Present: S. Versluis, D. Brown, M. Ferris-Young, J. Hickey, Chairman,
C. Gornowich, M. Huizenga, C. Rypma, and T. Greeno. Absent: M. Houseman.
Also Present: S. Conners, City Engineer, F. Wash, Planning Director,
and P. Dlouhy, Planning Assistant.
Chairman Hickey opened the meeting and Member Rypma gave the
invocation.
Approval of Minutes – August 17, 2005
Motion by C. Rypma, supported by S. Versluis, to approved the
above-noted minutes as written. Motion carried.
Case #05-432: O’Charleys Restaurant – Public Hearing
Chairman Hickey read the above-noted request for a final area site
plan amendment to the Meijer, Inc. Commercial Planned Unit Development
to allow the development of a 5,459 sq. foot restaurant building located
at 355 Wilson Avenue.
Planner Wash explained the procedural aspects of the request. He
reviewed the original Meijer Commercial Development plans with a general
orientation to the area in relationship to surrounding existing
developments.
Wash reviewed his staff report and related that the site plan review
committee has reviewed this proposal. The staff analysis and
recommendations include:
The plan proposes no new Wilson Avenue driveways.
There are no drives onto the Meijer entry drive.
The Meijer internal drive driveway is spaced back from the
nearest intersection in a straight stretch of roadway.
A cross access connection to Walgreeen’s is planned at the NE
corners of the site, but with no success at this time.
All internal drives are sized for two-way vehicle movements.
The internal stacking, while less than perfect, represents a
best-fit design on this challenging site.
A cross access agreement has been supplied to the applicant and
should state: "The 24’ parking lot ingress-egress connection will be
paved to the lot line prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for O’Charley’s. A cross access agreement will be recorded
by the applicant before issuance of a building permit, after review
and approval by the City of Walker. O’Charley’s patrons will use the
cross access location for parking until Walgreen’s or a successor
connects on the other side." (as conditions of approval).
Planner Wash felt that the proposed building was an attractive brick
building with an articulated entrance.
With respect to pedestrian access, Wash related that consideration
should be given by the Planning Commission as to extending sidewalks the
entire length of the site along the Meijer internal drive as noted on
the displayed staff plan with dashed lines. He stated that staff
recommends this as a condition of approval.
Wash reviewed the exterior lighting and noted that more detailed
drawings will be necessary as a condition of approval.
Wash reviewed the signage proposed. Wash stated that the size of the
Wilson Avenue ground sign is proposed as 8x10, same as the Fifth Third
Bank’s recent approval, plus a 5x5 ground mounted internal sign. Wash
also felt that the proposed wall signage on the north wall should be
removed. The placement of the ground signs should meet AASHTO safety
standards as a condition of approval.
Scott Conners reviewed concerns as noted in his staff memo, including
lack of vehicle stacking on the site, location of ground mounted signs
with visibility issues, and sealed plans; and sanitary sewer lateral
approval from Grand Rapids and additional inspection by our plumbing
inspector.
Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by T. Greeno, to open the public
hearing. Motion carried.
Member Versluis asked if Walgreens might change their position
regarding access to this property?
Robert Potts, representing O’Charley’s, stated that they are in the
process of checking with Walgreens and he is optimistic about the
possibility. Mr. Potts stated that O’Charley’s will pave to the property
line and hope Walgreens will agree to it. Member Versluis stated that he
hopes they will reconsider it, as a connection point makes sense here.
Chairman Hickey asked about the dumpster elevation facing the west
side, and asked why split faced block couldn’t be used around it? Mr.
Potts stated that is how is was designed, but it could be done and is
open to it. Potts agreed to used split face brick on the back end of the
dumpster enclosure.
Member Brown questioned the building orientation and asked why it
couldn’t face Wilson Ave.? Mr. Potts stated that they worked on that
possibility with Frank Wash but it didn’t work due to the shape of the
lot and was difficult to make the traffic flow work.
Member Greeno asked about the truck movements through the site? Mr.
Potts indicated that a delivery truck comes from Tennessee, and makes
that delivery typically between the hours of midnight to 10:30 a.m.
Chairman Hickey asked if they could utilize more brick on the side
above the cooler? Mr. Potts indicated that this was the design given
them with lap siding on the back side of the building. He indicated that
it would be difficult to do brick work on that side of the cooler and
that whole back side has to have siding.
Chairman Hickey asked if there was going to be a sign on the west
side of the entrance? Mr. Potts indicated no.
Member Huizenga asked if the ground sign was necessary with all of
the additional building signage? Mr. Potts stated that it is necessary
as someone coming from Wilson Ave. might miss it.
Member Greeno stated that he likes the idea of eliminating the
internal ground-mounted sign and getting people through the entrance.
Mr. Potts felt that the internal ground sign was not as necessary.
Member Rypma asked Planner Wash if what was proposed on the building
was ok? Wash stated all 4 sides are ok. He is agreeable to a reduction
on the entrance drive ground mounted sign. Mr. Potts stated that he
prefers to keep all of the building signage proposed, but felt that they
could live without the entrance/exit sign.
Member Greeno would like to see the sidewalks on the interior of the
road. The new bank has it and it should continue through the PUD, as it
will encourage walking. Mr. Potts stated that there is a limited strip
of landscaping if they have sidewalks, but they are open to it.
Scott Conners related that with regard to the sliver of property at
the northeast corner of the property, a deeded easement to the City for
sidewalks. Mr. Potts stated that he was agreeable to it.
Member Versluis asked for clarification on the signage as he wonders
if there is too much signage that might depreciate the look of the
building. It was the consensus to be in favor of signs on all 4 sides of
the building, and a reduction in the internal drive entrance/exit only
sign to a 2x3 size sign. Member Greeno stated that as a former 1st
Blimpie Sandwich Shop owner in the area, he understands the need to be
seen in order to be successful.
Member Greeno asked how many O’Charley’s Restaurants there are in the
State of Michigan? Mr. Potts indicated 4, one on the East Beltline in
Grand Rapids, 1 in Holland, and 2 in Detroit.
Mr. Potts related that they are struggling with making their presence
known in the state, unlike Applebees or Chili’s, who have a large
marketing budget/TV ads.
Member Versluis stated that he wants them to be successful and if
this makes them more compatible, then he is ok with it.
Mr. Potts stated that he will go with the Planning Commission’s
recommendation on signage.
Member Ferris-Young stated that she felt that aesthetically a smaller
O’Charley’s sign is better.
Motion by T. Greeno, supported by C. Rypma, to close the public
hearing. Motion carried.
Member Gornowich agreed that Member Ferris-Young’s comment of a
reduction of the 5x5 sign would be in order.
Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by T. Greeno, to approve the
Standale Crossing final area site plan amendment for O’Charley’s at 355
Wilson Avenue, as it does meet the standards set forth in the City of
Walker Zoning Ordinance with the following conditions of preliminary
area site plan approval:
The applicant agrees to all conditions noted in the City Planning
Director’s letter dated 8-29-05.
The applicant agrees to all conditions noted in the City
Engineer’s letter dated 8-31-05.
The ground sign dimensions limited to 10 feet tall x 8 feet wide
for the Wilson Avenue sign and 2 feet tall x 3 feet wide for the
Meijer internal Drive sign.
Split face block will be utilized for the dumpster enclosure.
Installation of sidewalks the entire length of the site along the
Meijer Internal Drive.
An easement deeded to the City for the northeast section of
property that encroaches on the sidewalks.
Findings of Fact (Section 94-213-(10):
The O’Charley’s Restaurant:
Compliments the intended use and design of the Standale Crossings
CPUD.
Does plan for efficient vehicular and pedestrian movements.
Does offer a landscaping and signage plan that will complement the
site and neighboring properties.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0.
Case #05-433: Pinnacle Ventures/Karpata Instore
Service – Site Plan Review
Chairman Hickey read the request for site plan approval to allow the
construction of a 5,355 square foot building located at 4348 – 3 Mile
Rd., N.W.
Planner Wash reviewed the staff report and the site plan and related
that the subject property is zoned ORP, Office, Research & Parking and
located on the southeast corner of Wilson and 3 Mile. The property
encompasses 2 lots and the proposal is to construct a new 7,400 sq. ft.
building, which would be built in two phases. Wash indicated that the
entire shell would be built. A future bank is proposed on the adjacent
lot. He stated that the site would gain access to 3 Mile Road and Wilson
Avenue via easement over the adjacent bank lot.
Planner Wash reviewed the building elevations and asked the Planning
Commission to review the proposed building materials with the developer.
With regards to the staff analysis and recommendations, Wash
recommended the following as conditions of approval:
A note should be added to the final plan as a condition of
approval with respect to equipment being stored inside the building
only, as no outdoor storage is allowed in the ORP District.
The proposed ingress-egress easement should follow the standard
City of Walker template. These easements must be approved by the
City then recorded by the developer.
Site plan application needs to be signed by the applicant/and or
property owner prior to obtaining a building permit.
The future bank proposed at 4368 3 Mile Road must undergo a
future site plan review application. The Phase II addition for
Karpata should be included in this current site plan review
decision.
The standard outdoor light text note on Sheet 4 of 5 should be
amended to read, "All outdoor lighting fixtures, including pole and
wall fixtures, will be fully shielded via a shoebox or similar
design."
The three maple trees currently shown in the public right-of-way
should be moved south onto the Karpata site.
The representative from Pinnacle Ventures was present and indicated
that this is a high tech venture. He stated that they will be using
masonry, painted metal finish and glass materials in their building
construction.
Chairman Hickey asked why the loading dock is not enclosed. The
representative stated it was a visual call and from a functional
standpoint, they talked about putting a cover on it. Mr. Hickey asked
why they needed such a big loading dock? The representative stated that
they need to be able to support certain trucks as they deal with vendors
and display fixturing for Meijer, Inc. Chairman Hickey asked why not
have the loading dock at the back entrance with a ramp inside the
building? The representative stated that they need to have that set
back. Zach Voogt related that they pulled the truck dock out so the dock
sets outside. Hickey felt that an internal ramp would provide a better
look and give additional square footage. Zach Voogt stated that the
turning movements would work well that way, and they need the room for
the 70’ trucks. The representative stated that it is not a fully loaded
truckload, and it is a staging opportunity to move the racks out to
Meijer. He thought they could enclosed the west side in order not to see
the truck.
The other representative reviewed the plans showing a masonary
building with a decorative front and painted steel.
Chairman Hickey stated that this will be an industrial looking
building. The representative stated that it is more of a technical
building rather than an industrial look.
Member Versluis sees a conflict with the compatibility of a steel
building with surrounding masonry buildings in the area. He asked if
this use is compatible use in the ORP District. Planner Wash stated yes.
A representative stated that they bring in materials such as metal,
cardboard, etc. and build racks for Meijer, Inc. Some of the clients are
Sony and Fuji film. Meijer approves the rack and they are then moved to
the various Meijer sites.
Member Ferris-Young asked how many office employees they will have?
The representative stated 15 employees, and the main part is the
2,000-2,500 sq. ft. staging area.
The realtor for Pinnacle explained the Karpata operation to the
Commission’s satisfaction. Chairman Hickey asked what the mezzanine is
used for? The realtor indicated for additional storage of boxes.
Chairman Hickey stated that he would encourage the use of as much
brick, block, and glass as possible on the building.
Member Gornowich asked if the would be using clear or reflective
glass? The representative stated clear glass.
Member Ferris-Young asked Planner Wash to explain the ORP zone, which
he did to her satisfaction.
Member Greeno asked what the office people do? The representative
stated that they provide web based support group, account managers, and
marketing people. He indicated that the office is the key to success of
the business.
Chairman Hickey asked the real restate representative if in 5 years
the business doesn’t prosper what is the resale of the building vs. a
brick building? The real estate representative stated that the office
could be reconfigured and it could be a very saleable piece of property.
Member Gornowich asked if the building had a totally flat roof? The
representative stated yes.
Member Versluis asked if the Planning Commission felt that if we
approve this type of building that we might be getting a lot of
proposals like this? Member Versluis likes the permanence of a brick
building. He can appreciate the applicant’s situation, and he wants to
make it work.
Member Gornowich stated as far as precedent setting, we can always
look at the design standards in the ordinance for possible amendment.
Planner Wash stated that basic changes could be made.
Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by C. Rypma, to approve the Karpata
instore Services site plan as it does meet the standards set forth in
the City of Walker Zoning Ordinance with the following conditions of
site plan approval:
The applicant agrees to all conditions noted in the City Planning
Director’s letter dated 8-29-05.
The applicant agrees to all conditions noticed in the City Engineer’s
letter dated 8-31-05.
The applicant agrees to enclosed the truck dock area and install 2
windows in that area.
Motion carried 6-2 (Nays: M. Ferris-Young, D. Brown) 1 absent.
Commissioner and Staff Update
Planner Wash reminded the Commission of the upcoming M-11 meeting on
the 21st that will begin at 6:00 regarding the MDOT
presentation of draft findings and recommendations on the access
management study.
Adjournment
Motion by T. Greeno, supported by D. Brown, to adjourn the meeting at
8:30 p.m.
_______________________________ _____________________________
Administrative Approval Carol Gornowich, Secretary
Walker City Commission
The City
of Walker, Michigan