Reference Desk

 

Planning Commission Minutes - April 28, 2009

THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD

PLANNING COMMISSION

APRIL 28, 2009

A Regular meeting of the Charter Township of Chesterfield Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 28, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. at the Township Hall Located at 47275 Sugarbush, Chesterfield, MI 48047.

1. CALL TO ORDER:

Chairman Priest called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL:

Present: Jim Priest Excused: Jim Moran

Robert Kohler

Paula Frame

Joe Stabile

George Deeby

Ray Saelens

Paul Miller

Cheryl Printz

Others: Patrick Meagher, Township Planner

3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA:

Motion by Mr. Priest, supported by Ms. Frame to approve the agenda as presented.

All Ayes Motion Carried

4. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT: (Committee will report items under Reviews)

5. PUBLIC HEARING:

6. REVIEWS:

A. PROPOSED WATERFRONT RESTAURANT - SLU #2009-01: Kem-Tec 29113 Lesnau Ct., Chesterfield, MI 48047. Proposed Restaurant located on the Southeast side of Jefferson, North of Riverpoint. Public Hearing closed, Tabled 4-14-09.

Mr. Priest stated that this agenda item had been tabled to this meeting in order to allow the applicant time to submit written narrative on the items that were open from the planner and engineer. We received a revised site plan. We have a new list of items from the planner and engineer. At the last meeting he asked the applicant to address these in writing. Most of the members have a problem understanding why we still have these items open. These items must be addressed. They are ordinances that we must operate under.

Tom LeFevre stated that he thought they addressed all of the items with the information that they submitted last Wednesday and Thursday.

Mr. Priest informed him that the current items are a review of the new submittal. It is a review of the items that they answered. We still have fourteen items that have not been addressed.

Mr. LeFevre stated that he thinks that they have been addressed. They answered every one of the requests.

Ms. Frame explained to the applicant that these comments are again from what has not been fixed on their original submittal. The new revised submittal of the revised site plan still does not have the corrections necessary. These items were on the first set of comments.

Mr. LeFevre asked which items were not addressed. He expressed confusion.

Mr. Saelens explained that one of the items not addressed was the alignment of Sugarbush.

Mr. LeFevre stated that he thought that was addressed last week.

Mr. Saelens stated that the new site plan shows that nothing changed on the entrance to the site.

Mr. LeFevre responded that he did not know that was not addressed.

Matt Keen stated that the last comment was to show it, so they went out there and surveyed it, and this time they just left it where it was at. They showed the existing Sugarbush approach on the revised site plan just to show where it was at. Now the new comment is that it is not the appropriate distance, so now they have to move the approach.

Mr. LeFevre responded that was addressed last week.

Mr. Saelens stated that when we started talking about this we talked about aligning the entrance with Sugarbush Road. Nothing has changed.

Mr. Priest interjected that is just one item.

Mr. LeFevre responded that was addressed last week saying that they are keeping the alignment right where it is at.

Ms. Frame stated that is not what we asked for.

Mr. Kohler asked if Mr. LeFevre does not have communication with the people he hires.

Mr. LeFevre responded that is 100% correct. He hires people to do the job for him. He hopes they did the right job for him in answering every request as of last Wednesday when it was resubmitted. He would hope that it is all there. Mr. Keen has stated that it was addressed the same way as before. They are not going to change the alignment. It is the first that he knows about this right now. He just depends on his people to do that. He apologized to the commission for taking up their time and stated that he understands where we are coming from. He would not expect us to sit here for months going over this again and again.

Mr. Priest suggested to Mr. LeFevre that he take the new list of planner and engineering comments and sit down with these people and work this out before they come back here. We will table this for up to six meetings so that it will give them plenty of time. They can come back any time that they get the items addressed and submitted to the Planning Department.

Mr. LeFevre asked that we go through and review the items that were not addressed. He asked Mr. Keen what was not addressed.

Mr. Keen responded that one of the biggest things is going to be a full lighting plan.

Mr. LeFevre interjected that he told us that he cannot do a full lighting plan. He asked Mr. Keen if he addressed that after the last meeting.

Mr. Keen responded that they showed lighting.

Mr. LeFevre stated that is the best that he can do. He cannot hire a lighting consultant. It is $12,000.00. He is not doing that. He guesses on that one they are done.

Mr. Keen stated that another item is a full landscape plan.

Mr. Meagher interjected a suggestion that he and Mr. Wilson would be glad to meet at the same time where everyone could sit around a table and run through each item; he would be happy to share how they don’t meet the fourteen review comments on his list. He can’t speak for AEW this evening. Many of the items are just what are they going to do with this.

Mr. LeFevre again asked what he did not answer with his last Wednesday and Thursday submittal.

Mr. Priest instructed him that it is everything on the review lists from this evening.

Mr. LeFevre responded that they did answer lighting and landscaping, but not what we wanted, but they did address it.

Mr. Priest instructed him that is why we want them to sit down with the planner and engineer to work these items out.

Mr. LeFevre responded that makes sense. The problem is that costs him money to make this work.

Mr. Priest responded that putting this off every two weeks costs him money too. It will be a lot cheaper and easier if they work these out and then come back to us.

Mr. LeFevre responded that he did address all of the comments with the submittal of last week, not the way we wanted them answered, but they were addressed. He asked if that is correct because he needs to know what he goes to Kem-Tec with.

Mr. Meagher responded that it has nothing to do with what the commission wants. There is an ordinance that has requirements for lighting standards; it has landscape requirements; it has submission requirements.

Mr. LeFevre stated that he cannot meet some of those requirements.

Mr. Priest responded that is why he needs to meet with the planner and engineer to work it out.

Mr. LeFevre responded that is fine, he can meet with them. He expressed confusion as to the amount of time to be tabled.

Ms. Printz explained that this is not the means to work out all of the details of their site plan. He needs to work with the planner and engineer in a different timeframe to come up with all of the changes that need to be made. When they submit a new site plan, it is reviewed again. Some of these comments might be new, some might be old. These are the items that need to be worked out in a different timeframe so that everything can be resolved before they return to this body.

Mr. LeFevre responded that he understands that because he has been to this body before. He will sit down with Mr. Meagher and work these out. He reiterated that some of these things he cannot do.

Motion by Mr. Priest, supported by Mr. Saelens to table SLU #2009-01 for up to 6 meetings with the deadline being July 28, 2009.

Mr. Priest explained to Mr. LeFevre that he can come back anytime within the period prior to July 28, 2009.

Mr. LeFevre responded that he understands that. He just wants us to know that since day one he has come here just wanting to know if we want this restaurant here. When we make it financially impossible to be here, he can’t be here. Every township and city works different.

Mr. Priest reminded Mr. LeFevre that is why we asked him at the last meeting to sit down with the planner and engineer to try to work through these items.

Mr. LeFevre responded that he got the wrong word from some other township officials. He will do that and be at the next meeting.

Vote On The Motion:

Ayes: Mr. Priest, Mr. Saelens, Ms. Frame, Mr. Stabile, Mr. Deeby, Mr. Miller, Ms. Printz

Nays: Mr. Kohler Motion Carried

7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PRIOR MEETINGS:

Motion by Ms. Frame, supported by Mr. Miller to approve the minutes from the April 14, 2009 meeting as sent.

All Ayes Motion Carried

8. COMMUNICATIONS:

9. NEW BUSINESS:

A. GIUSEPPE D’ANNA PROPOSED REZONING – PETITION #333: Michael Furnari, 2685 Lapeer Road, Suite #100, Auburn Hills, MI. 48326. Requesting to rezone property located at 28050 Cotton Road, on south side of Cotton, between I-94 & Donner Road from R-1-B (Single Family Residential) to RM-3, (Multiple Family Residential). Set Public Hearing for May 26, 2009.

Motion by Ms. Frame, supported by Mr. Saelens to set the Public Hearing on Rezoning Petition #333 for May 26, 2009.

All Ayes Motion Carried

10. OLD BUSINESS:

11. PLANNERS REPORT:

A. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUEST #39: Jay Sata for Ageless Medica Wellness Center II, 29187 Ryan Road, Warren, MI 48092. Requesting an Administrative Approval for a 7’ x 9 ½ x 29’ vestibule to storefront located at 33103 23 Mile Road, in the Bayside Mall, Suite just east of the Powerhouse Gym.

Mr. Meagher stated that they would like to put in a glass vestibule. This meets all of the ordinance requirements. It causes no problem for the site. He had no objections to this request.

Motion by Mr. Stabile, supported by Ms. Printz to approve Administrative Request #39.

Mr. Saelens asked that the motion be amended to clarify that we are only approving the vestibule itself; the motion does not include the sign.

Mr. Priest clarified that there is some signage on the glass; that is not covered under this motion.

Mr. Stabile agreed to amend his motion.

Ms. Printz continued her support.

All Ayes Motion Carried

Mr. Meagher stated that he has pretty much completed the compilation of comments from the workshop and he anticipates bringing the commission the first set of goals and objectives for the Master Plan at the next meeting. Perhaps we can also set the Public Hearing for the Wind Energy Ordinance on the next agenda as well. We can make changes on that during the Public Hearing.

Mr. Priest commented that at the last meeting it was brought up about some ordinances changes that need to be made or cleaned up; it was suggested that a committee be formed to work on that before bringing them to the commission for consideration.

Mr. Meagher responded that would be perfect; it might help expedite a few of these.

Mr. Priest asked for three volunteers for the ordinance committee.

Ms. Frame, Mr. Kohler and Ms. Printz volunteered to sit on the committee.

12. COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:

Mr. Stabile commented that if a fourth member is needed for the committee he will try to be there too.

Ms. Frame asked for volunteers for the next pre-planning meeting.

Mr. Saelens and Mr. Miller agreed to attend.

13. PROPOSALS FOR NEXT AGENDA:

14. ADJOURMENT:

Motion by Mr. Saelens, supported by Ms. Frame to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m.

All Ayes Motion Carried

Paula Frame, Secretary Christine A. Hunyady, Recording Secretary

 

 

 

Go To Top