Planning Commission

STERLING HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL DECEMBER 8, 2016 LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 40555 Utica Road, Sterling Heights, MI SUBJECT: Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission held December 8, 2016. Mr. Reinowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present at roll call: Benjamin Ancona, Geoff Gariepy, Edward Kopp, Stefano Militello, Donald Miller, Jeffrey Norgrove, and Leonard Reinowski, Gerald Rowe Members absent at roll call: Paul Jaboro Also in attendance: Chris McLeod, City Planner Clark Andrews, City Attorney APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Mr. Miller, supported by Mr. Norgrove, to APPROVE the Agenda. Ayes: Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Rowe, Ancona, Gariepy, Kopp, Militello Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion carried. A. PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARING - PPCM-1164 – Advanced Sports Training, LLC Requesting approval for a special approval land use to operate an indoor recreational facility In an M-1 (Light Industrial) district - East side of Mound between 17 Mile Road and Sims Road in Section 16. Property address: 40050 Mound Road Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. McLeod for an overview. Mr. McLeod gave an overview stating the applicant’s proposed use as an indoor recreation facility would allow the applicant to utilize the building for training and coaching of baseball and softball along with other specific sports instruction and agility training. Mr. Reinowski asked if the Commissioners had any questions for Mr. McLeod. Being none, he asked for the petitioner to come forward to the podium. Gary Bussa, 3851 Victoria Dr., Troy from Advanced Sports Training came forward to the podium. They are looking to provide winter training. The main usage would be from October through April. They do not plan to utilize the space in the summer months but if someone wanted to rent the space they would be open to renting the space. They will provide batting and speed/agility training mainly for girls fast pitch softball and hope to expand to boys baseball. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. Mr. Rowe asked Mr. Bussa if they are only occupying 3,000 of the 12,000 sq. feet and if they are leasing the space. Mr. Bussa stated yes. He stated there is a dividing wall and they will have their own entrance. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 2 Mr. Ancona clarified with Mr. Bussa that the building will be available if needed in the summer months. Mr. Bussa responded yes, they are not closing up the building for the summer. Mr. Miller verified with Mr. Bussa that occupancy would be about 15 athletes and 3 coaches. Mr. Norgrove asked if the opportunity arose to have special training sessions, could there be multiple teams present at the same time. Mr. Bussa stated they wouldn’t have much more than 15 because of the restricted space. Mr. Miller asked Mr. Bussa if there will be spectators, as well as athletes in the building. Mr. Bussa stated most parents drop off, but there may be a few that stay. Mr. Norgrove asked if there will be anyone who is trained in first aid present. Mr. Bussa stated they will have first aid kits and all coaches have been through concussion program. Mr. Reinowski asked the Commissioners for any other questions. Being none he asked if there were any public participants wanting to speak. Being none, he closed public participation. Motion by Mr. Rowe, supported by Mr. Gariepy, in the case of PPCM-1164, 40050 Mound 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 use 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 plans; 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. That the petitioner file and deliver a Hold Harmless Agreement in favor of the City in form and substance satisfactory to the City Attorney. 5. 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. 6. That the Planning Commission has determined that the proposed indoor recreation facility use is compliant with Section 25.02 of the Zoning Ordinance. 7. That no outdoor activity be conducted onsite and further, that any noises emanating from the building be kept at a minimum. This action is based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed indoor recreational facility is in conformance with the general planning standards of Section 25.02 of the Zoning Ordinance as outlined in comments A-G in the City Planner’s Staff Report Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 3 2. That the proposed indoor recreational facility meets or exceeds all other applicable Zoning Ordinance requirements upon compliance with conditions #1- #7 above. Mr. Reinowski asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Being none, he asked for a roll call vote. Ayes: Rowe, Gariepy, Ancona, Kopp, Militello, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING -PPCM-1165 - Sterling Enterprise Park (Planned Unit Development) Requesting approval for a planned unit development concept plan for a mixed use industrial park development in an M-2 Heavy Industrial, M-1 Light Industrial, and RM-2 Multiple Family Low Rise District – North of 17 Mile Road and west of Van Dyke in Section 16. Property address: 7191 Seventeen Mile Road Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. McLeod for an overview. Mr. McLeod displayed site plans and gave an overview of the proposal. He explained the Planned Unit Development Process (PUD) and the uses proposed in the PUD. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners for Mr. McLeod. Mr. Norgrove stated he asked the previous owner if they had any plans for a transfer station for a waste company and asked if there is any guarantee from the current developer that there will be no waste transfer station on the property. Mr. McLeod stated he believed there was a guarantee per the PUD agreement. Mr. Norgrove asked if Mr. McLeod felt the owner would uphold that agreement. Mr. McLeod stated the PUD is a legal binding agreement and there will also be a Master Deed document. Mr. Reinowski asked the petitioner to come forward to the podium. Clay Thomas of J.B. Donaldson Company, 37610 Hills Tech Drive, Farmington Hills, came forward to the podium. He is representing the owner of the property. He stated the importance of the approval for the PUD to keep the project moving forward. Mr. Gariepy asked Mr. Thomas with parcel H heavily encumbered with flood plains, how could it be developed and how they would be able to develop buildings so quickly for suppliers to be ready for 2018 Ram Truck production. Mr. Thomas stated currently it is listed as a general common element. He explained that means it will not be developed but left as open space. However, it will be convertible so it could possibly be developed if feasible in the future. He also stated they have done timelines and could have at least two more significant buildings done by the end of 2017 and they are confident they can meet those timelines if approvals move along. Mr. Miller asked about the new wall system they are using for the Mitchell Plastics building. Mr. Thomas stated it is NuForm. A progressive system made of PVC insulated panels with concrete. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 4 Mr. Reinowski asked for public participation. Louis Backus of 45550 Vanker Ave, Utica stated the three residential homes at the east end of the property (off 17 Mile Rd.) will be directly affected by a plastics company so close to the home owners. The property is for sale but there has been no interest; they feel they are being forced out. He stated they need to be bought out. Paul Backus, representing 7439 17 Mile Road, stated since 2014 there have been multiple complaints made to code enforcement regarding the deterioration of the fence which divides the properties. He asked if the residents remain there, what will be the divider. Mr. Gariepy asked Mr. Thomas to address the concerns of the residents. Mr. Thomas stated there have never been any issues from Mitchell Plastics regarding emissions. He stated Mitchell Plastics are great neighbors, they care about the environment and will continue to do what they can. He stated they have cleared the vegetation along the fence and was unaware more work needed to be more done. Mr. Thomas stated they have made an attempt to purchase the property to no avail. Louis Backus stated he had never been approached regarding the sale of any property and would like to discuss it. Paul Backus stated they did clear the vegetation but his concern is what will divide the properties. Mr. Gariepy asked Paul Backus if he had been approached regarding selling the property. Paul Backus stated there was some talk regarding the properties but he has not had any offers. Mr. Rowe asked Mr. McLeod to show the site plan to see where the three residential properties were located. Mr. McLeod explained the screening would be dealt with when they develop and know what type of use parcel I will be. They will also address the screening along parcel G abutting the condominiums. Mr. Gariepy asked Mr. McLeod if they will be required to put up some type of wall. Mr. McLeod stated because the residential properties are zoned industrial, they are not required to put up that type of divider. Depending on what will be developed in parcel I, they will decide at that time what type of screening will be needed. Mr. Reinowski asked for any other questions from Commissioners. Being none, he called for a motion. Motion by Mr. Gariepy, supported by Mr. Militello, in the case of PPCM-1165, 7191 17 Mile Road, I move to recommend approval of the concept plan for the Planned Unit Development, based upon the facts and plans presented, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the development and operation of the development shall remain consistent with the scale and nature of the use as described in the proposal, at Public Hearing and reflected on the concept plan; 2. That if the concept plan and Planned Unit Agreement are approved by the City Council, the petitioner shall develop, maintain and operate the development in compliance with all pertinent codes, ordinances and standards of the City of Sterling Heights, County of Macomb and the State of Michigan. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 5 3. That if the concept plan and Planned Unit Agreement are approved by the City Council, appropriate site plan and engineering plans meeting all other requirements of the City of Sterling Heights shall be provided by the developer for each phase as it develops and/or by individual property owners as they develop individual sites. 4. That if the concept plan and Planned Unit Agreement are approved by the City Council, the modifications requested as a part of the overall PUD concept plan be approved as they generally meet the intent of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and specifically the Planned Unit Development Ordinance. 5. That if the concept plan and Planned Unit Agreement are approved by the City Council, the Planned Unit Development Agreement be finalized, signed and recorded by the owner of the property and the City. 6. That with City Council approval, the overall time frame for the completion of the project be modified from the required thirty (30) month time frame to no more than eight (8) years due to the nature and expanse of the development, with the option of further extending the time frame upon request by the applicant and approval by City Council. 7. The recommendation 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. This action is based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed development of the property in accordance with the proposed concept plan complies with the intent and Ordinance requirements set forth in Section 22.03 of the Zoning Ordinance authorizing planned unit developments. To the extent of any conflict between the proposed PUD development as set forth in the PUD Agreement and the concept plan and other conflicting provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the PUD Agreement and the contents of the concept plan shall control. 2. That the concept plan provides for the reasonable development of one of the only remaining large parcels of land within the City into a first class industrial park. 3. That the concept plan for this proposed industrial park complements the expansion and development of the FCA Sterling Heights Assembly Plant south of the property across 17 Mile Road. 4. That the concept plan provides for regional storm water management through the use of regional detention ponds in lieu of individual site detention ponds, thereby maximizing development of individual parcels and storm water management efficiency. 5. That the concept plan includes traffic signalization at the intersection of Mitchell Drive and 17 Mile Road in order to minimize undesirable traffic back-up and congestion on 17 Mile Road and within the industrial park. 6. That the proposed development of the property as a PUD to be operated and maintained by a mandatory association of unit owners responsible for maintenance of common areas will facilitate the long-term operation and use of this property as a first class industrial park. 7. That the perimeter landscaping, common area landscaping and individual site landscaping incorporated into the concept plan and associated exhibits is consistent with the newly adopted landscaping standards for commercial and industrial sites. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 6 8. That the landscaping and signage for the development enhances the area and is consistent with the LDFA standards and landscaping along Van Dyke Avenue. 9. That the concept plan provides a heavy industrial grade public street, adequate utilities, public sidewalks, parking areas, open spaces, and other common areas accessible to the public or users of the developed properties. 10. That the concept plan provides an adequate foundation for the development of this large industrial parcel into a first class industrial park that is compatible with and complementary to the existing industrial development patterns in the area. Mr. Reinowski asked for any further discussion on the motion. Being none, he asked for a roll call vote. Ayes: Gariepy, Militello, Kopp, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Rowe, Ancona Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING – PZ16-1146 – CarMax Auto Superstores, INC – (Continued from November 3rd, 2016 Meeting) Requesting approval of a conditional rezoning from C-2 Planned Comparison Business district and C-3 General Business District to C-3 General Business district – South side of M-59 (Hall Road), east of Delco in Section 2. Property addresses (all or portions of): 12300, 12350, 12414, 12478, 12500 Hall Road Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. McLeod for an overview. Mr. McLeod stated this was carried over from the last Planning Commission meeting. He displayed the site plan and gave an overview of the revisions the applicant made to the proposal. Mr. Reinowski asked if the Commissioners had any questions for Mr. McLeod. Mr. Rowe asked Mr. McLeod to clarify the hours of operation for the reconditioning use. Mr. McLeod stated it would have to be clarified with the applicant by he believed the reconditioning use hours are 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Mr. Gariepy asked Mr. McLeod about the lighting fixtures. Mr. McLeod explained the thought process behind the lighting ordinance. He stated the applicant had two photometric studies done for operational and non-operational hours. Mr. Norgrove asked Mr. McLeod if the Planning Department was satisfied and confident with the revisions the applicant made. Mr. McLeod stated what the applicant has done to mitigate their plans to make it an acceptable solution. He feels they are meeting the intent of the ordinance. Mr. Reinowski asked if the parking lot would have to be reconfigured (for a new owner) if the applicant is approved to have spaces with smaller dimensions. Mr. McLeod stated to comply with the zoning ordinance; the parking lot would have to be redone according to the current standards. Mr. Miller asked if the sound study was done according to the ordinance. Mr. McLeod stated the decibel levels that were provided met zoning ordinance requirements. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 7 Chairman Reinowski asked the petitioner to come forward to the podium. Mr. Phil Ruggeri, 46231 Schoenherr, Sterling Heights, came forward on behalf of the petitioner. He stated the applicant addressed all the concerns from residents and the administration and there were many concessions made. Mr. Reinowski asked for any questions from the Commissioners for the petitioner. Mr. Rowe asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Ruggeri stated the retail outlet will be open from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. The reconditioning is generally open from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. but there may be instances it could be open until 11 p.m. or later depending on volume of vehicles. Mr. Reinowski stated there was no public present for participation. He asked for a motion. Motion by Mr. Kopp, supported by Mr. Miller, that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to City Council to APPROVE case number PZ16-1146, CarMax Auto Superstores, Inc., request to conditionally rezone the subject property from C-2 Planned Comparison Business District to C-3 General Business for the following reasons: 1. Conditional rezoning of this parcel based upon the proposed conditions contained within the development plans will ensure that the development will be constructed in accordance with a specific mutually agreeable conditional rezoning agreement between the petitioner and City prepared by the City Attorney, which incorporates the conditions offered by petitioner, to the benefit of surrounding property owners and the City; 2. Conditional rezoning of this parcel based upon the proposed development plans will result in a development compatible with the surrounding zoning and land uses. 3. That with the requested variances, the site will comply with all site plan requirements for a pre-owned automobile sales facility within the City. 4. That the applicant agree to obtain site plan approval for the first phase of the proposed development on the property within eighteen (18) months of the effective date of the ordinance amendment approving the rezoning or map amendment, to obtain a building permit for the proposed development within twenty-four (24) months of such effective date, and to complete development of the proposed development within thirty-six (36) months of such effective date. 5. That a mutually agreeable conditional rezoning agreement be prepared by the City Attorney delineating the terms and conditions of the proposed rezoning to be executed by the property owner, (and facility operator, if different than the owner), and the City and recorded with the Macomb County Register of Deeds within sixty (60) days of approval of the conditional rezoning. 6. That the applicant works with the Planning Department to resolve the design issues of the temporary fencing, decorative lighting, enhanced landscaping treatments, and security fencing as outlined in the Planning Department staff report. This is to include the reduction of lighting intensity during the hours the facility is not open for business. 7. That the requested variances outlined in the Planning Department staff report are acceptable based on the overall design of the site and the adjacent land uses. 8. That the use 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 plans. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 8 9. That 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. Mr. Reinowski asked for any discussion on the motion. Mr. Andrews suggested amending the motion to include in #4 “for the first phase” and in #6 specifics regarding the reduction in intensity of the lighting. Motion by Mr. Kopp, supported by Mr. Miller, to AMEND numbers 4 and 6 of the motion. Mr. Gariepy asked Mr. Andrews what hours is the reduction to take place, for the retail or reconditioning hours. Mr. Andrews stated you would have different times for each area. Austin Allen with CenterPoint, 355 Union Blvd, Denver, Colorado came forward to the podium. He stated the lighting would dim substantially at the 9 p.m. closing time. Mr. Reinowski asked for any further discussion on the motion. Being none, he called for a roll call vote. Ayes: Kopp, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski, Rowe, Ancona, Gariepy, Militello Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion Carried. B. SITE PLAN REVIEWS PSP16-0035 – Moual Razoky Requesting site plan approval for a 12,504 square foot office building - Northeast corner of Maplecrest Road and Dequindre Road in Section 30. Property addresses: 35614-35634 Dequindre Road Mr. Reinowski asked Mr. McLeod to give an overview. Mr. McLeod displayed site plans and gave an overview of the proposal for an office building to be located adjacent to single family residential property. Mr. Reinowski asked if the Commissioners had any questions for Mr. McLeod. Mr. Norgrove asked Mr. McLeod if the sign for the building will be an electronic sign and if it will be of high intensity. Mr. McLeod stated they do not know the design of the sign at this time. Mr. Rowe asked if notices were sent to the residents regarding this case. Mr. McLeod stated yes, there were notices sent out. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any other questions from the Commissioners for Mr. McLeod. Being none, he asked the petitioner to come forward to the podium. Moual Razoky, 1920 Bayou Dr., Bloomfield Hills, stated he is requesting site plan approval for a 12,504 square foot office building. Mr. Reinowski asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. Being none, he called for a motion. There was no one present for public participation. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 9 Motion by Mr. Rowe, supported by Mr. Norgrove, in the case of PSP16-0035, 35614 & 35634 Dequindre Road, I move to APPROVE the preliminary site plan, 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 an amended site plan to be provided which addresses the requirements in this Motion; 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. The decision of the Planning Commission shall remain valid and in force only as long as the facts and information presented to the Commission are found to be correct and the conditions upon which this motion is based are forever maintained as presented to the Commission. 4. That appropriate site plan and engineering plans meeting all other requirements of the City of Sterling Heights be provided. 5. That the photometric plan be revised to indicate the installation of decorative light fixtures within the parking lot as well as on all facades of the building and compliance with lighting intensity standards. 6. That the areas shown on the site plan within the parking area as being striped be constructed as either sidewalk or curbed landscape islands and the landscape plan is to be amended to show additional landscape in these areas. 7. That the shrubs and plantings along the parking lot areas/frontages be enhanced to the satisfaction of the City Planner to ensure an appropriate hedge meeting zoning ordinance requirements is being provided. 8. That the evergreens along the north property line be increased in height to eight (8) feet to meet the Zoning Board Authority variance conditions and the landscape plan be amended accordingly. 9. That the hours of operation be no greater than 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Sunday. 10. That the square footage dedicated to medical office be reduced to an appropriate amount to coincide with the number of parking spaces being provided. 11. That the site plan complies with all requirements of PZBA16-0021. This action is based on the following findings: 1. That the applicant intends to build a single story office building in accordance with the proposed site plan, landscape plan, elevations, etc. prepared by Studio Creative Design as amended to meet the requirements of this Motion. 2. That with the required amendments to the site plan and landscape plan, the building site plan and landscaping plan will comply with ordinance requirements in terms of ZBA case PZBA16-0021. 3. The site design with one (1) driveway off of Dequindre Road and one (1) off of Maplecrest at the identified locations meet ordinance requirements. 4. That the site design provides satisfactory traffic circulation in compliance with ordinance requirements. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 10 5. With the site plan and landscape plan amendments, there will be a harmonious relationship between the office building and adjacent uses. Mr. Reinowski asked for any discussion on the motion. There was discussion about the hours of operation and Mr. Andrews suggested any changes should be made during this motion. Mr. Andrews also suggested removing the wording “recommend for approval” and replacing it with “approve”. Motion by Mr. Rowe, supported by Mr. Norgrove, to AMEND initial wording and number 9 of the motion. Mr. Reinowski asked for any further discussion on the motion. Being none, he asked for a roll call vote. Ayes: Rowe, Norgrove, Ancona, Gariepy, Kopp, Militello, Miller, Reinowski Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion carried. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Mr. Norgrove, supported by Mr. Miller, to APPROVE the minutes of November 3, 2016. Ayes: Norgrove, Miller, Reinowski, Gariepy, Kopp, Militello Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Abstained: Ancona and Rowe Motion Carried. CORRESPONDENCE Michigan Association of Planning Michigan Planner Letter from Mr. McLeod to City Council regarding the 2017 Planning Commission meeting dates. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS Approval of 2017 Meeting Dates Motion by Mr. Rowe, supported by Mr. Militello, to ACCEPT the 2017 Planning Commission meeting dates as presented in the memo dated December 1, 2016. Ayes: Rowe, Militello, Ancona, Gariepy, Kopp, Miller, Norgrove, Reinowski Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion carried. MOTION TO ADJOURN Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 8, 2016 Page 11 Motion by Mr. Norgrove, supported by Mr. Militello, to ADJOURN . Ayes: Militello, Norgrove, Ancona, Gariepy, Kopp, Miller, Reinowski, Rowe Nays: None Absent: Jaboro Motion Carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stefano Militello, Secretary Planning Commission