|
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
APRIL 25, 2005
AGENDA
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of environmental impact
assessment, final PUD plan and final PUD agreement to construct a 14,
490 sq. ft. retail store located at 2321 E. Grand River, petitioned by
Walgreens. (05-18)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding
PUD agreement. (dated 4-6-05)
B. Recommendation regarding
final PUD plan. (dated 4-6-05)
C. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-6-05)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 2…Review of site plan and impact assessment
to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. private elementary school and daycare
located in Sec. 23 at the northeast corner of Bauer Road and Challis
Road, petitioned by Brighton Country Day Schoolhouse Facilities, LLC.
(05-08)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition.
A. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-5-05)
B. Disposition regarding site
plan. (dated 4-5-05)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #3…Review of sketch plan and impact
assessment to install paving located at 7281 W. Grand River, petitioned
by St. Joseph Mercy Health. (05-20)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-6-05)
B. Disposition regarding
sketch plan. (dated 4-7-05)
Administrative Business:
Planners
report presented by LSL Planners
Approval of
April 11, 2005 Planning Commission meeting minutes
Member
Discussion
MINUTES
The work session of the Planning Commission was
called to order by Chairman Don Pobuda at 6:30 p.m. The following
commission members were present constituting a quorum for transaction of
business: Don Pobuda, James Mortensen, Curt Brown, Teri Olson, Dean
Tengel, and Mark Snyder. Also present was Kelly Kolakowski, Township
Planner; Brian Borden from Langworthy, Strader, LeBlanc & Associates,
Inc. and Tesha Humphriss from Tetra Tech, MPS.
By the end of the work session, there were a few persons in the
audience.
Items scheduled for action during the regular session
of the commission were discussed.
The regular session of the Planning Commission was
called to order by Chairman Don Pobuda at 7:00 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and a moment of
silence was observed.
Moved by Mortensen, seconded by Olson, to approve
the Agenda as written.
The motion carried unanimously.
The call to the public was made to discuss items not
on the agenda. There was no response and the call to the public was
closed at 7:01 p.m. Chairman Pobuda noted that the Board will not begin
any new business after 10:00 p.m.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of environmental impact
assessment, final PUD plan and final PUD agreement to construct a 14,490
sq. ft. retail store located at 2321 E. Grand River, petitioned by
Walgreens. (05-18)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding
PUD agreement. (dated 4-6-05)
B. Recommendation regarding
final PUD plan. (dated 4-6-05)
C. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-6-05)
Mr. Mark Drane, of Rogvoy Architects was present to represent the
petitioner. They are planning a demolition and redevelopment of the site
on the corner of Grand River and Gold Club Road to build a 14,500 square
foot Walgreens drug store with a drive-thru pharmacy. They are proposing
56 parking spaces. The current building occupies more of the site than
this building will. They will pave Maplecrest Drive from Golf Club Road
to their entrance drive. They have moved the transformer, added a fire
hydrant, and provided additional landscaping to cover the transformer as
well as to screen the rear of the site from the adjacent homes. He
showed colored renderings and elevations.
Mr. Borden stated they do not have any outstanding issues. The final
site plan complies with the conceptual plan and they have addressed all
of their previous concerns.
Mr. Humphriss reviewed her letter dated April 20, 2005.
- In previous meetings, it was decided that modifications would be
made so that entering delivery trucks will not cross oncoming traffic
and these changes are not shown on the plans. Mr. Drane advised that
this is an error on the plans and explained their proposed changed.
This satisfied Ms. Humphriss.
- Details of the directional sign and traffic-calming device need to
be shown on the plans. Mr. Drane advised that this is on the plans and
showed the engineer where it is located.
- A detail of the proposed underground detention system should be
provided. The petitioner will comply with this request.
- The REU’s for this building are 6. The petitioner is aware of
this.
- A fire hydrant has been added to the plans, therefore,
construction plans will be required for review to obtain an MDEQ water
permit. The petitioner will comply with this request.
- The petitioner should be aware that all live taps to the municipal
systems are required to be observed by a representative of the
utility. The petitioner is aware of this and will comply.
- A permit from the Livingston County Building Department is
required for the installation of the water and sewer leads.
The petitioner is aware of this and will comply.
The call to the public was made at 7:13 p.m.
Mr. Mark Finley of 4567 Mount Brighton Road owns property behind this
building. He asked to see a colored elevation of the rear of the
building. He asked where the semi trucks will unload. Mr. Drane showed
the area at the rear of the building where they will unload. Mr. Finley
questioned the landscaping between the homes and the building. Mr. Drane
showed that they are proposing double landscape rows, which will include
7-8 foot high spruce trees, a hedgerow, canopy trees and evergreen
trees.
The call to the public was closed at 7:16 p.m.
Commissioner Olson noted that the footcandles exceed the ordinance at
the property line. Mr. Drane stated that the technical property line is
really inside the parking lot shared by the adjacent property and that
is why they exceed the ordinance. He advised that they will adjust one
of the lights along the Maplecrest entrance will be adjusted to meet the
ordinance.
Moved by Mortensen,
seconded by Brown, to recommend to the Township Board approve of the PUD
Agreement dated April 25, 2005 to construct a 14, 490 sq. ft. retail
store located at 2321 E. Grand River, petitioned by Walgreens with the
following conditions:
1. The PUD Agreement shall be
reviewed by the Township Attorney.
2. Cross access agreements
will be obtained and recorded with the property owner to the east prior
to the granting of a land use permit.
3. The petitioner will
provide the Township with evidence that he has the right to access
Maplecrest Drive and further agrees that Walgreens and its suppliers
will not use Maplecrest Drive for through traffic.
4. Paragraph 2.1 of the
proposed PUD Agreement will be revised to read “…….between all
typical and ancillary uses related thereto”.
The motion carried
unanimously.
Moved by Mortensen,
seconded by Snyder, to recommend to the Township Board approval of the
PUD Plan to construct a 14, 490 sq. ft. retail store located at 2321 E.
Grand River, petitioned by Walgreens with the following conditions:
1. A Land Use Permit will not
be issued until an executed Cross Easement Agreement is provided to the
township.
2. Cross access easements
will be obtained and recorded with the property to the east prior to the
granting of a land use permit.
3. The petitioner will
provide the Township with evidence that he has the right to access
Maplecrest Drive and further agrees that Walgreens and its suppliers
will not use Maplecrest for through traffic.
4. The petitioner will
resurface Maplecrest Drive west from the site entrance to Golf Club Road
with approval from the private road owner(s).
5. No window signs are
permitted.
6. All greenbelts will be
irrigated.
7. The petitioner will
arrange with the trash hauling company to pick up trash prior to the
opening hours of the pharmacy.
8. The lighting fixture at
the curb entrance from Maplecrest Drive will be adjusted to meet
Township Ordinance.
9. Items 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and
9 of the Township Engineer’s letter dated April 20, 2005 will be
complied with.
The motion carried
unanimously.
Moved by Mortensen, seconded by Snyder, to recommend to the
Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment dated April 6, 2005 to
construct a 14, 490 sq. ft. retail store located at 2321 E. Grand River,
petitioned by Walgreens. The motion carried unanimously.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 2…Review of site plan and impact assessment
to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. private elementary school and daycare
located in Sec. 23 at the northeast corner of Bauer Road and Challis
Road, petitioned by Brighton Country Day Schoolhouse Facilities, LLC.
(05-08)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition.
A. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-5-05)
B. Disposition regarding site
plan. (dated 4-5-05)
Mr. James Barnwell and Eric Rauk of Desine Inc., Mr. Todd and Donald
Young from Young and Young Architects, and Ms. Tayla Wells of
Schoolhouse Development, representing Brighton Country Day Academy, were
present.
Mr. Barnwell stated that they have addressed the consultants
concerns.
They have provided a letter
from the LCRC dated 4/22/05 regarding the proposed road improvement
project.
They have provided
manufacturer’s cut sheets for the light fixtures.
They have met the parking
ordinance requirements.
With regard to the drop off area, they have done striping and have a
sign. They do not feel they need additional calming devices. They feel
their traffic pattern is easy to follow.
With regard to the traffic concerns, Mr. Barnwell showed an aerial
photograph outlining the proposed road changes to the area by the LCRC
and where they are proposing to access their site off of Bauer Road. By
accessing the site off of Bauer, and not Challis, they would save many
trees as the slope on that side is very steep. He has spoken to the Road
Commission regarding the possibility that they have their building
built, but the road is not ready, and they suggested that the school
utilize their currently-proposed emergency access drive temporarily
until the road is completed. He noted they have done an updated traffic
study dated April 1, 2005 with three scenarios:
Year 2006 with out the road improvements
Year 2006 with the improvements
Year 2009 with the improvements
If they put the access on North Bauer Road and the improvements are
not done, they will be at a Level of Service of B and C .
Chairman Pobuda noted that the full traffic impact would not be there
until approximately three years as it takes time to enroll students. He
asked the petitioner how much land they are donated for the road
improvements. Mr. Barnwell stated they are giving the County
approximately ¾ of an acre.
Mr. Barnwell stated that both he and the Road Commission feel the
site can be safely and adequately accessed during the interim of the
road completion.
Mr. Young showed colored renderings of the building as well as
building materials. They have reduced the EFIS used on the building and
increased the amount of brick. The material percentages are 36% brick,
27% metal, and 37% EFIS, which was at 60%. They have tried to off set
the “box” look of the building by projecting parts of the building
outwards and using different building materials.
Chairman Pobuda likes the break up of the architecture that is being
proposed. He would still like to see more brick. After a brief
discussion, the petitioner proposed increasing the brick to 42% and
decreasing the EFIS to 32%.
Commissioner Tengel feels it is a beautiful building; however, this
is surrounded by residences and he does not feel it is an appropriate
design for this location.
Commissioner Brown is more concerned about the safety of the
intersection rather than the traffic counts, levels of service, etc. He
asked if the Road Commission suggested anything such as a blinking
traffic light, etc. Mr. Barnwell said they have spoken to them and are
continue to speak with them. The Road Commission will put some signage
up and will work with them. They noted in their letter that the
petitioner will need to get further approval from them.
Mr. Borden reviewed his letter dated April 19, 2005.
- He noted that the revised plan does show more brick and less EFIS;
however, the architecture and building materials and colors need to be
approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Young showed on the rendering
where the additional brick will be added. It will be on the southwest
side of the building, which is the most visible side.
- He noted that the LCRC has made two suggested changes to the site
plan to accommodate it during the interim of their construction is
complete; however, an easement would be required for the driveway to
be moved as it is owned by the railroad. Mr. Barnwell stated they are
working on this with the railroad; however, he noted that the Road
Commission stated they could work with them on the location of the
temporary driveway. Ms. Humphriss noted that there are three options
proposed by the petitioner as access to the site in the interim of the
road changes being made. She has spoken to the Road Commission and
they will work with the petitioner with regard to the site distance
issue with the access drive by removing some of the berm in the ROW.
- The Planning Commission needs to determine if the existing
landscaping and screening is sufficient for the greenbelt
requirements. Obviously, there is significant amount of vegetation;
however, Planning Commission approval is required.
- The light bulbs project out from under the casing on the light
fixtures and it is generally the Township’s practice to have these be
within the fixture. The petitioner will make this change.
Ms. Humphriss reviewed her letter dated April 20, 2005.
- All proposed curb cuts and improvements to public roads will need
to be approved by the Livingston County Road Commission.
- She still has concerns regarding the circulation pattern on the
site. She is suggesting additional measures be implemented rather than
just a “Right Tun Only” sign to prevent motorists from traveling the
wrong way in front of the school. Mr. Barnwell reiterated his comments
from the beginning of his presentation. They feel their design is
sufficient.
- The natural slope of the site in the vicinity east of the access
drive and south of the school is 1:3, which exceeds the Township’s
maximum allowable slope of 1:4. It was previously noted that this is
satisfactory to the Planning Commission, however, she feels it should
be noted in the motion if one is made this evening.
The call to the public was made at 8:40 p.m.
Ms. Vicki Moellmenn of 6933 Lyle Lane represents the homeowners in
the area. There are 17 home back there, plus two vacant lots for sale.
There is a 40-acre parcel and a 120-acre parcel across the street that
she is sure will be developed with homes. She wants to know if this
future development is being considered with regard to traffic and the
egress and ingress. She asked if the Brighton school buses are going to
go down that road. The residents there have a hard time with the buses
refusing to go down there when the road conditions are bad. Is there
future expansion to the school proposed? She questioned why the access
is not on Challis Road. She does not feel the slope is that extreme. She
also suggested two driveway access points, one of Bauer Road and one on
Challis Road so that all of the traffic is not in the same area. She is
concerned with the proposed road changes. She does not feel it
alleviates the traffic concerns, it just shifts the traffic to a
different area. She questioned special events at the school. They do not
have adequate parking for these types of things and the parents are
going to be parking on Bauer Road. She does not like the design of the
building. This is in a residential area and this building does not look
residential.
Mr. George Nate of 4539 Golf View Drive is a retired engineer and
from a traffic engineer’s point, a temporary four-way stop would be
safer, even than what is there now. He stated that bringing the traffic
onto Challis Road would be bringing the traffic where there is already
too much traffic. He is familiar with the site and there is too steep of
a grade to have the access drive on Challis Road.
Ms. Hilda Kersh of 4875 Crooked Stick is concerned with safety. That
street is very dangerous and she does not want any more traffic. She
used to work for the Road Commission and they were talking about making
these improvements 20 years ago.
Ms. Mary Hebert of 6899 Lyle Lane reiterated her neighbor’s concerns
regarding the parking on Bauer Road during peak times and for special
events.
The call to the public was closed at 8:55 p.m.
Moved by Brown, seconded by Mortensen, to recommend to the
Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment dated April 4, 2005 to
construct a 30,000 sq. ft. private elementary school and daycare located
in Sec. 23 at the northeast corner of Bauer Road and Challis Road,
petitioned by Brighton Country Day Schoolhouse Facilities, LLC.
The motion carried (Tengel – No; Brown – Yes; Mortensen – Yes; Pobuda
– Yes; Olson – Yes; Snyder – Yes).
Moved by Brown, seconded by Mortensen, to approve the Site Plan
to construct a 30,000 sq. ft. private elementary school and daycare
located in Sec. 23 at the northeast corner of Bauer Road and Challis
Road, petitioned by Brighton Country Day Schoolhouse Facilities, LLC.
with the following conditions:
- Petitioner will add additional brick to the southwest wall of the
building with the total brick to be approximately 42% and the total
EFIS to be 30%.
- Petitioner will have all entrance and exit points approve by the
Livingston County Road Commission and Township Engineer and will
attempt to develop a secondary emergency exit. While we don’t require
a new fur-way intersection be constructed at the site entrance, we
feel it would be a much safer access point until the improvements are
made to the new Challis Road configuration.
- The Planning Commission will allow the existing landscaping on the
south property line to serve as the buffer and no additional
landscaping is required.
- Petitioner will modify the existing light cut sheets to fully
shield the lens.
- The Planning Commission will allow a 1:3 slope in the vicinity
east of the access drive and south of the school.
- Petitioner will file for application to have a flashing caution
signal on Bauer Road that will help reduce traffic speeds.
- Fire Marshall approval is required.
- All rooftop equipment shall be shielded.
- Parking as displayed on the site is adequate.
The motion carried (Tengel – No; Brown – Yes; Mortensen – Yes; Pobuda
– Yes; Olson – Yes; Snyder – Yes).
Moved by Tengel, seconded by Snyder, to excuse Commissioner
Mortensen from participating in Agenda Item #3 as he is on the Board of
Trustees for St. Joseph Mercy Hospital. The motion carried
unanimously and Commissioner Mortensen left the room.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #3…Review of sketch plan and impact
assessment to install paving located at 7281 W. Grand River, petitioned
by St. Joseph Mercy Health. (05-20)
Planning Commission
disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding
impact assessment. (dated 4-6-05)
B. Disposition regarding
sketch plan. (dated 4-7-05)
Mr. Wayne Perry of Desine, Inc. was present to
represent the petitioner. They would like to expand the parking on the
south side of the health center to add seven additional barrier-free
spaces. They would also like to add 29 additional parking spaces to the
rear side of the staff parking lot that is currently under
construction.
Chairman Pobuda questioned if this part of the banked
parking that was provided with the original plan. Mr. Perry answered
essentially yes. He reviewed the entire site showing what is currently
developed so the Commissioners who were not on the Commission during the
initial approval of this site can become familiar with it.
Mr. Borden reviewed his letter of April 19, 2005.
-
The light poles and fixtures must match those
approved in the previous plan. Mr. Perry advised they will comply with
this requirement.
-
The landscape plan must provide sufficient
plantings to meet the increased requirement for parking lot plantings
and landscaped area. Mr. Perry stated they have always provided
additional landscaping and this will be the same. St. Joseph’s Mercy
always requires a lot of landscaping. They will be adding two
additional islands landscaped similar to the other ones on the site.
Ms. Humphriss stated they only had some minor issues
with the plan and the petitioner has addressed them and/or will comply
with her requests.
The call to the public was made at 9:38 p.m. with no
response.
Moved by
Brown, seconded by Olson, to recommend to the Township Board approval of
the Impact Assessment dated April 6, 2005 to install paving located at
7281 W. Grand River, petitioned by St. Joseph Mercy Health with the
following change: Page1, Paragraph #4, shall be changed to read
“…….spaces located on the South side of the building entrance…….”
The motion
carried unanimously.
Moved by
Brown, seconded by Snyder, to approve the Sketch Plan to install paving
located at 7281 W. Grand River, petitioned by St. Joseph Mercy Health
with the following conditions:
-
The light
poles and fixtures will match the existing ones.
-
The
petitioner will add two landscape islands on the south parking
addition similar to the existing ones.
-
Items 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the Township Engineer’s letter dated April
14, 2005 will be complied with.
The motion
carried unanimously.
Commissioner Mortensen returned at 9:40 p.m.
Moved by Mortensen, seconded by Snyder, to
approve the minutes of April 11, 2005 minutes. The motion carried
unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Submitted by: Patty Thomas, Recording Secretary
Approved by: Barbara Figurski, Secretary |