Planning Commission Minutes

Present: J. Hickey, Chairman; C. Rypma, T. Greeno, S. Versluis, M. Huizenga, M. Ferris-Young, and D. Brown. Absent: C. Gornowich. Also Present: F. Wash, Planning Director, and P. Dlouhy, Planning Asst.

Chairman Hickey called the meeting to order and Member Rypma gave the invocation.

There were no comments at this time.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by D. Brown, to approve the August 15, 2007 minutes as printed. Motion carried.

Chairman Hickey read the agenda item as follows: In accordance with the State of Michigan Municipal Planning Act, the City of Walker Planning Commission will review the draft 2 & 4A/4B Master Plan Update and hold the final public hearing. Sub-Area #2 is the area of the Fenske site/Wilson Ave. Sub-Area 4A is the downtown Standale area; and Sub-Area 4B is the area behind Meijer from Lake Michigan Dr. to O’Brien, west of Wilson.

Motion by D. Brown, supported by M.A. Ferris-Young, to open the public hearing. Motion carried.

Planner Wash related that this is Step 7 of 8 on the last major portion of the master plan update we started 2 years ago. Wash stated that the plans were released to adjacent communities and no comments were received. He hopes to move this item forward to the City Commission for final approval, then distribution to adjacent communities.

Chairman Hickey asked if there were any public comments on Sub-Area 2, the Wilson Ave./Fenske site? There were no comments.

Chairman Hickey asked if there were any public comments on Sub-Area 4A, the downtown Standale area? There were no comments.

Chairman Hickey asked if there were any public comments on Sub-Area 4B, the area behind Meijer from Lake Michigan Dr. to O’Brien, west of Wilson? There were no comments.

Chairman Hickey stated that this is the same plan that was presented in June of 2007. Planner Wash stated yes, the only change is the extended retail area down to the south end of the Meijer building at the direction of the Planning Commission.

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

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by C. Rypma, to forward a favorable recommendation on Sub-Area #2 – Fenske site/Wilson Ave. to the City Commission. Motion carried.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by M. Ferris-Young, to forward a favorable recommendation on Sub-Area #4A – Downtown Standale area to the City Commission. Motion carried.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by M. Ferris-Young, to forward a favorable recommendation on Sub-Area #4B – area behind Meijer from Lake Michigan Dr. to O’Brien, west of Wilson to the City Commission. Motion carried.

Chairman Hickey read the application requesting a conditional rezoning from ORP, Office, Research & Parking, to C-1, Local Commercial, for a parcel located a t 3911 Lake Michigan Dr., on the north side of M-45, east of Kinney Ave.

Motion by M.A. Ferris-Young, supported by C. Rypma, to open the public hearing. Motion carried.

Planner Wash related that he has received three documents tonight, two from residents, and one from Fergus Companies. The Commission should make a motion to receive and file these documents for the record.

Wash reviewed past history of the site, including the last attempt to rezone this parcel from ORP to C-1, for a KFC Restaurant 1.5 years ago, which was denied.

John Fergus has applied for a conditional rezoning, which allows the developer to offer conditions for rezoning in accordance with State law. The City cannot impose but can accept conditions.

Wash related that these conditions offered by the applicant exceed the zoning ordinance requirements in some cases. Ultimately it is the Planning Commission and City Commission’s decision on the rezoning.

Planner Wash reviewed the staff report and a REGIS map of the site. Wash indicated that the property is zoned ORP, but master planned for commercial, and surrounded by office and commercial uses and multi-family housing.

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by M.A. Ferris-Young, to accept into the record the letter of opposition and petition from Cheryl Fredricks, President of Barkwood Condominiums, letter of opposition from Irene Stehouwer, and note of opposition from James McHugh, of Barkwood Condominiums, plus materials submitted by John Fergus. Motion carried.

John Fergus, applicant/developer, was present and also reviewed an aerial photo of the site, along with a site sketch for Advance Auto Parts. He related that he had spoke to Planner Wash and Cheryl Fredricks, Barkwood Manager, with a desire to work something out with the adjoining condominium development, as he was aware of the past attempt to rezone the property. Mr. Fergus felt that this would be a good transitional use. He spent a lot of time researching our zoning ordinance for consideration of buffering the residential in the rear. In reviewing the site plan, Mr. Fergus offered 6 general conditions for this rezoning as follows:

Mr. Fergus felt that Advance Auto Parts would not generate the traffic that an ORP use would. Fergus stated that some uses currently allowed in a C-1 District would not be allowed here to assure this property is developed as shown with a 7,000 sq. ft. building, a direct driveway to the street, extensive landscaping, and it will be consistent with transitional uses along the street.

Cheryl Fredricks, President of Barkwood Condo Assn., stated that she has 40 owned condo units, and 33 of the 40 owners are present tonight. She reviewed their concerns as follows:

Cheryl Fredricks stated that she submitted a letter and petition of opposition to Frank Wash and to the City Commission, and asked the Planning Commission to take their concerns into consideration.

Jim McHugh, of 480 Barkwood Ct., stated that he is not in favor of an auto parts store at this location.

Another Barkwood resident stated that it will be hazardous to have another driveway off of Lake Michigan Dr. He stated that the former FMB Bank was suppose to share one driveway adjacent to the Dan Arsulowicz property.

Other concerns were drainage issues with rain, and icy conditions in the winter. If the auto parts store is not successful and leaves, then would this have to be reconsidered just as they kid for the KFC rezone? He understands that this house will not be there forever, but would prefer an office complex. He asked the commission to vote against the rezoning request.

Ed Binger, 464 Barkwood, is against an auto parts store. He stated it is hard to pull out of Barkwood as it is. He is a resident, a GVSU student, and a full-time employee. He has to turn onto Kinney and into Hampton Lakes Apts., then to Barkwood in order to get to his home. He felt that left hand turns are difficult with 4-5 driveways on their side of M-45, then 3-4 on the south side of the street.

As a younger resident, he goes to these auto parts stores and people change belts, oil, etc. right in the parking lot of the store. He doesn’t think that the older Barkwood residents want to see this going on from their decks either.

A Barkwood Condos resident, stated that her main concern is that you cannot make a lefthand turn out of the condos, she is concerned about safety and having to reroute through the residential roads via Cummings to get to her condo.

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

Member Rypma asked how is the entrance being changed? Planner Wash stated that is a site plan issue and will be addressed in detail with MDOT if this property is rezoned.

Wash stated that we would have them build a joint driveway and get cross access with the bank with a service drive along the first row of parking on the site.

Member Versluis stated that he does not see this Advance Auto Parts Store as a consistent use with what is in this area. Mr. Fergus stated that it will generate much less traffic than a bank or an office and it tends to spread traffic out. Fergus stated that it doesn’t have to be an identical use to be compatible; rather it is in the size and the compatibility as a neighborhood use. The important thing is that the conditional rezoning is property specific and runs with the land.

Member Versluis doesn’t agree that the proposed use is consistent. Fergus stated that there is a poor fit with the buildings to the west.

Member Greeno asked what the hours of operation would be? Fergus stated approximately 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. with peak hours on Saturday, and open on Sunday. Greeno asked what goes into the dumpster? Fergus stated that Advance Auto Parts recycles, so the truck will take the recyclables. The oil gets recycled and is located inside of the building. There is nothing with odor. No oil changes on site.

Fergus stated that cross access is not going to work with the bank. Planner Wash added that it is state law to give reasonable access and he would work with the developer and MDOT for good access management to the site. Fergus stated that he has no problem with cross access with sites along M-45, and noted that this site is 3’ higher than the property to the west.

Member Greeno asked Cheryl Fredricks if Barkwood Condominiums would be willing to have cross access with this site? After a further explanation, Cheryl Fredericks stated no, they would not be willing.

Member Ferris-Young asked what the typical traffic count would be for the day? Mr. Fergus stated that he had a number for the week, but didn’t bring that info with him to the meeting. He felt it would be an average of 400 cars per day. Ferris-Young asked how many deliveries? Fergus stated 1 per week via semi-truck. Fergus felt there was enough room for a hand truck and pallets for maneuverability.

Planner Wash stated that, depending on the use and size of a building, number of employees, etc., a traffic impact analysis will be required. Driveway and cross access will also be determined as part of any site plan review.

With regard to the conditional zoning aspect, Member Versluis stated that he always prefers that the zoning should stay with the property. If Advance Auto Parts decides not to operate here any longer, then we will be left with an empty building. Planner Wash stated they would then have to come back to the Planning Commission and City Commission for future approvals or amendments to the conditional zoning agreement.

Member Versluis finds a conditional rezoning troublesome. Planner Wash stated that it is standard practice in some other states but is new to Michigan. He stated that the Planning Commission should examine what conditions have been offered, and do they go above the standards of the zoning ordinance? In this case, yes it does and maybe Mr. Fergus’ proposal is a good idea. Member Versluis felt that everybody will come in and try this.

Member Greeno stated if Mr. Fergus’ self-imposed conditions are stronger than our ordinances, then he doesn’t have a problem with the rezoning. Member Greeno asked the Barkwood Condo president to reconsider the cross access in the future. Greeno stated that unlike KFC, this proposal wouldn’t be noisy and smelly. The developer has gone out of his way to show us they want a barrier between their business and the Barkwood residents. He realizes it will not be totally hidden because of the height of the Barkwood buildings. If we press forward with the rezoning, there will be more to come with that barrier via the site plan review process. Greeno suggested tabling this item.

Member Versluis reiterated his position that the use is not consistent with surrounding development, and not a transitional use for the Barkwood residents. He felt that some kind of office use would be more adequate, and he does not support this request for rezoning.

Member Rypma appreciated the article from Planner Wash on conditional rezoning. He felt that it has its good points and bad points. He would be more in favor of a PUD. He doesn’t see the proposed use fitting in with the character of the neighborhood and with the transition with the condos. The master plan does show commercial for this area, but it is only a guide. He does not support this request.

Member Huizenga agrees with Member Greeno in that the zoning ordinance standards are exceeded. There are not going to be odors. The setbacks are better than what they currently have with adjacent office/bank buildings. This is not a great parcel for an office. He feels that the high traffic counts will not get any better. He is in favor of the rezoning; not necessarily for an Advance Auto Parts Store, only if it can be done well.

Member Ferris-Young stated that she lived in Barkwood condos in the 1990’s. She felt this proposal has a good opportunity for landcaped berms, whether it is Advance Auto parts or whoever. She would support the rezoning and would rather deal with a developer where we know what we are getting.

Member Brown stated that she agrees with Member Versluis, she is not crazy about getting an Advance Auto Parts Store, and doesn’t think it fits well in the area. She would rather see an office, which is closed on weekends. She also would like to see future cross access and eliminate this driveway. She is not in favor of the rezoning.

Chairman Hickey stated when he served on the master plan committee, we decided that an office in an ORP zone would fit because of other buildings in proximity. When the study by the DDA was done for downtown Standale, other areas would be a supporting entity, and an office would be supporting. He felt that Advance Auto should be located in an existing C-1 zone in Standale. He is totally against this rezoning, and feels it should be an office, or doctor or dentist office.

Motion by S. Versluis, supported by C. Rypma, to recommend to the City Commission denial of the conditional rezone from ORP to C-1 for the property located at 3911 Lake Michigan Dr. Motion carried 6-2. (Nays: M. A. Ferris-Young and M. Huizenga).

Chairman Hickey read the application requesting rezoning of 2 parcels from AA – Agricultural to MPUD- Mixed Use Planned Unit Development that will complete the land area of the Orchard Park project. The properties involved are 3404 Walker Avenue and 3211 Bristol Avenue.

Planner Wash reviewed the staff report and related that this is a small but essential part of the larger project. One parcel was formerly owned by Consumer Power Co., where Northridge Dr. would come through. The small piece on Bristol is in the rear yard of where Cabela’s would land on this site. Both properties are now owned by Walker Orchard Land Partners and are requested to be rezoned to MPUD.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by M.A. Ferris-Young, to open the public hearing. Motion carried.

Member Rypma asked how these 2 pieces got lost in the shuffle? Zach Bossenbroek stated that Walker Orchard Land Partners didn’t own them before.

Member Greeno asked when they were planning to come in with an application for the 60 acres across the street on Bristol? Zach stated soon, but first wanted to get the preliminary area site plan approval for the Orchard Park project done.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by M. Huizenga, to close the public hearing. Motion carried.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by M.A. Ferris-Young, to recommend approval of the rezoning of the 2 parcels located at 3404 Walker Avenue and 3211 Bristol Avenue, from AA, Agricultural to MPUD, Mixed Planned Unit Development, to the City Commission for approval. Motion carried unanimously. 7-0.

Chairman Hickey read the application requesting site plan approval for a 35,000 sq. ft. industrial, multi-tenant spec. building located at 4337 – 3 Mile Road, N.W.

Planner Wash reviewed the staff report and provided REGIS aerial orientation to the site. Wash related the site is located at the intersection of 3 Mile and Wilson. This property was included in the original engineering plan for North Wilson Industrial Park and all detention will be handled via the stormwater permit process.

Wash pointed out that there is a pre-existing wetland in the northwest corner of the site, which will need to be addressed with MDEQ. The property is zoned ML, Light Industrial. From a staff standpoint, the details have been worked out.

Planner Wash reviewed the site plan and related that the building is proposed to be a multi-tenant building, and falls under our new sign ordinance. There are a mixture of materials proposed. The planning commission enforces the architectural code and requested samples of building materials for review. Wash related what is proposed is masonry with glass and metal.

Paul Veltheizen, of Exxel Engineering, was present on behalf of the developer. Paul brought along building elevations for the planning commission to review.

Chairman Hickey stated that he would like to see a variation in colors and textures with stone and brick utilized on the building on the 3 Mile and Wilson Ave. sides. Northwest Commerce Park is a beautiful park with good looking buildings throughout. Hickey likes the windows on the south and west elevations. He likes split face block, but he does not like metal siding. He felt it should be brick, block or stucco. He has no problem with the building design or layout on the lot.

Member Rypma asked Planner Wash’s opinion on the materials for the building?

Wash related that we had a long discussion during the development of the Building Design Ordinance and language was taken out for industrial with respect to architectural standards. Staff does not have leverage to require masonry all the way around the building. However, the final decision rests with the Planning Commission.

Member Versluis added that the front wall should be masonry. Planner Wash stated that two sides are pretty visible and he feels it would be better to have masonry on the sides that face Wilson and 3 Mile. Limit the use of EIFS (exterior stucco) and use brick/split face block . It was determined that the metal awning with some metal accents were ok. Planner Wash has no problem with the building layout.

Wash stated that the Planning Commission would like to see a revised, colored, exterior elevation that does not use metal skin on the south and west elevations. The primary materials on these elevations should be brick, block, glass and limited EIFS. The Planning Commission would also like the applicant to submit a scaled wall and ground signage package according to the new sign ordinance standards. The applicant should bring material samples to the next planning commission meeting.

Motion by C. Rypma, supported by S. Versluis, to table this item with the site plan amendments noted above. Motion carried.

Planner Wash related that Sub-Areas 3A & 3B were approved by the City Commission, and posted on the website as official updates to the Walker Master Plan.

Wash related that we have 7 new houses in Sunset Hills #4 and have sent out a letter to each of the homeowners that they will receive a street tree and gator bag for watering purposes, planted by Katerburg-VerHage. Funds will come from the Sunset Hills #4 street tree escrow.

Wash reviewed an upcoming agenda item in the Fruitridge Industrial Park on Northridge Dr. for another Visser spec building.

Wash related that RFQ’s for the DDA for the Parkside/Cummings area have been sent out. Wash related this is the first implementation test for the DDA downtown development plan. He has received a conceptual idea from a developer. The RFQ deadline is September 17th.

Wash has been including the planning commission on e-mails for info only purposes on the recent traffic meetings involving Orchard Park, English Hills Golf Course, Dreamscapes, and all government agencies.

Motion by T. Greeno, supported by D. Brown, to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried.

___________________________ ___________________________

Administrative Approval Carol Gornowich, Secretary

Walker Planning Commission