Planning Commission

STERLING HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL APRIL 10, 2014 LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 40555 Utica Road, Sterling Heights, MI. SUBJECT: Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission held April 10, 2014. Vice Chairman Reinowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present at roll call: Benjamin Ancona, Al Kollmorgen, Edward Kopp, Stefano Militello, Donald Miller, Jeffrey Norgrove, Leonard Reinowski. Members absent at roll call: Paul Jaboro (excused). Gerald Rowe (excused). Also in attendance: Donald Mende, City Planner Clark Andrews, City Attorney Renee Bayer, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF AGENDA Moved by Militello, supported by Kopp, to approve the agenda as presented. Ayes: Militello, Kopp, Ancona, Kollmorgen, Norgrove, Reinowski. Nays: None. Absent: Jaboro, Rowe. Motion carried. PPCM-1135 – CAPITAL TELECOM ACQUISITION (AT&T) Requesting Special Approval Land Use for a wireless communication tower. Location: West side of Van Dyke between Metropolitan Parkway and Fifteen Mile Road in Section 28. Property Address: 36797 Van Dyke. Mr. Mende stated that the Sterling Heights Zoning Ordinance permits Wireless Communication Towers as a Special Approval Land Use (SALU) in the Commercial zoning district (Section 13.02 M). Mr. Mende displayed the site plan and an aerial photo. This parcel is zoned C-3 (General Business) and is developed with a 6000 sq. ft. Firestone Tire & Automobile Repair building. The approximate parcel dimensions are 151’ x 546’. The petitioner intends to construct a 120’ tall monopole for cellular antennas at the west end of the property, roughly 460’ setback from Van Dyke. The Sterling Heights Zoning Ordinance permits cell towers in the commercial zone subject to Special Approval Land Use by the Planning Commission. One condition, in order to encourage the co-location of multiple antennas on one monopole, is that the distance between two towers must be at least 1500 feet. A review of the FCC database indicates no existing towers within 1500 feet of the proposed tower. This new monopole is proposed be built so as to be able to accommodate multiple carriers (co-locators) in the future. Cellular towers are regulated from a number of other sources including: Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996; Federal Sequestration Act of 2012; Michigan Zoning Enabling Act as amended by PA 143 of 2012. Generally speaking, these statutes prohibit the discrimination between different providers, limits local government regulation which results in prohibiting wireless services, and requires most applications to be treated as permitted uses by right. The site plan and property have been reviewed by the appropriate city departments and is NOT in compliance with the site plan standards and ordinances. Two issues stand out. First, access to the tower and equipment enclosure is via a proposed gravel driveway. The Offices of Planning and Engineering communicated to the Petitioner that asphalt or concrete is required. The Sterling Heights Fire Marshal was consulted as well and stated that, with the tower access drive exceeding 150’ in length, the Fire Prevention Division requires a paved surface and compliance with Fire Prevention Regulation 5-8, which deals with fire apparatus roads and turnarounds. The Petitioner disregarded that standard and countered that Section 28.18 A.5.gives the Planning Commission authority to approve any material, including gravel, and instructed the Office of Planning to process the request (see attached e-mail), against our recommendation. [A.5. A 12 foot access road constructed of materials approved by the Planning Commission shall be provided and maintained in good condition to provide access for service and emergency vehicles.] The Petitioner further stated the opinion that cellular towers and equipment enclosures are not intended to be covered by Article 23 Off Street Parking And Loading Requirements because cell towers are not specifically mentioned (see attached e-mail). The Petitioner fails to note, however, that Section 23.01 H. clearly deals with uses not specifically mentioned. [H. For those uses not specifically mentioned, the requirements for off-street parking facilities shall be in accord with a use, which is most similar in type as determined by the Zoning Official.] A 120’ cellular tower and equipment enclosure, by their nature, are the type of structures that would warrant the use of Heavy Rescue apparatus if there were ever any type of medical, fire or rescue operation needed at this location, with accessibility concerns first and foremost. Secondly, a site inspection has revealed that there is outdoor storage on the property in violation of the ordinance. Used tires are stacked up against the building and an unlicensed semi-trailer is parked in a designated passenger vehicle parking area. Further, the dumpsters are stored outside of the designated masonry enclosure. Special approval land uses may be permitted by the Planning Commission subject to the General Standards of Section 25.02 and the specific conditions imposed for each use. City Administration believes that this has not been met by the Petitioner in this case. Mr. Mende recommended that this request be denied based on the lack of the hard surface paving and code issues. The petitioner, Scott VonRein, representing Capitol Telecom, 1500 Mt. Kemble Ave., Morristown, NJ 47960, stated that they are in general compliance of all the requirements of the cell phone ordinance Section 28.18. We are proposing a 120’ monopole that is permitted as required. The existing trees in the vicinity will shield the cell tower and the compound. As far as the 12’ access road, we prefer to do a compacted gravel driveway that is basically one step below being paved. One of reasons for this is to not attract people to go back there. If this is a major point of contention with the planning commission, I’m sure we can come to an agreement on the paved road. Mr. Militello asked what is the issue with getting the driveway paved if you said you were willing to do it? Mr. VonRein stated the issues are what he mentioned earlier but if this is going to make or break the site, they will pave the road. Mr. Reinowski asked with the possibility of the elimination of landlines, would this cell tower have an emergency generator or operate strictly off the Edison lines? Mr. VonRein stated that AT&T is proposing a back-up generator for the site in addition to the primary electricity. So, there will be a back-up generator. Mr. Norgrove asked about the site inspection that was done that showed couple of violations. The violations being outdoor storage, tires stacked up against the building, an unlicensed semi- trailer parked in the vehicle area and a dumpster being stored outside the enclosure. Will these be or have they been rectified? Mr. VonRein stated he was not aware of these violations and would have to speak to the landlord. Mr. Kollmorgen asked Mr. Mende if the violations would be the landlords (Firestone) as opposed to AT&T. Mr. Mende stated that yes, they would be Firestone’s and they are leasing the property to AT&T and ultimately Firestone is responsible for the entire site. Mr. Kollmorgen stated that the enclosure for the garbage bin is going to be right adjacent to the drive, the proposed gravel drive. That might be an issue if you don’t have the containers in the storage area. Mr. VonRein stated he was at the site before this meeting and if you are facing the rear of the site, the garbage dumpsters are on the left side of the property and were within the brick enclosure. The access drive that is proposed is just to the right on the back part of the property. I don’t think the two will affect the other. Mr. Kollmorgen stated that his point being that if the dumpsters were outside of the enclosure, you would not be able to get safety vehicles back there. Two other points, there is no issue with the tower from Van Dyke, I’m wondering about 16 Mile. Is there anything impeding the vision from 16 Mile since we are hearing about nice enclosures, the wooded area for the vision from Van Dyke and I’m not seeing anything about 16 Mile and it appears to be just as close to 16 Mile. Mr. VonRein stated that you can’t hide a 120’ tower, there is no hiding that. The tower is centered in the middle of the property. There are 30’ to 40’ trees in the surrounding it. It will shield the base and maybe 1/3rd of the tower from 16 Mile and Van Dyke. Mr. Kollmorgen stated this would not make him give a no vote but not paving the driveway would. Mr. VonRein stated he would change the driveway to a paved road. Mr. Militello asked Mr. Mende if they should postpone this request until the work has been done? Mr. Mende stated that the board typically would prefer a postponement to revise the plan to show it’s paved and then code enforcement can do an inspection to make sure the violations are taken care of. Tom Hodges, with petitioner Scott VonRein, asked who will be sending the violations to Firestone, the city or do you want us (AT&T) to tell them what they need to do? Mr. Reinowski answered that they might want to reinforce it but since the city is aware of it, they will be taking some action on it. Mr. Reinowski opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Motion by Miller, supported by Militello, In the case of PPCM-1135, Capital Telecom Acquisition (AT&T), 36797 Van Dyke, I move to POSTPONE the Special Approval Land Use to the meeting of June 12, 2014 to allow the petitioner time to revise and present amended site plans for compliance review to the Planning Commission. Roll call on motion: Ayes: Miller, Militello, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Kollmorgen, Kopp Nays: None Absent: Jaboro, Rowe Motions carried to postpone. PPCM-1136 – MARK & AGNES YARSIKE Requesting Temporary Use Approval for outdoor flower sales – North side of 15 Mile Road west of Schoenherr in Section 26. Property address: 13331 Fifteen Mile Road Mr. Mende stated that the petitioner appeared before the Planning Commission at the March 13, 2014 meeting for approval of a temporary use – Outdoor Nursery Sales. The request was denied by a vote of 6-1. Mr. Mende displayed plans. The petitioner has substantially revised his proposal by downsizing the area utilized for the outdoor flower display, reduced the time period, and has submitted a new application for consideration. The petitioner is proposing to operate a temporary seasonal outdoor sale. The petitioner has provided a drawing that indicates two display areas, one dimensioning approximately 78’ x 80’ (reduced from 90’ x 100)’ west of the bank and one approximately 20’ x 90’ (reduced from 20’x 100’) adjacent to the front berm/landscaped area. The reduction in display area moves the use further to the east and away from Planet Fitness. The petitioner has also revised the time period for the use, ending almost 30 days sooner than the previous request. The petitioner did state that he has been shopping around for a new location and this will be his last year at this location. Based on the reduction in sales display area, length of the sale and conditions of approval that must be met, the Planning Commission may consider approving the request. The Office of Planning has completed its review and has determined that all of the specific conditions contained under Section 28.14 and other applicable identified under Zoning Ordinance No. 278 can be met. Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. Mende about the last time this was before the board, there was some indication from Planet Fitness that they had some agreement with the shopping center to use the parking. Mr. Mende stated that he has not been provided any information regarding any agreements between Planet Fitness and the shopping center. I do know that with Planet Fitness, they do have substantial parking on the west side of the building but the majority of the parking gets used in front of their front entrance. Mr. Norgrove asked Mr. Mende if the violations from the previous year had been addressed and taken care of. Mr. Mende stated that the violations were from 2013 and taken care of. The slate is clear for 2014. The violations from 2013 are what triggered the petitioner to come before the commission for approval rather than us to just review it administratively. Mr. Norgove asked Mr. Mende that with the updated changes is the planning department satisfied with everything that they have come to them with. Mr. Mende answered that they don’t see any issues for not approving it for this summer. Mr. Ancona asked Mr. Mende that the petitioner looking for a new location for next year doesn’t really have anything to do with tonight’s issue. He could come back next year if he wanted to for us to choose to approve if everything is good. Mr. Mende replied yes. Mr. Kollmorgen asked Mr. Mende about the last meeting there was a speaker that was opposed to granting the petitioner anything. Did we notify the people around that area again? Mr. Mende stated that standard notification of 300’ was sent out. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Mende if there were any fines involved with the 5 violations from last year. Mr. Mende stated that he did not believe there were any fines. These are violations that typically the warning letters are mailed and asking for compliance. In this instance the penalty is paying the fee and appearing before this board. On behalf of the petitioner, Mark & Agnes Yarsike and the representative for the landlord, TAVA Investments, David Merelli, Phil Ruggeri, 43231 Schoenherr, Sterling Heights, MI 48313, stated that the landlord has full support for petitioner for this petition and if you need to acknowledge that, he is here to do that. There is adequate parking for Planet Fitness. The petitioner has been in the same location for fourth seasons and this is his fifth and is trying to accommodate this new tenant. One of the things that has changed is the dates have been shortened by three weeks. It should be April 25th thru July 10th and one week before the season and one week after the season is the setup and tear down. Those setup and tear down weeks are included in the dates of April 25th through July 10th. He is only there for about 76 days. This should not interfere with the existing tenants otherwise the landlord would not be supportive. Mr. Norgrove asked Mr. Mende if the change in the dates would affect the application in anyway. Mr. Mende replied he didn’t think so. Mr. Reinowski opened the public hearing. Samantha Dallo, 2487 Coral Dr., Troy, MI 48085, is here speaking on behalf of Planet Fitness and a lot of the existing tenants in the plaza. Mr. Dallo placed photos of the parking lot she had taken every day this week for the camera. These photos show that the area the petitioner wants to use is being used to its full capacity. The petitioner was using caution tape and signs for his dedicated customers that was not authorized and he was using the other tenant’s dumpsters. Mr. Militello stated that there is plenty of available parking for Planet Fitness. There is a whole row of parking up against the brick wall and along the building itself. Plus, there is parking in the back. To say the little bit of square footage that he is taking up is going to hinder the shopping center’s parking is not right; there is plenty of parking in that area. Before when the petitioner requested a bigger area, I understand the complaint. But it reduced it and is making an effort and I feel you can make an effort to help him out also. The violations were last year and to bring those up is not worth it. Mr. Kollmorgen asked Mr. Reinowski if there were two landlords for this property. Mr. Reinowski stated yes. Mr. Militello asked Mr. Ruggeri if his research is correct as far as if there is a cross easement in the parking lots. Mr. Ruggeri answered yes. Motion by Norgrove, supported by Militello, In the case of PPCM-1136, Mark & Agnes Yarsike, 13331 Fifteen Mile Road, I move to APPROVE the Temporary Use based upon the facts and plans presented in public hearing, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the days and hours of operation for the outdoor sale shall be limited to April 25th thru July 10, 2014 during normal business hours; 2. That the outdoor sales shall be set up no sooner than April 25th and removed no later than July 10, 2014; 3. That the size and nature of the sale shall conform to the activity described in the petition and reflected on the plot plan received March 19, 2014; 4. That the sales area shall be placed in such a manner as to allow unobstructed pedestrian access to the designated entrances; 5. That separation of pedestrian/vehicular traffic shall be maintained with appropriate barricades. 6. That all maneuvering lanes and drives located in the vicinity of the sale (other than the area that has been barricaded) shall remain clear for traffic circulation; 7. That the site be cleaned on a daily basis and restored to its normal condition immediately after the completion of the sale; 8. All refuse shall be placed in the proper receptacles and promptly removed; 9. That all necessary permits be obtained through the Building Office; 10. That the petitioner comply with all codes and ordinances of the City of Sterling Heights, County of Macomb, and the State of Michigan; 11. That the operation and control of the sale and activities be the sole responsibility of Mark & Agnes Yarsike and David Morelli (Tava Investments); 12. Any violations of these conditions or codes and ordinances will result in the revocation of this permit if not remedied to the satisfaction of the City of Sterling Heights within 24 hours; 13. The location of the outdoor sales is subject to a field inspection by the Office of Planning and is subject to change. Roll call on motion: Ayes: Norgrove, Militello, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Kollmorgen Nays: Miller Absent: Jaboro, Rowe Motions carried to approve CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no citizen participation APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MARCH 13, 2014 Moved by Militello, supported by Miller, to approve the Minutes of February 13, 2014, Regular Meeting. Roll call on motion: Ayes: Militello, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Kollmorgen, Kopp Nays: None Abstain: None Absent: Jaboro, Rowe Motion carried CORRESPONDENCE None OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS Mr. Norgrove stated that he did attend the basic training in St. Clair and found it very informative. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Militello, supported by Miller to adjourn at 7:43 p.m. Ayes: Militello, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Kollmorgen, Kopp Nays: None Absent: Jaboro, Rowe Motion carried Respectfully submitted, Ben Ancona, Secretary Planning Commission