Planning Commission

STERLING HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL March 10, 2016 LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 40555 Utica Road, Sterling Heights, MI SUBJECT: Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission held March 10, 2016. Mr. Reinowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present at roll call: Benjamin Ancona, Paul Jaboro, Al Kollmorgen, Edward Kopp, Stefano Militello, Donald Miller, Jeffrey Norgrove, and Leonard Reinowski Members absent at roll call: Gerald Rowe, Excused Also in attendance: Chris McLeod, City Planner Don DeNault, City Attorney APPROVAL OF AGENDA Moved by Reinowski, supported by Norgrove, to approve the Agenda. Ayes: Reinowski, Norgrove, Ancona, Jaboro, Kollmorgen , Kopp, Militello, Miller Nays: None Absent: Rowe Motion carried. PPCM-1147 – Samir Dawood Request for Special Approval Land Use for a carry out restaurant in a C-1 (Local Convenience Business) district – East of Hayes Road, north of 19 Mile Road in Section 1 Property Address: 43015 Hayes Mr. McLeod stated the proposed carry out aspect of this facility will be 325 sq. ft. of the larger overall food operation at the site. He stated it’s basically a grocery store that’s going to provide a carry out business. The hours of operation for the use will be 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., seven days a week. Patrons will be able to call in orders for food and pick up and there will not be any designated seating for the carry out restaurant use itself. The overall shopping plaza is in compliance for parking requirements. Other uses within the plaza itself are Chengs Asian Bistro, Sunshine Pharmacy, Smokers Express, JDS Dance, Mr. Vapor, Jade Nails, Hungry Howie’s, Family Dollar, and Phoenix Grill. There are several vacancies in the plaza at this point. In the review as part of the General Planning Standards of 25.02, the Planning Commission does need to review this use against those general standards. 1. The proposed special land use approval shall be of such as location, size, and character that it will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The proposed use shall be of a nature that will make vehicular and pedestrian traffic no more hazardous than is normal for the district involved. 3. The proposed use shall be designed as to the location, size, and intensity of site layout and periods of operation to eliminate any nuisance. 4. The proposed use shall be such that the proposed location and height of building structures and location will not interfere with or discourage the appropriate development of district or the surrounding uses. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 2 5. The proposed use shall relate harmoniously with physical and economic aspects of adjacent land uses. 6. The proposed used shall be so designed, located, and planned to be operated that the public health, safety, and welfare will be protected. 7. The proposed used shall not be detrimental or injurious to the neighborhood in which it’s located. State law specifies that a request for a Special Land Use Approval be approved if the request is in compliance with the standards and conditions set forth. Mr. McLeod suggested the action for this application is to approve this special land use based on the following conditions: 1. The development and operation of the facility shall remain consistent with the scale and nature as described. 2. The petitioner shall develop, maintain, and operate the facility in compliance with all pertinent codes, rules, and regulations of the city, county, and state. 3. The petitioner files a Notice of Approval with Macomb County Register of Deeds within 60 days. 4. The decision of the Planning Commission shall remain valid as long the facts and conditions presented as part of this case remain intact. 5. The size of the tenant space dedicated to the carry out use is 325 sq. ft. and the hours of the operation are 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., 7 days a week unless reviewed by the city. Mr. McLeod ended the presentation and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions from the commissioners for Mr. McLeod. Being none, Mr. Reinowski opened up for the petitioner(s). Since the petitioner could not be present, in his place, Xavier Dawood (son) and the manager, Danny Jajo, were present. Mr. Dawood stated it is a small business with a small oven to provide carry out, things like chicken and beef shawarma. He then asked if there were any questions. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions from the commissioners for Mr. Dawood. Mr. Norgrove asked about plans for the ventilation of the building and if there will be a problem with smoke going into the neighborhood. He stated this has been a problem before with other businesses and wanted to know if there is a plan in place. Mr. Dawood and Mr. Jajo stated they have been planning for this and have had it looked at and should not be a problem. Mr. Kollmorgen asked the current hours of operation. Mr. Jajo stated 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions from the commissioners and the audience. Being none, called for a motion. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 3 Motion by Mr. Miller, supported by Mr. Norgrove, in the case of PPCM-1147, 43015 Hayes Road, move to approve the Special Approval Land Use based on the facts and plans presented, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development and the operation of the facility shall remain consistent with the scale and nature as described; 2. The petitioner shall develop, maintain, and operate the facility in compliance with all pertinent codes, ordinances, and standards with the City of Sterling Heights, the County of Macomb and the State of Michigan; 3. The petitioner files a Notice of Approval with the Macomb County Register of Deeds within 60 days following this action. Failure to file this notice shall serve as grounds to revoke this Special Approval Land Use; 4. The decision of the Planning Commission shall remain valid and enforced only as long as the facts and information presented to the commission in the public hearing are found to be correct and the conditions upon which this motion is based are forever maintained as presented to the commission; 5. The size of the tenant space dedicated to the carryout use is limited to 325 sq. ft.; 6. The hours of operation for the use not extend beyond 10 a.m. to 7 p.m., 7 days a week unless reviewed by the city; 7. The use being limited to 325 sq. ft. contained within the larger existing food store and there will not be any dedicated seating area and the use is to be operated during the stipulated hours of operation designed so that it is in harmony with the existing area and shopping plaza and does not pose any nuisance to nearby occupants; 8. The limited size and scale of its use is in general harmony with the general proposals intent to the zoning ordinance provided. Providing a convenience to local residents and shoppers; 9. The use relates to the existing physical and economic aspects of the adjacent land uses in regards to shopping habits, convenience, and continuity of development in that there are several other noted restaurants and carry out uses in the plaza. Mr. Reinowski asked for discussion on the motion. Mr. Militello asked Mr. DeNault about the numbering of the motion. DeNault stated it was correct. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions or discussion on the motion. Being none, called for role. Ayes: Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Jaboro, Kollmorgen, Kopp, Militello, Nays: None Absent: Rowe Motion Carried. PSP16-0001 – The Church of Jesus Christ Request for Special Approval Land Use for a place of group worship in an R-60 (One- Family Residential) district – South side of Plumbrook Road between Dodge Park and Schoenherr Road in Section 23. Property Address: 12500 Plumbrook Road Mr. McLeod stated this is a special approval land use for the replacement for the existing sanctuary and the increase in building size by approximately 1600 sq. ft. The Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 4 location of the actual place of worship is on the south side of Plumbrook, east of Dodge Park and west of Schoenherr in section 23. The existing zoning for the property is R- 60, the existing land use is the church itself. The masterplan designation is for public or semi-public. The proposed application is for the construction of an additional 1600 sq. ft. to the existing place of worship. The current building size is 5638 sq. ft. and the proposed size being slightly over 7200 sq. ft. A portion of the existing church space will be demolished with then the addition going over the existing portion of the building being demolished as well as extending to the rear of the site. The additional building area will be utilized for a new sanctuary as well as new lobby, administration, and classrooms. The actual sanctuary itself will accommodate 147 persons based on the calculations provided by the applicant. This is an increase of only 4 seats over the current capacity of the site. The proposal also increases the number of parking spaces by eight as well as provides for a better circulation pattern for the overall parking lot itself. The building was constructed in 1970 and 1972 specifically for a place of worship. The Church of Jesus Christ has occupied the building since 1988. It is noted the existing building does not meet setback requirements from the side property line. The City’s ordinance requires that all places of worship have a setback of at least 50 ft. However, all of the proposed addition does meet setback requirements so is not being viewed as an expansion of a non-conforming structure. The overall height of the existing structure is 18½ ft. while the overall height of the new structure is approximately 24 ft. The building itself is proposed to be metal to match the existing siding of the building. However, the north and west elevations will provide a brick veneer base along the bottom portion of the building to increase the aesthetic of the building as well as tie the existing and proposed building portions together. A new covered entryway is also proposed. The site plan increases the landscaping, including 6 Sunburst Locusts along the street frontage to comply with street tree requirements. Landscaping has also been shown within the parking area within the new islands as well as the addition of ornamental trees along the building. Site plans have been reviewed by the Planning Department for compliance with general ordinance requirements over the course of the last few months. The site plan can only be obtained if Special Approval Land Use is granted by the Planning Commission. No new lighting is proposed at this time for the parking lot. This was discussed during the site plan review with the applicants that there was no need for it. If lighting becomes necessary, a new application for site plan approval will be necessary. The need for a dumpster was also discussed and the applicant stated a dumpster enclosure is not necessary at this time. The adjacent land use adjacent to the Church of Jesus Christ is single family residential dwellings. The west and south sides of the property have significant tree lines and the south side of the property backs into the Plumbrook Drain. The Office of Planning has completed our review based on the Special Land Use requirements of section 3.02 which are specific to a place of worship. It is noted there that: 1. The buildings of maximum height allowed by the district may be permitted providing the setbacks are increased. The height of the building as proposed does meet City ordinance requirements so no additional setback is necessary. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 5 2. Ingress and egress shall be of major and secondary thoroughfare. The site has access to Plumbrook which carries the appropriate planned designation. 3. Parking lot screening meeting the requirements of moderate intensity impact shall be provided as required in section 24.01. The expansion to the parking lot is to the south and the building will buffer the parking lot from the property to the east. The property to the west already contains an existing tree line which separates the parking area from the adjacent residential property. In addition, the proposed parking lot is approximately 95 ft. from the western property line. The Planning Commission may wish to require additional plantings along the west property line in the small area adjacent to the existing parking lot or along the proposed parking lot area to supplement the existing tree line if felt it was necessary. 4. Such facility shall include related community centers, provided that such centers are limited to activities sponsored by the church. The church contains rooms to be utilized by the church or members of the church themselves. 5. All principle and accessory buildings, except for accessory storage buildings, such as a shed or detached garage are to maintain the minimum setbacks. As noted, the structure itself does meet the 50 ft. requirement. The Planning Department has also reviewed the application against the General Planning Standards of section 25.02 and found the application acceptable. The suggested action for PPCM-1149, the planning department recommends approval: 1. The development and operation of the facility shall remain consistent with the application; 2. The petitioner shall develop, maintain, and operate the facility in terms of all codes and ordinances; 3. The Notice of Approval shall be provided and recorded with the property within 60 days; 4. The decision of the Planning Commission shall remain valid and in force as long as the facts and information presented are correct and maintained; 5. The Planning Commission has found the proposed church expansion is compliant with section 25.02 of the Zoning Ordinance; 6. The landscaping scheme, or better, be utilized along the building foundation be planted around the base of the new portions of the building; 7. Any outdoor use of the site shall be conducted in a manner which does not burden neighboring residential properties by means of noise or frequency of operation. Mr. McLeod ended the review and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Reinowski asked the commissioners if they had any questions. Being none, Mr. Reinowski opened up for the petitioner(s). Dennis Everett, 37674 Andrew Dr., Sterling Heights, MI 48312, stated he is acting as the head trustee for the local congregation. Pastor Paul Stallard, 37165 Gary Dr., Sterling Heights, MI 48310, Joe Gruits, 1350 New Love, Rochester Hills, MI, architect for the church Mr. Everett stated they have owned the church since 1988. Previously had another congregation at 14 Mile Rd. and Dequindre for about 30 years. The building was not Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 6 handicap friendly. They sold that building 2 years ago and combined congregations with the church on Plumbrook. Mr. Everett stated they need more space. The current building was built as a butler building which is an aluminum or steel type warehouse. There is not a lot of functionality of the building itself. There is very little room to fellowship with each other. There are classrooms as well as the main sanctuary. There are issues energy wise as well, the building is not well insulated. The church has issues trying to make the building more energy efficient and functional. The appearance from the inside is metal type walls. Basic reasons members voted, were to build a new sanctuary, add classrooms, make more functional, and aesthetically more appealing. Mr. Gruits stated the site plans show they have moved the main entrance further of the main entry drive off Plumbrook. Currently, it is very congested before and after church upon entering and exiting. They moved entrance back to try and make the circulation pattern a little better than what it is now. Mr. Reinowski asked for a copy of the plans to be placed on table to show on screen so it was visible to audience. Mr. Everett complied with plans. Mr. Gruits briefly went over plans and stated the plans were designed so not to create a “billboard” effect along Plumbrook. They would also add enough brick (elevation wise) to tie the two structures together. They will also use metal siding to match existing structure and paint with earth tone colors. Mr. Gruits pointed out the property is very clean and well-kept and they have been a good neighbor and resident. Mr. Reinowski asked Pastor Stallard if he had anything to add. Pastor Stallard stated they are part of the community and are here for the community. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions from the commissioners. Mr. Kollmorgen asked to see the drawings of the lot to show where more screening may be required. Wanted to know if more trees are being added. Mr. Gruits stated they have added some trees and to the best of their knowledge they have satisfied the ordinance. Mr. Miller asked what the purpose of the fellowship hall is and will it be used at the same time as the sanctuary. Mr. Everett stated the function of the fellowship hall is to get the congregation together to eat meals, have Sunday school, have refreshments, and socialize. It will not be in use simultaneously and is for the congregation only. Mr. Norgrove asked the petitioner to show the blueprints of the existing structure and where the 1600 sq. ft. addition is going so the public is informed. Mr. Gruits went over the blueprints while being shown on screen. Mr. Reinowski asked for any other questions from the commissioners. Being none, he opened questions to public. Mr. James Pontek, 12403 Kent Dr., asked what will happen to the trees along the creek. Mr. McLeod responded with showing the plans and stated none of the proposed improvements will encroach on the existing tree lines heading south. While the building and parking lot will encroach further south than they are right now, they will still probably be more than 30 ft. from that existing tree line. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 7 Mr. Everett added there are no plans to take any trees down back in that area. There is a lot deaden down in that area they would like to eventually get cleaned up. Also, there is a lot of poison ivy and poison oak in that area. Mr. Reinowski asked for any other questions from the audience. Being none, called for motion. Motion by Mr. Norgrove, supported by Mr. Militello, in the case of PSP16-0001, 12500 Plumbrook Road, I move to approve the Special Approval Land Use based upon the facts and plans presented, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the development and operation of the facility shall remain consistent with the scale and nature of the use as described in the proposal, at Public Hearing and reflected on the site plan; 2. That the petitioner shall develop, maintain and operate the facility in compliance with all pertinent codes, ordinances and standards of the City of Sterling Heights, County of Macomb and the State of Michigan; 3. That the petitioner file a Notice of Approval with the Macomb County Register of Deeds within sixty (60) days following this action. Failure to file this notice will serve as grounds to revoke the Special Approval Land Use; 4. The decision of the Planning Commission shall remain valid and in force only as long as the facts and information presented to the Commission in the public hearing are found to be correct and the conditions upon which this motion is based are forever maintained as presented to the Commission; 5. That the Planning Commission has found that the proposed church expansion is compliant with Section 25.02 of the Zoning Ordinance; 6. The existing landscaping scheme (or better) utilized along the building foundation be planted around the base of the new portions of the building; 7. That any outdoor use of the site shall be conducted in a manner which does not create a burden on the neighboring residential properties by means of noise or frequency/hours of operation. This action is based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed building expansion is in conformance with the specific requirements of Section 3.02 of the Zoning Ordinance; 2. That the proposed building complies with all zoning ordinance requirements and does not expand the nonconforming nature of the building; 3. That the proposed building addition increases the overall seating capacity of the church by four (4) persons; 4. That the parking spaces being provided, sixty four (64) exceed that required by Ordinance, forty nine (49); 5. As noted on the site plan, the sanctuary and fellowship hall will not be a simultaneous use, thereby reducing the potential for impact and parking issues. Mr. Reinowski asked for any other questions or discussion on the motion. Being none, called for role. Ayes: Norgrove, Militello, Miller, Reinowski, Ancona, Jaboro, Kollmorgen, Kopp Nays: None Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 8 Absent: Rowe Motion Carried PPCM-1145 - Master Land Use Plan Update Mr. McLeod stated the designated consultant couldn’t attend so he and the Parks and Recreation Director would be handling any questions regarding the goals and objectives. The purpose of the discussion is to go over the goals and objectives for the Master Land Use Plan as well as the Parks and Recreation open space and Non-Motorized Master Plan. This is in preparation for the community forum which will be held Wednesday, March 16, 2016, at the senior center where these goals and objectives will be reviewed again with the overall community and hopefully the Planning Commission. The premise of the goals and objectives section is that it will provide a basis for the suggestions for the overall Master Land Use Plan. The goals and objectives come from a basis of the city’s overall vision plan that was done in the last several years. The overall goal, for the City of Sterling Heights, is to become a sustainable place. Mr. McLeod then went over the Overall Guiding Principles (pg. 125) for the Master Land Use Plan. He then went over the vision statement and the guiding principles from the Visioning 2030 Plan: 1. Safe, well-maintained and desirable neighborhoods enhanced by great schools; 2. Plentiful leisure and recreation opportunities featuring fully utilized parks; 3. Abundant pathways for biking and walking; 4. Focal points that are both public and private to serve as destinations for residents and visitors; 5. Well maintained and aesthetically pleasing roads and green spaces; 6. Successful, vibrant, and attractive commercial centers with unique offerings; 7. Destination for high tech and emerging industries and entrepreneurs; Mr. McLeod stated Wade Trim has provided key themes they feel are appropriate for the city based on the overall vision: 1. Sustainability 2. Smart growth 3. A sense of place 4. Strong economy 5. Accessible transportation Goals and objectives: 1. Adopt a master plan development framework based on principals of smart growth. Create a score card that will enhance livability with in Sterling Heights. 2. Creative place making through nodal development. As the master plan moves forward, several nodes throughout the community will be identified where these Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 9 nodal developments should take place. The place making effort is to create unique, vibrant, walkable areas where people are drawn to. a. Identify nodes with potential for place making and increased activities; b. Creative place making, tactical lean urbanism; c. Creation of a form-based code. This would provide for a large aspect of design elements in it. Would also allow a large amount of flexibility in terms of uses and interpretation of the ordinance. 3. Strategy for reducing the carbon footprint of Sterling Heights a. Non-motorized transportation; b. Increase in public transit; c. Increase in energy efficiency; ; d. Discouraging unnecessary restrictions 4. Limit the human impact on the environment a. Sustain and enhance the air and water quality by working with our regional partner, SEMCOG, Macomb County, and so forth; b. Encourage on site retention and infiltration of storm water; c. Identify and preserve key natural features and habitats within the city; 5. Promote cultural socioeconomic and age diversity a. Amend codes to allow more housing types; b. Insure codes are reflective of cultural preferences Residential 1. Residential Neighborhood Development Improve the livability of the city’s residential areas; a. Allow for mixed use development; b. Review the City’s density requirements; c. Provide access to regional transportation; d. Make sure streets within residential developments follow complete street patterns; e. Promote the physical health and community design, as well as public safety; f. Provide a sustainable approach; Objectives: 1. Utilize the principals as a basis of regulatory revisions; Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 10 2. Create a stronger sense of place through zoning; 3. Encourage mixed-use development; 4. Seek to create new housing through density changes; 5. Access to regional transportation network; 6. Create a network of complete streets; 7. Prioritize design that encourages and promotes physical activity; 8. Public safety and personal security; 2. Allow for a broader range of housing types and products a. Permit new housing types; b. Allow for the housing stock to allow people to age in place; c. Ensure a mix of affordable and rental units; 3. Create human scale places a. Allow nodal developments to occur; b. Review and adopt human scale zoning requirements; c. Provide access to natural areas and parks for all citizens; COMMERCIAL GOALS 1. Create mixed use nodes that include commercial office, civic, and residential use; 2. Create a zoning ordinance that allows for mixed use buildings and districts by right; 3. Emphasize flexible use and adopt a form based zoning ordinance; 4. Enhance the existing auto-dependent commercial corridors; INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING, WAREHOUSING, AND LEGISTICS 1. Build upon the city’s track record for success in the industrial sector a. Provide high quality infrastructure to facilitate business growth; b. Target the city’s industrial corridor for additional investment; 2. Create flexibility a. Foster favorable business climate to encourage investment; b. Create a business recruitment and retention program; 3. Mitigate the impact of industrial manufacturing uses on neighboring property a. Keep performance standards for industrial and manufacturing uses current Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 11 b. Increase industrial green space TRANSPORTATION 1. Create transportation choices a. Plan and implement non-motorized connections; b. Require non-motorized infrastructure; 2. Expand public transit 3. Plan for changes in transportation demand 4. Maintaining the existing street network INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES 1. Develop and asset management plan; 2. Develop a city forestry plan; 3. Provide exceptional public infrastructure and services; Mr. McLeod ended the overview of the Master Land Use Plan section then asked if there were any questions, additions or deletions from the Planning Commission. Mr. Norgrove asked if they can reserve the right to comment at a later date. Mr. Reinowski answered yes and Mr. McLeod stated The Master Land Use Plan is a draft until the date it is adopted. Mr. Norgrove stated he will reserve the right to comment later after the forums with the public. Mr. Reinowski asked for any other questions or comments. There were none. Mr. Kyle Langlois, Parks and Recreation Director, stated there are a lot of pieces from the Master Land Use Plan are also found in the Parks and Recreation Plan. The Master Plan is laying ground work to press forward to be a progressive city we need to be in our region. The overall goal of the Parks and Recreation Action Plan is to be a sustainable place economically, environmentally, and culturally. The recreation policy decisions are going to reflect careful consideration of 3 factors: facilities, programs and non-motorized paths. Mr. Langlois stated this can’t just benefit the residents today but needs to be something sustainable that future generations will be able to enjoy and utilize down the road. The goals are to properly maintain, sustain, and grow all of the areas: facilities, programs, and non-motorized paths. These goals, if met, will position Sterling Heights as a model for Parks and Recreation initiatives around the State of Michigan. Key components include the evaluation of facilities, parks, programs, trails, etc. They align us with industry’s best practices and it’s making an investment in our city that will foster physical, mental, economic and financial benefits to all of our residents. In strategic planning, Mr. Langlois spoke of: 1. The importance of how living close to a well-kept park increases property values; Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 12 2. Mental and physical benefits are all important and our community can be a leader in that area; 3. Parks and Rec would like to enhance the quality of life for the residents; 4. Provide a full range of recreation programs and facilities to the residents; 5. Support and encourage accessibility to and within the city’s parks; 6. Provide open space and recreational opportunities through neighborhood parks being accessible; 7. Provide a consistent level of funding to support the maintenance of current facilities and develop new facilities; 8. Conserve existing bio-diversity; incorporate new features in everything being done to stay sustainable environmentally. Mr. Langlois stated there will be two public forums that will help interact with residents that want to participate. Mr. Langlois asked if he should go over the individual goals. Mr. Reinowski stated to proceed with a brief summary. Mr. Langlois started summary of goals: 1. Parks and Recreation a. To continue the evaluation of all programs; adjust the types and formats programs to suit the residents; b. Improve existing programs; c. Create new programs; 2. Land and Facility a. Provide recreation land in the form of large urban parks, sports complexes, community and neighborhood parks which are convenient and accessible to all residents; b. Provide indoor and outdoor recreation facilities that meet the diverse recreation needs of Sterling Heights residents; c. Improving, enhancing, and protecting open spaces and natural features throughout the city; d. Mr. Langlois stated the City Development Manager, Jason Castor, previously spoke about how they are working with the Clinton River Watershed Council. Also, working with Lawrence Tech to become a water town. They are working on a number of sustainability pieces along the Clinton River, trying to continue to sustain the environment around Dodge Park and throughout the city; e. Incorporate recreation facilities in the future plans for residential development; f. Maintain a balance system of parks and open spaces by having well operated and maintained facilities; g. Continue to complete pedestrian sidewalk and safety path gaps along major corridors within the city; Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 13 h. Elevate the importance of pedestrians and cyclists throughout the city; i. Take into consideration how we are linking to parks and communities; j. Continue to focus on improving barrier free and universal accessibility at all city facilities and parks; including access to picnic tables, grills, paths, playing fields, parking areas, restrooms, play equipment, etc; k. Investigate innovative ways to fund and reduce the cost of providing programs; l. Provide necessary staffing and administrative infrastructure at levels commensurate with program and maintenance needs to support the expansion of recreation opportunities. 3. Continue to market recreation services to potential users through a variety of media; 4. Create mechanisms to maintain positive public relations; 5. Continue to improve coordination with other organizations. Mr. Langlois stated there will be a public forum at the Senior Center on March 16 and April 20, at 7 p.m. This will be an opportunity for people to see what’s going on and ask specific questions. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any questions from the commissioners. Mr. Norgrove stated under Management Goals and Objectives, Mr. Langlois mentioned i nvestigate innovative ways to fund and reduce the cost of providing programs. He then asked, with the rumors of possibly Liberty Park being sold, if there could be any plans to pick up the slack, possibly start softball leagues in the city? Then asked, if there is any way for the city to capitalize on the potential loss. Mr. Langlois could not confirm or deny whether Liberty Park has been sold or is in process of being sold. He stated that if that were to happen it would create a serious void in the area. Adult sports are a great contributor to the revenue streams of the Parks and Recreation Department. He also stated we need a mix of revenue generating programs and free programs our residents can enjoy as part of their residency and we would need to pick up the slack moving forward. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were other questions. There were none. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Linda Godfrey spoke regarding the Master Land Use Plan Update. She stated she has been a resident of Sterling Heights for almost 39 years and has participated in Parks and Rec. Ms. Godfrey stated the advertisement for the public forum was minimal. She asked Planning Commissioners to consider priorities before approval of the Master Land Use Plan. She stated a number of areas need to be cleaned up, i.e. Nelson Park. Ms. Godfrey asked: Under the current proposal, as listed, will you have the final say as the Planning Commissioners, as to whether this Parks and Rec Update is approved? Or will you approve it, here at the Planning Commission, then send to City Council for final adoption and approval of the Master Plan as well as Parks and Rec. Plan? In regards to sports complexes: Ms. Godfrey stated at the last council meeting, it came before them to approve architectural monies for the plans for the Parks and Rec. facility, but Council didn’t approve a company or go out for bids. She asked if this involves the planning commissioners and if they aware or not? Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 14 In regards to Farmer’s Market: In the beginning, prior to produce coming into season, Ms. Godfrey would like to see less trinkets and more crafted items. She also stated dislike for the plan to put up a canopy. She feels it will be very costly and would like to see it be more aesthetically pleasing; facing Dodge Park, it would take away from the intent of nature. Ms. Godfrey stated she would hope to get general notice out to public as these proposals will likely cost a great deal of money if approved and may need to have a millage increase to support this. She asked that documentation be available for complete cost estimate. Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. McLeod to address how the notice is being given about the meetings begin held on The Master Plan. Mr. McLeod stated that Community Relations has an on-going effort in terms of social media on the web, and so forth, in regards to the community forums. As well as being mentioned at multiple meetings, there are three official public input sessions. March 16, April 20, and the final approval process (Master Land Use Plan) will have its own specific public hearing prior to adoption. He also stated that if any resident, at any point, has questions or comments they may contact the Planning Department and they can bring those to the attention of the Planning Commission and Planning Consultants. Mr. McLeod stated notifications can be found at the Building Department desk, using social media, and local papers. Mr. Kollmorgen asked Mr. DeNault: Are we a recommending or approving body in this effort? Mr. DeNault answered, a recommending body. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any other questions from the audience. He concluded the public participation. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Kollmorgen referenced page 3, second paragraph, last line, asked to strike the word “square”. Mr. Reinowski verified should read, 2,450 feet. Mr. Kollmorgen concurred. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any other comments or corrections. Being none, called for a motion. Motion by Kollmorgen, supported by Militello, to approve the minutes (with one change as stated above) of February 11, 2106. Ayes: Kollmorgen, Militello, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Jaboro, Kopp, Miller Nays: None Absent: Rowe Motion Carried. CORRESPONDENCE Mr. Militello stated there was a letter from the City of Troy. There was also a letter from the Shelby Township Planning and Zoning indicating that they’re going through the same process with their Master Plan. They have a meeting March 17. 2016 Mr. Militello stated everyone received a copy for their review. OLD BUSINESS PZ15-1136 – Sam Alisa and May Alisa Planning Commission Regular Meeting of March 10, 2016 Page 15 Mr. McLeod stated this was postponed at the June 11, 2015 meeting. The application needs to have the Planning Commission to establish a date specific for the item to be brought back to the table. Notices will then be sent to the residents of the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. McLeod state the April Planning Commission agenda is very full. He stated the next available agenda would be the May agenda. Motion by Militello, supported by Kopp, to postpone until the May 12, 2016 meeting. Ayes: Militello, Kopp, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona, Jaboro, Kollmorgen Nays: None Absent: Rowe Motion Carried. NEW BUSINESS None. MOTION TO ADJOURN Motion by Militello, supported by Jaboro, to adjourn. Ayes: Militello, Jaboro, Kollmorgen, Kopp, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Ancona Nays: None Absent: Rowe Motion Carried The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stefano Militello, Secretary Planning Commission