Mr. Neal Plante from Boss Engineering and Mr. Joe Chidester from Lindhout Associates were present.

Mr. Chidester stated they are proposing to build a 7,820 square foot building, with 5,000 square feet for office and showroom and the remainder will be for warehouse and storage. They made the suggested changes to the architecture and building footprint. They moved the sunroom from the front and pushed the building further toward Grand River. He showed the old plans and the new proposed plans. He feels this is in keeping with the new Genoa downtown area that is being proposed. They moved the remaining sunrooms further back and added significant landscaping. They also moved the loading overhead door to the rear of the building. He showed colored elevations and building material samples.

Commissioner Figurski questioned if it was correct that only three trees could be saved. Mr. Chidester confirmed this. She asked if the one sign shown is the only one proposed. He stated yes.

Commissioner Brown asked how far forward the building was moved. Mr. Chidester stated they took off the sunroom and moved the front of the building 20 feet forward.

He questioned if the retention pond can be altered to meet the required 1:4 slope, which would then not require the fencing. Mr. Plante agrees that they do not want the fencing around the pond either, unfortunately the area they have to work with, they have to have a 1:3 slope. It is a retention pond and not a detention pond so it requires that much more area. He noted that the Livingston County Drain Commission requires a fence around any pond that is not a 1:5 slope. He noted the pond was made this size to accommodate for the proposed future addition.

Commissioner Tengel asked if the retention pond can be made now with the required slope and then when the addition is put on, can it be altered. He noted that the proposed addition may never even be built. Mr. Plante stated that when they build the addition, they would have to provide fill for the pond and that could be quite costly.

Ms. Humphriss stated that when a retention pond is not owned by the County, the requirements defer to the Township, and Genoa Township standards are 1:4, and a fence is required for anything less.

Commissioner Snyder noted that it is not at the front of the building and at the rear of the site. It is not meant to be attractive. He does not feel it will be seen from Grand River. He suggested additional landscaping around the pond, to shield the fence. Chairman Pobuda agrees that it will not be seen from Grand River. He likes the idea of having some additional landscaping added.

Chairman Pobuda questioned why the joint pond with the property to the west was not developed. Mr. Plante stated that Trends in Tile is moving forward with their construction and Pro Bros is not ready to begin. Trends in Tile does not want the extra easements, maintenance agreements, etc. They are willing to allow the overflow from this pond to theirs.

Commissioner Brown does not like the 1:3 slope because the reasons for it is to make the building larger.

Ms. Kolakowski stated that historically, the Planning Commission has approved 1:3 slopes for retention ponds when they are in the rear of the site and not visible from Grand River.

All commissioners agree that since Trends in Tile was allowed the 1:3 slop, then this petitioner should be allowed. They noted that the 1:3 slope would not be allowed for ponds in the front of buildings.

Mr. Purdy suggested a dark green vinyl fence since there will be additional screening added. It will help to blend it in with the natural landscape. He suggests plantings that will have a mature height of 4-5 feet.

Mr. Purdy reviewed his letter of June 21, 2005.

1. Planning Commission approval is required for the architecture, materials, and colors. Commissioner Brown noted that he is not in favor of the sunroom being in the front of the building.

2. The driveway along Grand River needs to be aligned correctly with the opposite driveway unless otherwise approved by the Road Commission. Ms. Humphriss has spoken to the Road Commission and they are comfortable with the current placement of the driveway due to the use across the street. Bordine’s Nursery is seasonal and has different peak hours, the petitioner is proposing a rear access drive, and Bordine’s has a second entrance further on Grand River.

3. He would like the future service drive to be constructed in conjunction with this project and that the easement be extended to the easterly property line so if in the future that site is developed. Mr. Chidester stated they would prefer not to add asphalt or paving in that area until the future development is needed. They would be willing to put in crushed concrete in that area. He would like to receive a “floating” easement to the property to the east as they are not sure where it will need to be placed. All commissioners agree that a gravel drive is allowed for a pre-determined amount of time and then if the addition is not developed, it shall be put in permanently.

Ms. Humphriss reviewed her letter of June 22, 2005.

1. The petitioner is proposing to move a power pole. This needs to be coordinated with DTE Energy.

2. A permit for the Livingston County Road Commission is required for the curb cut on Grand River.

3. The slope and retention pond were discussed at great length in her letter. She noted that this issue has already been discussed and it was decided to allow the 1:3 slope with a green vinyl fence and additional plantings.

4. A 15-foot easement for the overflow is indicated on the adjacent parcel. An easement agreement should be secured with the property owner to the west.

Ms. Kolakowski noted that the transformer at the front of the site appears large. She wanted to bring this to the Planning Commission’s attention and determine if adequate screening is being proposed. Mr. Chidester stated they are proposing to plant five arborvitae and they will be one foot taller than the transformer.

The call to the public was made at 7:58 p.m. with no response.

Moved by Figurski, seconded by Tengel to recommend to the Township Board approval of the Impact Assessment with a revision date of June 7, 2005 for a proposed 7,820 sq. ft. office and showroom building for a Pro Brothers Windows and Sunroom located on the south side of Grand River Avenue, between Dorr Road and Kellogg Road, Sec. 14, petitioned by Lindhout Associates Architects. The motion carried (Tengel – yes; Brown – yes; Figurski – no; Pobuda – yes; Olson – yes; Snyder – yes).

Moved by Tengel, seconded by Snyder, to approve the Site Plan dated June 7, 2005 for a proposed 7,820 sq. ft. office and showroom building for a Pro Brothers Windows and Sunroom located on the south side of Grand River Avenue, between Dorr Road and Kellogg Road, Sec. 14, petitioned by Lindhout Associates Architects with the following conditions:

1. Four-foot high dark green vinyl coated chain link fencing will be placed around the retention pond.

2. Plantings on the north side of the retention fencing shall have a full growth height of four feet.

3. The petitioner will supply an updated site plan for the Township Board meeting, showing the rear access drive connecting to the adjacent site to the west and the relocation of the dumpster, deleting the future addition and the future parking.

4. The rear access drive will be crushed concrete meeting Livingston County Road Commission standards for a period of two years from the date of land use permit issuance at which time it will be paved, meeting Township internal driveway standards.

5. A floating easement shall be granted to the property owner to the east in anticipation of future development on the site.

6. The Planning Commission will allow the 1:3 slope for the proposed retention pond, specifically because it is in the rear of the site and not visible from Grand River.

7. The Planning Commission will allow for the driveway to not align with Bordine’s on the opposite side of Grand River, subject to Livingston County Road Commission approval.

8. The materials and colors presented this evening are approved and will become the property of the Township.

9. A 15-foot easement for the overflow is indicated on the adjacent parcel. An easement agreement should be secured with the property owner to the west.