Planning Commission Minutes

Present: M. Huizenga, C. Gornowich, M. Ferris-Young, D. Brown, C. Rypma, S. Versluis, T. Greeno, Chairman Hickey. Also Present: F. Wash, Planning Director, P. Dlouhy, Planning Asst., Pete LaMourie, City Traffic Consultant.

Orchard Park team: Jim Bossenbroek, Zach Bossenbroek, Gary Smith, Jeff Hundley, and Mick Barney, of Triangle Associates.

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

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by C. Gornowich, to table the minutes pending a minor correction. Motion carried.

There were no public comments at this time.

Chairman Hickey read the agenda item - the work session with the realigned development team regarding proposed revisions to the approved Preliminary Area Site Plan for the Orchard Park MPUD. The proposed revisions include a change of development phasing plus a redesigned preliminary area site plan and road/building layout for District E, the tourist-oriented retail area.

The Planning Commission met with the developer team in revising their proposal to amend the Orchard Park Preliminary Area Site Plan.

Planner Wash asked the planning commission to compare and contrast the approved PASP, the proposed amended PASP and the sketch created by staff.

Chairman Hickey stated that we want to get over some of the hurdles with respect to the location of a prospective water park, the big boxes along the expressway, and saving the road around Cabela’s in District E.

With respect to the big boxes along the expressway, Jim Bossenbroek, owner, stated that the idea of how to place buildings on the site is something of an art and science. He related that you have to have 1 or more anchors with the second anchor a phantom anchor; and without that shopping becomes more transient, more strip mallish and not as attractive. Bossenbroek stated that a good possibility for a big box tenant is J.C. Penney with a 305 x 305 sq. ft. building. He related that historically they have been a solid anchor at Woodland Mall and Rivertown Mall, etc. Jim Bossenbroek related that they have a more successful upscale prototype as a stand-alone, as in the new Brighton lifestyle mall. He indicated that the retail has to work for them and for us.

Jim Bossenbroek stated that there are projects around the country that have done this very well with the big boxes and he would like to take staff along on a trip to visit these sites. Bossenbroek related that the big box uses with different materials, heights, cupolas that mix things up visually have done well. He indicated that they will use the latest design techniques but can’t be limited to 50,000 sq. ft. boxes, as he doesn’t know his users yet. Bossenbroek cited developments in Florida, Texas, Vegas, and California where the big boxes have been integrated well, but there is nothing like this in Michigan.

Gary Smith related that there are 2 levels: the site plan aspect – where we can plan what we want, and the architecture – the look and feel of the development.

Smith stated from a site plan standpoint, the retailers still have very traditional needs with close proximity of parking to their buildings. Chairman Hickey added that Planner Wash’s sketch has parking all the way around and he likes this configuration of buildings. The Planning Commission concurred.

Member Versluis asked, apart from the architectural standards or even the big boxes, is J.C. Penney the standard type of tenant the developer plans to bring in? Versluis stated that originally this was heralded as an "upscale" project. Jim Bossenbroek stated that J.C. Penney’s demographics are higher than the demographics of this area. Member Versluis stated that he is still looking for uniqueness, not the same as all the other shopping centers in the area. Gary Smith stated that it is still the intent of the town center to have higher end fashion.

Jim Bossenbroek stated that they need some anchor retail along I-96. Otherwise, there is not enough for the infrastructure and Cabela’s to do the TIF. He felt that this is a great place for J.C. Penney along I-96 and creates this destination to ultimately support the town center. Bossenbroek stated that there are not enough housing demographics to support the town center now. Cabela’s has to go up, then the other retailers along I-96, then the town center.

Member Versluis stated that it sounds like this will be just like everything else, just like Brighton, this is fairly typical everywhere he goes. He is not looking for fairly typical, he is striving for uniqueness. Bossenbroek stated that there are very interesting users in the Brighton Mall where J.C. Penney is an anchor. Versluis stated that he thought this would be exclusive with unique stores that you couldn’t find just anyplace. Apart from Cabela’s, he doesn’t see this as being original.

Chairman Hickey asked, what uses does Cabela’s bring with them? Jim Bossenbroek stated hotels, restaurants, and strip retail. Bossenbroek gave an example of in Kansas City, a Nebraska furniture mart - 600,000 sq. ft., a Great Wolf lodge plus another water park all went in this development.

Gary Smith stated that they still intend a walkable, higher end, exclusive shop project, as in the original plan. All of that will be surrounding the town center. We are still talking about all of this, only in a different configuration. Cabela’s, the tourist oriented anchor with associated retail, restaurants and hotels is still the plan. Gary stated that this new plan is better than the original plan.

Gary Smith stated that the developer is losing valuable ground with Cabela’s. He asked, how can we incorporate these uses and get it into a format that is close to the intent of the master plan? He felt that the new plan shows well connected, well thought out synergistic uses.

Member Greeno stated that until they know if one of the boxes is JC Penney or whatever, they don’t know where to draw the boxes. Greeno asked if the sub-area plans and guidelines need to be changed? Gary Smith stated no they still plan on the intended uses, but until we know the users we just don’t know.

Planner Wash stated that the Planning Commission has a zoning ordinance based obligation to approve the preliminary area site plan with basic land use, orientation of buildings, basic idea of where the development is going. In other words, the framework has to be approved. Planner Wash asked the planning commission, is District E changed or is it consistent with what was approved in the master plan? Is the pedestrian access and open space suitable for outdoor retail, vistas, streetscapes, views to and from the site? Wash stated that the preliminary area site plan may not be set in stone, but there is a lot of intent that goes into that sketch plan.

Member Ferris-Young stated that a high end make up store didn’t make it at Rivertown and that all of the examples of successful developments were located in warm climates, but none mentioned in Michigan. Jim Bossenbroek stated that they have strict design standards in Austin, Texas and everyone wants to locate there. He related that J.C. Penney, Target superstore are included in that power center and they also have a gathering area with small shops, and the architecture was done right. Bossenbroek stated that you don’t see that much in the Midwest, maybe in Chicago, but not in Michigan.

Member Ferris-Young suggested that the developer consider heated sidewalks for the Walker development. Jim Bossenbroek stated it would not be cost effective, but possibly in the town center area.

Planner Wash asked of the developer, on their site plans, to point out on this site where are they going to locate all of this creativity? Gary Smith asked, what will be the next step once the preliminary area site plan gets approved? Planner Wash stated the construction plans in conjunction with the final area site plan approval. Planner Wash stated in the first version of the preliminary area site plan, all of this discussed creativity was shown on the plans. He asked, where is it in this revised plan? He then reviewed his sketch, showing the box sizes, architecture, fountain, etc. He added that he would like to see this level of detail in the developer’s plans as was in the originally approved preliminary area site plan. Planner Wash asked, according to our master plan, what does the developer envision? Mr. Bossenbroek stated a tourist orientated anchor – Cabela’s, a hotel, restaurants, service oriented uses, and as a default, entertainment, or theatre or a water park.

Member Rypma stated that he anticipated retail along I-96, it is just a matter of how much. Member Rypma likes what he sees on Planner Wash’s sketch drawing. He doesn’t see a problem with a big box or with entertainment and retail at this location. Chairman Hickey agreed that if store 1 and 2 went together and it looked like 3 stores, he wouldn’t have a problem with it. Member Gornowich added, "depending on how it’s done".

Gary Smith stated if J.C. Penney commits, then they would have a good general retail anchor.

Planner Wash asked, is the Planning Commission comfortable with the plans as submitted by the developer? If so, they should move it forward.

Member Rypma likes the sketch that Planner Wash put together. He suggested that the developer come back with something close to that. There was concensus of the planning commission to be in favor of Planner Wash’s sketch drawing. Rypma stated when the developer has a tenant he will have to come back before us anyway. He is comfortable with that.

Gary Smith then pencil sketched a couple of ideas with respect to the big boxes along I-96 and building configuration, and reviewed it with the planning commission.

Jim Bossenbroek stated that for the 425 agreement and to finance the TIF, financers will be asking, "what approvals do we have"? He stated what is viable is medium size boxes, Cabela’s, and some outlots and some retailers. Bossenbroek stated that he has to show his lender that the City is ok with medium size boxes along the freeway.

Member Huizenga stated that he first found the boxes along the freeway offensive. In Planner Wash’s drawing, it breaks it up nicely. Huizenga also wants to see something for public space along the ravine. We as a planning commission need to decide what we want, have the developer draw it, come back and then we decide whether we agree to it, then the final area site plans will come back. Huizenga doesn’t like the big boxes along the freeway, he likes Planner Wash’s idea.

Planner Wash stated that the planning commission has, under the zoning ordinance, the power of uses not allowed, which we have done, such as an auto dealership, etc.

Member Versluis stated that he is concerned about the stores that will be here. Once the die is cast here, it will dictate what stores will come. He is concerned about big boxes.

Jim Bossenbroek gave an example in northwest Minneapolis (Arbor Lakes) where it started out as a 300-400 acre power center and grew to an upscale town center/life style center. Bossenbroek stated that if Cabela’s and tenants come, and traffic increases, etc. this could become an Arbor Lakes.

Member Versluis stated that what was originally proposed here was an upscale development, and the people felt they deserved something better. There was a recall, etc. Versluis stated that this site deserves the best, and he wants it to be a Mecca, and he doesn’t know if this is that type of development. Jim Bossenbroek asked Member Versluis who he would like them to have come? Bossenbroek stated that the market does not support a Nordstroms, as the demographics do not support it. Realtor, Jeff Hundley agreed with Jim Bossenbroek. Hundley stated that they would like to see Pottery Barn and some others come and he thinks it is possible.

Member Versluis stated that this is his chance to do this right as he has a passion for it. Bossenbroek stated that Commissioner Versluis has to understand the economics, the cost of the infrastructure, cost of land, cost of clean up, incentives given to Cabela’s, etc.

Jim Bossenbroek assured Steve Versluis that he wants to get the highest and best scale tenants to be viable. He has to be realistic about what he needs to get the job done, such as get Cabela’s first, etc. Gary Smith stated that the special place that Member Versluis is talking about is still here. Mr. Bossenbroek stated that he wants to make it successful first before the East Beltline does.

Member Rypma asked if it would be 2 years before the town center was built? Mr. Bossenbroek stated he didn’t think it would be that long, and once Cabela’s comes, a lot of users will follow.

Member Greeno stated that he wants it to be successful all the way around.

Planner Wash added that the layout, design, orientation, in addition to all the details, needs to be agreed upon by the planning commission, per the standards of the zoning ordinance.

Member Huizenga asked if we could set the standards for the big boxes, such as length of the walls along the interstate?

Member Rypma stated that he thought we had a resolution that referred to the size of the big boxes, etc. Planner Wash stated that was only a draft.

Chairman Hickey asked Mick Barney and Gary Smith if they could put a front façade on the back of the building that cannot be accessed, with windows for looks? Smith thought that was a possibility. Chairman Hickey asked Gary Smith to come back with a drawing that shows this.

Gary Smith stated that these box buildings along I-96 can be staggered, cantilevered, etc. but they have to meet the parking requirements.

Issues were discussed regarding public safety and public access around the buildings.

Member Ferris-Young stated that she would prefer to see a "bubble" drawing from the developer rather than the finished product at this stage. Planner Wash related that we will need more than a bubble drawing, as we need to follow the standards of the zoning ordinance.

Member Huizenga stated that he still prefers Planner Wash’s drawing with the smaller boxes on angles, etc. He felt that it was ok to combine the buildings, limit the square footage, with buildings looking over the ravine.

Member Gornowich agrees with all of the comments made by the other commissioners. She does not want the box buildings in a straight line, agrees with Planner Wash’s concept drawing, but prefers the fountain/sitting area more in the center of District E.

Member Ferris-Young asked the developer to provide pictures and examples of tenants with high probabilities. She likes the offset buildings shown on Planner Wash’s concept drawing.

Member Rypma agrees and likes Planner Wash’s concept best. It is creative and is what we want to see.

Planner Wash asked the developer to give us the preferred option for a preliminary plan with a couple of alternatives. He reminded them that we have an ordinance to follow.

Member Brown also likes Planner Wash’s option, and doesn’t like the straight line of box buildings. She doesn’t have a problem with J.C. Penneys.

Member Greeno stated that we need to get the right wording to the developer so he can get what he needs to get done. Greeno felt that we need a road behind the box buildings for safety, and the right design standards. He concurs with the commissioners about Planner Wash’s concept of the layout and configuration of buildings.

Chairman Hickey asked where the parks will be located in District E? Gary Smith stated that they could add some trails around this district. Hickey stated that we need a park or plazas. Gary Smith will get pictures of the development in Austin.

Chairman Hickey asked if it was still the developer’s intent to have a water park on the east side of Bristol? Mr. Bossenbroek stated yes and reviewed the location on the map.

Zach Bossenbroek stated that they will be submitting an application soon for that 60 acre site. Member Gornowich asked if the proposed water park site would utilize 5-6 acres? Mr. Bossenbroek stated yes.

City traffic consultant, Pete LaMourie, stated that the traffic impact study will have to be expanded to include the 60 acres east of Bristol Ave. He felt that the drops in density may offset the traffic, but felt that the City should ask for a revised traffic impact analysis to see where the traffic distribution will occur.

Planner Wash related that he will meet with the owners of English Hills Golf Course next week to coordinate plans for the Northridge extension.

Member Greeno stated that all of the roads, traffic, and infrastructure should be considered out 10 years with respect to the Bristol, Walker, and 3 Mile Road, and cost sharing of same between the developers.

Chairman Hickey stated that we have the 4 Mile corridor study done and in place.

Member Gornowich asked about improvements to the area where there is 1 lane under the railroad south of 3 Mile on Bristol Ave. Planner Wash indicated that Scott Conners has been working on that via the capital improvement process. Pete LaMourie stated that there is federal government protection for bridges serving railroads. LaMourie felt that far down Bristol the percentage of traffic will be smaller. He felt that the developer will have to find a way to mitigate the impacts on 4 Mile and Alpine. Jim Bossenbroek stated that is an already failed intersection.

Planner Wash stated that we will need a revised traffic impact analysis, including the percentage of overall trips on Bristol, north of 3 Mile.

Chairman Hickey asked the planning commission if anyone had a problem with the location of the water park on the east side of Bristol? The planning commission was ok with this location.

A recap of items for the developer team to incorporate on their Preliminary Area Site Plan amendment as follows:

Member Huizenga stated that he looks forward to more opportunities to work with the developer and felt that it has been a good process thus far.

Planner Wash is looking for 2 planning commissioners to be on the Standale RFQ committee. Chairman Hickey and Member Huizenga volunteered.

Planner Wash reviewed the revised maintenance building plans for Millenium Park which were basically flip-flopped on the site.

Motion by D. Brown, supported by M. Ferris-Young, to allow staff to approve these alterations. Motion carried 8-0.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by C. Gornowich, to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Motion carried.

_____________________________ _____________________________

Administrative Approval Carol Gornowich, Secretary

Walker Planning Commission