Planning Commission Minutes

Present: S. Versluis, M. Ferris-Young, C. Gornowich, J. Hickey, Chairman, C. Rypma, and T. Greeno. Absent: D. Brown, M. Huizenga, and M. Houseman.

Also Present: F. Wash, Planning Director, and P. Dlouhy, Planning Asst. Absent: S. Conner, City Engineer

Chairman Hickey opened the meeting and C. Rypma gave the invocation.

Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by C. Rypma, to approve the minutes of October 5, 2005, as printed. Motion carried.

Chairman Hickey read the request for a text amendment to amend Section 94-357 of Chapter 94 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Walker with respect to garage sales in residential districts.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by T. Greeno, to remove this item from the table. Motion carried.

It was determined that the public hearing was closed at the last meeting.

Planner Wash related that this item was tabled and send back to the Ordinance Committee for review and consideration of more information. The Ordinance Committee made a revision from two to three sales per year. The duration remains at not more than three consecutive days. Wash then referred to a letter from the Walker Police Department, several ordinance examples from other communities, and minutes from the 8-17-05, as included in the packets.

Wash reviewed the procedural aspects of the amendment and suggested that a recommendation, positive or negative, be made to the City Commission regarding these zoning ordinance text amendments.

Member Greeno stated that the recommendation to the Ordinance Committee was for three per year, not more than 2 consecutive days, and it came back three times, and three days.

Member Gornowich stated that their neighborhood holds an annual neighborhood garage sales and they coordinate this event with the DPW and police department and utilize signage directing people to park in the nearby neighborhood park. She brought samples of the directional signs they use for parking and feels it is necessary for safety, and related they would get preauthorization from the DPW as to placement of these signs. They will not be able to use this signage if (d) of the proposed amendment is in place and suggests that the following language be added at the end of paragraph (d) "No signs shall be placed in, on or upon the public right-of-way including, but not limited to, utility poles, "without prior authorization of the D.P.W."

Member Versluis questioned what impact, if any, this ordinance might have on the neighborhood fruit stand, as he would hate to see that happen.

Member Rypma asked if there were any complaints received regarding parking? Planner Wash stated, not that he was aware of. Member Rypma stated that he doesn’t really like regulating this. Member Versluis and other members concurred.

Chairman Hickey asked, how will this be enforced?

Member Greeno stated he could understand the need to regulate if somebody started in April with ongoing sales throughout the year.

Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by S. Versluis, to recommend a favorable recommendation to the City Commission for the addition of Section 94-357 to Chapter 94 of the Code of Ordinances, with the suggestion that directional signage be permitted with prior authorization by the D.P.W. Motion carried 6-0.

Chairman Hickey read the application requesting an amendment to the IPUD, Industrial Planned Unit Development to relocate an existing off-site billboard approximately 250 feet north of the north right of way line of North Park St.

Planner Wash reviewed the staff report and procedural aspects of the request.

He then reviewed an aerial photo for an orientation to the area, Plan #1, showing the relocation of the existing billboard from the south of this site to the north onto this site, and Plan #2, showing the details regarding the setback requirements.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by C. Gornowich, to open the public hearing. Motion carried.

Chairman Hickey asked where the sign will be located in relationship to the 5^th 3^rd Ball Park sign? Michael Hucul, Viacom Outdoor, representing Katerberg-VerHage, stated that it is at least 1,000 feet south of that sign. Chairman Hickey asked if it would be 35’ off the ground to be seen from the expressway? Mr. Hucul stated, yes and changed periodically with a variety of advertisements.

Member Ferris-Young asked if the billboard would create any safety/traffic hazards with the merging traffic and 3 signs within one-half a mile? Planner Wash stated that MDOT has safety standards that have to be followed via the permit process.

Mr. Hucul stated that they have been issued a permit for a sign south of North Park. He related that it is to be relocated 250’ north of the North Park right-of-way.

Member Gornowich asked if it were an electronic reader board, and Mr. Hucul indicated no.

Member Rypma asked if it switches advertisements on the board? Mr. Hucul stated no, they change the boards about once a month.

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by C. Gornowich, to close the public hearing.

Motion carried.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by C. Gornowich, to approve the Greenleaf Distrubutors Final Area Site Plan amendment for the Viacom Outdoor billboard re-location at 201 North Park Street, N.W. as it does meet the standards set forth in the City of Walker Zoning Ordinance with the following condition of Preliminary Area site Plan Approval: That the applicant agrees to all conditions noted in the City Planning Director’s letter dated 10-10-05. Motion carried 6-0.

Chairman Hickey read the request for site plan approval for a proposed 37,200 sq. ft. manufacturing addition including office addition.

Planner Wash related that this request was before us and approved in 2001. Metals USA did not build the additions at that time and the plan has subsequently expired and they are before us for a re-approval. Wash related that the plans were reviewed at the site plan review subcommittee. There are no engineering comments at this time.

Ken Watkins, Architectural Concepts, was present on behalf of the request. He related that this is the same plan as approved in 2001, and there are no changes to the building and to the number of parking spaces.

Member Rypma stated that the plans are dated 2001. He asked if staff was comfortable with any changes to the ordinance since then that might affect the plans? Planner Wash stated that the plans still meet the requirements of the storm water ordinance. He related that the updated plans are dated 9-7-05 and have been reviewed by the site plan review committee.

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by T. Greeno, to approve the site plan dated

9-9-05 for the Metals USA expansion, as it does meet the standards set forth in the City of Walker Zoning Ordinance with the following conditions of site plan approval: That the applicant agrees to all condition noted in the City Planning Director’s letter dated 10-7-05. Motion carried 6-0

Chairman Hickey read the application requesting rezoning of properties from C-1 Local Commercial and C-3 Highway Commercial to CPUD, Commercial Planned Unit Development. Also requested is preliminary area site plan approval to allow a comprehensive redevelopment project consisting of a 14,558 sq. ft. Walgreens, 9,682 sq. ft. Belle Tire Store, 2,200 square foot RX Optical and a 9,000 sq. ft. retail/office building.

Planner Wash reviewed the staff report, an aerial overview of the southeastern corner of Alpine Avenue and 4 Mile consisting of eight pre-existing and commercially zoned lots on 4.74 acres. He related that the plans call for combining all of the parcels, demolition of all onsite structures followed by the new construction of four new commercial buildings, including: Walgreen’s, RX Optical, Belle Tire, a speculative retail/office unit. Wash stated that sidewalks are to be installed by the developer all along the perimeter of the site and through the Walgreen’s site. Wash then reviewed the access management plan with a potential road out from 4 Mile to Kingsbury upon securing additional future parcels south of the Walgreen’s site.

Wash then reviewed the procedural aspects of the rezoning request and the preliminary area site plan.

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by T. Greeno, to open the public hearing. Motion carried.

Bernice Camling, 681 Gage, asked if the retention pond will cause problems with their neighborhood septic systems? She asked if they will be utilizing a retaining wall as their property is 4 feet higher than the houses on Gage? She also asked what impact this will have on the value of their homes?

An Alpine Twp. resident across 4 Mile, stated that their driveway comes out about where the driveway for Walgreens will be and they have to cross 3 lanes of traffic when he turns into his driveway. Member Gornowich asked how far does left turn traffic back up during peak traffic hours? The Alpine Twp. resident stated 3 houses from his, and he fears he will be rear ended.

An Alpine Twp. resident, at 747 4 Mile, stated that she has traffic, lighting, and landscaping concerns.

Jerry Boynton, 660 Kingsbury, stated that he is not against the project and feels that it will clean up the area, get rid of storage trailer and pile of tires that currently exists behind Belle Tire. He is concerned about the back up of traffic on 4 Mile, and asked if they plan an access route behind the development out to Kingsbury? Planner Wash stated from an access management standpoint, we should be able to get out from 4 Mile to Kingsbury. From a long-term perspective, it will help maintain the capacity and safety on Alpine Ave.

Chairman Hickey stated that we should welcome that idea of another road behind the Health Food Store out to Kingsbury. Planner Wash stated that currently the developer doesn’t have all the parcels needed for that secondary access. Chairman Hickey felt it should be kept open for emergency access.

Carol Kline, 4 Mile Rd. stated that it may look trashy behind the Belle Tire Store but it is quiet. She doesn’t want any more traffic on 4 Mile Rd. as she can’t get out of her driveway now with cars backing up. She doesn’t want a connection to Kingsbury.

Chris Enright, Architect, and Steve Czadzeck, Engineer, were present on behalf of the request. Mr. Enright stated that the existing Belle Tire is not an ideal facility for the company, and the new stores have 10 services bays consisting of 10,000 sq. ft. The current showroom is inadequate with an existing trailer behind the facility. The new facility will have repair of vehicles and inventory inside. Mr. Enright reviewed the plans and related that RX Optical to the south has 3 more years on their lease plus 7 additional years at this location. The Chiropractor’s office is owned by Visser, and the dentist office is looking to move. He related that Walgreens wants to be on the main corner and they are looking for a win-win situation. By moving Belle Tire to the south of the corner, they have the opportunity to build the new Walgreens on the corner, and rebuild RX Optical with office buildings.

Mr. Enright showed photos of a walk able cohesive development in Brighton, MI with a newer Belle Tire Store and other buildings consisting of all brick/stone exteriors with metal accents. He related that this will be a very similar situation utilizing the walk able concept. He reviewed the building setbacks and signage for the development. He related that the sidewalks would be to City standards with parking and the element of landscaping on the corner. He felt that the landscaping in the right-of-way was not appropriate and recommended alternatives by eliminating all of those spaces and moving away from the corner.

Mr. Czadzick then reviewed the detention pond area in the rear of the property with heavily landscaped area to provide additional green buffer for the residents. He indicated that currently there are 5 access points near the intersection with 2 on Alpine Ave. and 3 on 4 Mile, and they propose 2 accesses with a left hand turn only onto 4 Mile Rd. With this large development, they propose that all of the lighting on the site will be down shielded. He indicated that most of the businesses open from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., with the exception of Walgreens, closed on Sunday. Currently Walgreens is not anticipating a 24 hour store. Deliveries are typically after hours.

Chairman Hickey asked how many cars will Walgreens generate? Mr. Enright stated that he just received the updated URS Traffic Report today. Member Gornowich stated that the report she received showed 36 a.m. and 74 p.m. new trips generated. Chairman Hickey stated that there were no level of service A’s in this Alpine Ave. area.

Planner Wash stated that the intersection of 4 Mile and Alpine has been and will continue to be congested.

Member Greeno stated that the traffic report shows 152 total trips for all uses of that site. They show the tire and optical as new trips, but those users are already there.

Planner Wash stated that Alpine Ave. works most of the time; the problems we have are during peak hours. The traffic situation isn’t going to be any better. We do however, have the opportunity to redevelop and improve an old corner, and the developer is working with MDOT and Kent County Road Commission.

Chairman Hickey asked the applicant what they have in mind for the retail/office building? The applicant stated that they anticipate a medical user.

Chairman Hickey asked about the delivery schedule? Mr. Enright stated that occasionally semi trucks deliver, and a box truck delivers tires to Belle Tire.

Chairman Hickey asked if the retention pond will be screened, as there are mentally and physically impaired people in the nearby planned Genesis development and the existing Hope Network facility. Mr. Enright stated that they prefer not to screen it but will consider it if that’s what the City wants.

Chairman Hickey asked about an easement behind the Health Food Store to legally access the property? Mr. Enright stated that they would have to have an cross access agreement from both parties so they could pave to the property line and amend the back parking areas for access to Kingsbury.

Planner Wash stated from a site plan design, access in back of the Health Food Store would not work with the alignment. Cross access should be safe for fire access, and that is why they designed a front service drive. He asked, would we rather make that connection or maintain the green space to buffer the adjacent homes? We could look at it when the final plans come back.

Member Versluis stated that the idea of rejuvenating that corner with attractive buildings is very appealing to him. He felt this could have a domino effect to the south for rejuvenation and this could be a catalyst. He is sensitive to traffic issues, but hopes there is a way to make this happen. The buildings now are old and in need of upgrading.

Member Ferris felt the development will be an improvement with landscaping and screening around the existing neighborhood.

Member Gornowich stated that she is torn as she would love to see redevelopment, but is very concerned about the high rate of accidents at the intersection. Walgreens will be adding the most vehicles at the worst time of the day. She is concerned about the Alpine Twp. residents. With regard to site lighting, if Walgreens is a 24/7 Store, it will not be possible. The screening to the south and east is nice. She is opposed to making a connection to Kingsbury. She likes the idea of a retaining wall between them and the existing neighbors.

As far as property values, she lives behind the Geenen-Dekock development on Alpine Ave. and their property values have steadily grown.

Mr. Enright felt that a retaining wall around the office building would not be needed.

Member Rypma asked if the developer would consider moving the Walgreens driveway on 4 Mile down to the east and the benefits will be worth it.

He stated that there has to be access to Kingsbury. He likes the plan.

Member Greeno stated that he is in favor of it, and feels that the corner definitely needs upgrading. Traffic is always an issue. He asked Mr. Enright what are the chances of landing the other site? Enright stated that the existing nail shop has a rather inflated idea of property worth, but they are still pursuing them and the auto parts store for a total of 3 parcels. Member Greeno stated that he likes the layout with the Walgreens drive through and doesn’t see any internal traffic issues. He is glad they have shown the truck maneuvering details on the plans.

Chairman Hickey asked if the drive through window for Walgreens was a single one? The architect reviewed the canopies over the Walgreens windows. Mr. Enright stated he wasn’t sure if there were 2 lanes proposed for the drive through or one.

Member Rypma asked what the architect thought about moving the drive further to the east on 4 Mile Rd.? Mr. Enright stated that he doesn’t want this to be an issue for the neighbors or anyone. He felt that further to the east gets away from direct access to the building. Member Rypma stated that if a decel lane was added they could get right into it.

Planner Wash stated that if this plan moves forward, we will revisit this with MDOT and traffic engineers to work out the feasibility of moving the driveway in the final area site plan.

Chairman Hickey asked about the signage allotment for Belle Tire, RX Optical, and Walgreens? Planner Wash stated that they have a tremendous amount of road frontage and the signage proposed is well within the allowed amount.

Member Greeno suggested installing a yellow bollard at the end of the Walgreens building coming out of the Walgreen’s pharmacy drive-through 1 car length for safety.

Chairman Hickey reviewed the proposed list of changes including the following:

Moving the Walgreen’s driveway to the east on 4 Mile, moving the speculative building back to the south; Option #2 signage – Allow the 4 Mile Road ground sign and require Walgreen’s RX Optical and Belle Tire to share an Alpine Ave pylon sign. Exterior lighting to be 20’ when nearing residential and shielded to limits of the property. All existing conditions in the Planner’s staff report apply.

Motion by S. Verluis, supported by C. Rypma, to table this issue for 2 weeks for the developer to address the above-noted changes to the plans. Motion carried 6-0.

Planner Wash related that the master plan committee will meet next week Wednesday, October 26th at 9 a.m. in the City Commission chambers to discuss the results. The second master plan meeting will be the first part of December.

Planner Wash conducted a brief traffic management discussion with the Planning Commission using REGIS.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by C. Gornowich, to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. Motion carried.

____________________________ ________________________________

Administrative Approval Carol Gornowich, Secretary

Walker Planning Commission