Members Present: T. Korfhage, D. Brown, M. Huizenga, J. Hickey;
Chairman; T. Byle, T. Schweitzer, C. Gornowich, A. Parent. Absent: C.
Rypma. Also Present: F. Wash, Planning Director, and P. Dlouhy, Planning
Asst.
Chairman Hickey opened the meeting and Member Huizenga gave the
invocation.
Approval of Minutes – January 7, 2009
Motion by T. Byle, supported by D. Brown, to approve the minutes of
January 7, 2009, as printed. Motion carried.
General Public Comment
There were no comments at this time.
Case #08-551 – G&T Realty Rezone – 765 Kingsbury –
tabled 1-7-09
Chairman Hickey read the request for rezoning of property from
SA-Suburban Residential Single Family to C-1-Local Commercial for
property located at 765 Kingsbury, N.W. (PPN#41-13-01-101-048).
Planner Wash stated that this item was tabled 2 weeks ago for
follow-up of items listed in the staff report. The public hearing was
closed on January 7th, 2009.
Wash reviewed his staff report and provided an aerial orientation to
the site, which is located near the northeastern corner of Alpine Avenue
and Kingsbury, between 4 Mile Road and North Center Drive. Wash related
that the subject parcel was a former Nutrition Plus site.
Wash reviewed the area zoning and land uses such as an Parts Plus
Store zoned C-1, dry cleaner and nail salon zoned C-1, Walgreens/Belle
Tire zoned CPUD, National City Bank zoned C-1, and the existing
residential neighborhood on Kingsbury. Wash stated that the subject
property is master planned for community commercial.
Wash related that the building was allowed to be rebuilt after the
1998 windstorm by act of the Walker Zoning Board of Appeals. He
indicated that the property has been taxed and used commercially for
many years.
Wash stated that at the Planning Commission meeting on January 7th,
the majority of the discussion was focused on the possible uses of the
subject building. Concern was expressed over a potential liquor store on
the property. Wash stated that the City does not control the State
Liquor Control Commission. However, City zoning rules might be more
strict and not allow such a use.
Planner Wash stated that Lt. Greg Long from the Walker Police
Department is present tonight to answer public safety questions.
Motion by M. Huizenga, supported by C. Gornowich, to remove this item
from the table. Motion carried.
Chairman Hickey reviewed the tabling questions and answers from
Planner Wash as follows:
Q: What are the required setbacks between a liquor store and
adjacent residential uses?
A: State of Michigan Liquor Control Code – PA 58 of 1998: This law
requires a 500-foot separation distance between a licensed place of
on-premise alcohol sales and churches or school buildings. There is no
regulated setback between licensed businesses and residences. PA 58 of
1998 was attached to the updated staff report.
Q. What is the current state of alcohol sales at the adjacent
Walgreen’s?
A: The adjacent Walgreen’s does not sell liquor, beer or wine.
Q: Will the Zoning Administrator (Jeff Nelson) and City Attorney
(Jeff Sluggett) support the Planning Director’s "judged similar"
recommendation for ZBA review of a liquor or party store proposed in a
C-1 Local Commercial zoning district, as stated in Wash’s staff report
dated 12-22-08?
A: Jeff Sluggett is in agreement with staff. Jeff Nelson also
agrees to the "judged similar" process for a potential future liquor
store.
Q: What is the history of commercial use on this residentially
zoned property?
A: A list of commercial building activity on 765 Kingsbury was
included in commissioner’s packets.
Q: Will Police Chief Catherine Garcia-Lindstrom be invited to the
Jan. 21st Planning Commission meeting to discuss alleged
public safety issues in the Kingsbury Gage Neighborhood area?
A: Yes, the Police Chief has been invited.
Is the owner interested in offering a conditional rezoning?
A: Wash met with realtor Earl Clements on Jan. 8th to
discuss the issue. Mr. Clements had the property owner, John Ten
Elshof, on the speaker phone. The owner expressed no interest in a
conditional rezoning to restrict a potential liquor store use on the
site. The owner felt that the parking ordinance would limit the
intensity of a potential restaurant use on the site. The owner
suggested they might be open to restricting potential drive-up windows
on the site. However, as no offer for conditional rezoning has been
received, the Planning Commission should consider the application as
it stands…a non-conditional rezoning to C-1 Local Commercial.
Lt. Greg Long then reported on public safety calls in the
Kingsbury-Gage neighborhood over the last two years. He related that
there was one break and enter call at 765 Kingsbury. Long reported that
there were no calls made in 2008. However, adjacent to this area, in the
residential Kingsbury neighborhood and the Kingsbury Place Apartments,
they have received the normal calls in that area consisting of citizen
arrests and assisting staff at the apartments. Long stated there was
nothing abnormal with regard to call volume in the area of 765
Kingsbury.
Realtor Earl Clements stated that the building has been used and
taxed for commercial for over 20 years. He said that in 1988-1989, the
owner was Nutrition Plus, who moved out of there about 1 year ago.
Clements stated that the building has been for sale or lease for the
past 9-10 months. He has had several inquiries but little activity, with
one or two people interested in a party store/liquor store, three food
operations, including a small ethnic grocery store, and two small
Mexican restaurants. Mr. Clements stated that he has no signed leases,
only letters of interest.
Mr. Clements stated that he came before the Planning Commission as he
was trying to do the right thing by getting this zoning corrected. He
stated that he didn’t want a conditional rezoning as he did not want to
set restrictions on the property. He thought that the building size and
parking would restrict the intensity of uses in the C-1 zone anyway.
Member Huizenga asked who Mr. Clements has received letters of
interest from? Mr. Clements stated that he has received letters of
interest from a Mexican restaurant and two different party stores, but
he has not yet signed anything.
Commissioner Al Parent asked if the current owners had contacted the
previous owners about the zoning of the property? Mr. Clements stated
that any potential recourse would have expired by now.
Planner Wash explained the procedural aspects if a liquor store is
requested on this subject site as follows:
Wash stated if a restaurant is proposed on this subject site, it
would be limited by the number of parking spaces. He stated that it
might end up being a take-out restaurant. If the site is proposed to
have a drive-through restaurant, that would be enough of a change to
warrant Planning Commission review.
Planner Wash stated that he would be hard pressed to say that the
rezoning should be denied. The applicants have been advised that a
liquor store is not permitted in the C-1 District and the ZBA might not
approve a "judged similar" use determination.
Member Gornowich stated if a liquor store was approved, the standards
to be addressed would be as a "judged similar" and there would be
different standards to establish the ZBA’s findings of fact. She stated
it would be an interpretation rather than a variance. Planner Wash
stated yes, an interpretation of the ordinance. Member Gornowich asked
if a use variance had been contemplated? Planner Wash stated that a use
variance is the toughest to obtain. He recommends approval of the
rezoning to C-1 Local Commercial, with a subsequent ZBA "judged similar"
interpretation for a potential liquor store. Gornowich stated that the
property hasn’t been used for residential and it has set empty for the
past nine months. She felt that might be justification for a use
variance.
Chairman Hickey asked if Planner Wash’s recommendation is in favor of
rezoning to C-1? Planner Wash stated yes. When he originally spoke with
Mr. Clements, he recommended rezoning to C-1, as it is the least intense
commercial district.
Commissioner Parent stated that he spoke with City Engineer Conners
and learned that a new traffic island will soon be installed at the
Kingsbury/Alpine intersection with no left turns onto Alpine Avenue,
only right-in/right-out. Planner Wash drew a "right-in, right-out only"
island on the REGIS Map. The island will be located at the
Kingsbury/Alpine intersection.
Member Huizenga stated that he doesn’t see this site as ever being
used for residential, because it has been used as commercial for over 20
years.
Member Byle asked Mr. Clements if he had received three letters of
intent for the subject site? Mr. Clements stated he has no signed
leases, only letters of interest from two Mexican Restaurants, a liquor
store, and another party store.
Mr. Clements stated that he and the owners thought the subject
property had been zoned commercial for over 20 years.
Member Brown referred to Planner Wash’s staff report where it states
that "a State Law standard that on-premise liquor sales licenses cannot
be less than one-half mile (2,640’) from another licensed
establishment." The Rite Aid north of 4 Mile Road, west of Plumb’s
grocery store, sells liquor. The distance between the two is 2,160 feet.
This suggests that, unless a waiver is granted by the State of Michigan,
a liquor sales license might not be granted at 765 Kingsbury. The
"separation on the opposite side of a major thoroughfare" (Alpine
Avenue) may lend support for a waiver".
Planner Wash stated that the State might grant a liquor license for
the subject site, but the City may not approve or allow the use, based
on local zoning regulations.
Member Korfhage stated that if this was still a Nutrition Plus Store,
we wouldn’t be having this debate. He has faith that all of the steps
will be covered. If a liquor store is requested, it will have to go
before the Zoning Board of Appeals and there is no guarantee the ZBA
will approve a "judged similar" determination.
Member Korfhage agrees with Member Huizenga; even if the existing
building was torn down, a residence would never be built there. Member
Huizenga stated that if a restaurant went in, it would have little
parking and limited seating inside.
Member Brown stated that she agrees with Members Huizenga and
Korfhage. She doesn’t want to see a liquor store go in, but thinks it
should be rezoned to C-1. Brown doesn’t know how fair it would be to
wait for a user to go in there and then rezone it.
Member Gornowich stated that this is a 20-year old mistake that has
been propagated, and the building has been leased again and again. The
size of the lot and building will limit the potential for some uses
allowed in the C-1 zoning district.
Member Byle added that he thought a barber shop, medical or dental
office could go in, or a limited restaurant use. Byle stated that we
should not leave the property zoned residential or expect it to be used
residentially.
Member Gornowich stated that she doesn’t want to see a liquor store
go in, but if requested, it will have to go before the ZBA with no
guarantee of approval. She agrees with the staff recommendation to
rezone the property to C-1.
Member Schweitzer stated the rezoning is consistent with the master
plan. He is looking at the C-1 uses and all uses seem reasonable. The
liquor store land use is not on the C-1 use list. He is looking at what
has been on the site for the past 20 years. The site is surrounded by
commercial uses with residential on one side. In the future, this parcel
may be combined for future redevelopment with another parcel. He thinks
it is a reasonable request to approve the rezoning to C-1.
Commissioner Parent stated that he has talked with the residents in
the Kingsbury-Gage area. There are trash problems with the nearby Steak
and Shake Restaurant. Parent stated it is too bad that the owners can’t
agree on a conditional rezoning. He feels that it should be some type of
commercial, but there are too many unknowns at this time. He cannot vote
for C-1 rezoning.
Motion by C. Gornowich, supported by D. Brown, to recommend approval
to the Walker City Commission for the rezoning of 765 Kingsbury (PPN
#41-13-01-101-048) from SA-Suburban Residential Single Family to C-1
Local Commercial. Motion carried 6-2. (Nays: A. Parent, and J. Hickey).
Planner Wash stated that this item will go to the City Commission on
February 9th.
Commissioner and Staff Update
Planner Wash stated that he met with the Ordinance Committee today.
He is working towards an open house for the Standale Downtown District
Ordinance sometime in March. The Planning Commission will be invited to
attend. It will be in the evening at 5:30 or 6:00 p.m.
The Wind Energy Ordinance is being reviewed by the Ordinance
Committee and it will be coming to the Planning Commission soon.
Wash related that there will be changes made to the private road
ordinance so that they are completed in a timely manner.
The next Planning Commission meeting will be held on Wednesday,
February 18th, with two site plans on the agenda.
The idea of having only one meeting a month was discussed. Planner
Wash stated that he will keep that in mind and it will depend on the
number of applications that come in.
Adjournment
Motion by A. Parent, supported by D. Brown, to adjourn the meeting at
8:15 p.m. Motion carried.
_________________________ ____________________________
Administrative Approval Carol Gornowich, Secretary
Walker Planning Commission
The City
of Walker, Michigan