSSION: of general items
ADJOURNMENT:
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
CALL TO THE PUBLIC: (Note: The Board reserves the right to not begin new business after 10:00 p.m.)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of site plan application, impact assessment and site plan for a proposed 18,510 sq. ft. retail and office
building located at 5970 E. Grand River, Sec. 10, petitioned by Jasmar LLC. (07-17)
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding impact assessment.
B. Disposition regarding site plan.
Administrative Business:
Planners report presented by LSL Planners
Approval of July 9th, 2007 Planning Commission meeting minutes
Member Discussion
Adjournment
DISCUSSION: of general items
ADJOURNMENT: The work session of the Genoa Township Planning Commission was adjourned to 7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and a moment of silence was observed.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Upon motion of Barbara Figurski and support by James Mortensen, the agenda is approved as submitted. Motion carried
unanimously.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC: (Note: The Board reserves the right to not begin new business after 10:00 p.m.)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of site plan application, impact assessment and site plan for a proposed 18,510 sq. ft. retail and office building located
at 5970 E. Grand River, Sec. 10, petitioned by Jasmar LLC. (07-17)
James Barnwell of Desine Engineering and William Colley, architect address the Planning Commission on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Barnwell provides an overview of the proposed
plan. They are not opposed to a floating easement.
The bank's access from the corner is roughly 160 feet from the centerline.
There are 80 parking spaces. If a cut-thru is placed on the property, some of these will be eliminated.
The Drain Commission will accept some run-off from the property in the event of a one hundred year storm, but would like to see a detention pond on the property. The piping will
be above ground rather than under ground at the request of the Drain Commission. Overflow would run to the front of the property, not the rear - and therefore, it will go into the catch
basin.
Tesha Humphriss advises that this system should not bear the stringent requirements that the ordinance provides for. Any motion should provide for some sort of oversight for the
maintenance of the detention system.
Petitioner has worked with Spirit to obtain a reasonable agreement for an easement.
The issue of lights is addressed. Applicant will put in whatever lights requested by the Planning Commission within reason.
James Mortensen asks Tesha Humphriss about the traffic risks. Tesha Humphriss explains the various approaches to that problem that were discussed. Tesha Humphriss indicates that
the future re-development would call for access to be further back on both sites.
Mr. Colley suggests that the conflict with Spirit Auto be settled by granting a 2nd floating easement on the west side of the property to provide for reconfiguring if
the property redevelops. He believes Spirit Auto is complaining for its own reasons and that the heavy traffic times are different than what is expected from the development.
Tesha Humphriss expresses concerns about the existing layout with existing traffic.
An artist's rendering of the building design was presented by Mr. Colley. He also presents samples of the proposed building supplies. Jeff Purdy
indicates that this meets with his approval. As for the delineation band above the canopies, the architect suggests using a contrasting brick. He believes it looks nicer. He
proposes that signage be letter and not plastic square signs.
The materials will be split brick and red block.
The petitioner discusses placing signage at the back end of the building. Jeff Purdy suggests that perhaps all signs could be used
on the rear of the building pursuant to the ordinance. This must be approved by the Planning Commission, but these would be restricted to 50 sq ft. All commissioners, except Commissioner Grajek,
believe that a variety in the signs is fine.
Chairman Pobuda asks if the windows on the second floor could be designed differently so it doesn't look like a warehouse. He asks if it is possible to add a small deck type
façade. Jeff Purdy suggests that this isn't a residential area, so it wouldn't really apply. Mr. Colley indicates there is a lot of brick detail in
the existing plan around the windows. Jeff Purdy thinks the windows have the vertical proportion that the Township is looking for and is well
represented.
Mr. Colley suggests that attempting to replicate a historic downtown area, such as Howell, would be a mistake and he believes this building is superior to that. Dean Tengle
indicates that he doesn't believe that this building is suitable to the Town Center vision. If there is a superficial way
to create offsets to give it depth, he thinks this would be what he wants to see. Mr. Colley indicates that to attempt this with materials would be a mistake. He thinks that to create it by
building separate yet connected buildings would take away from the tenant's flexibility in the rental of space.
Dean asks about the sidewalks. Petitioner wants to pave to the curb, but the Road Commission wants the paving pulled back five to seven feet.
Barbara Figurski believes it's a nice building, but doesn't believe it is what is envisioned for the Town Center
development.
Teri Olson likes the building.
Chris Grajek indicates that the artists rendering doesn't reflect enough detail. He'd like to see more detail around the top. Dean Tengle thinks it's a beautiful building, but he
doesn't want it to look like one big building.
Jeff Purdy indicates perhaps a brick pier could break the building visually. Petitioner is willing to do something like that. Chairman Pobuda understands
the concept, but would like to see it broken up, as well.
Petitioner indicates this building is only 100 feet long, and the Planning Commission needs to remember how that will look in conjunction with the other buildings. James
Mortensen has no problem approving this building, but wouldn't approve all of the buildings to look like this.
Kelly VanMarter shows some slides of downtown developments that reflect a delineation caused by cornice designs.
The Planning Commission is satisfied with the parking spaces. The floating easement was discussed by Jeff Purdy on the east.
Tesha Humphriss refers to the August 8th letter. The two things that are missing is sediment forebay and soil borings. Petitioner is proposing a sediment collection
system. So long as overflow can be met and the soil borings are received, she would be open to reviewing the details. Petitioner will supply those. The remaining items are that the Road
Commission requirements will be causing modifications. The petitioner is requiring 1 on 3 grading, which exceeds the ordinance. 1 on 4 grading could be accommodated if the petitioner eliminates a
row of parking. Petitioner indicates that this causes a predicament. Petitioner is willing to provide a decorative fence. The Planning Commission would prefer no fence. Petitioner will
investigate the possibility.
Tesha Humphriss would like to see petitioner revise the way the striping is shown.
Chairman Pobuda encourages petitioner to work with Tesha Humphriss on the items listed.
The landscaping meets requirements.
The Fire Department made many recommendations in their August 6th letter. Petitioner will address these.
Jeff Purdy indicates the dumpster's placement and surrounding meets with his approval.
Deliveries would be through deliver trucks, rather than semi trucks.
B. Disposition regarding site plan.
Administrative Business:
Member Discussion
Adjournment at 8:38 p.m.