City of South Lyon

Planning Commission Meeting

April 13, 2006

 

Vice-Chair Mosier called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

All present recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag

 

Present:            Commissioners Lewandowski, Bradley, Mosier, Culbertson, Subotich, and Kurtzweil.

Also present were Chuck Cairns (Planning Consultant), Kristen Cunningham, Director of Community and Economic Development.

 

Approval of Agenda:

             Motion by Culbertson, supported by Lewandowski

To approve the Agenda for April 13, 2006.

Vote                                                               Motion Carried Unanimously

 

Approval of Minutes:

Motion by Lewandowski, supported by Bradley

To approve of the Minutes for March 23, 2006 as amended.

Vote                                                               Motion Carried Unanimously

 

Public Comment

No public comment.

 

Old Business

South Lyon Auto Wash – PC#01-06 Preliminary Site Plan Review

 

Cairns discussed his March 27, 2006 review comments. The proposal is to add a large storage unit. The summary indicated the wrong zoning that must be corrected. The building height was indicated but there was no way to verify the information without the building elevations.  The building materials must be identified before final site plan review and they should include the floor plans to confirm the intent of use. No landscaping was indicated but it would be nice to see some. The Police Department noted they would like to see more external lighting. If more lighting is added then details of the fixtures must be included. There were some sight engineering concerns that would need to be addressed before final.

 

O’Dell LeChavelier, the owner of South Lyon Auto Wash stated that the building is general steel and would be general storage with no office space. The building height would not exceed 25-feet. A pitch to the roof would be added so it would blend in with the neighboring buildings. Landscaping could be added with no problem.

 

Mosier asked if the exterior would be all steel. LeChavelier replied it would have brick also to match the main building. Cairns stated as long as it matches the car wash it should be fine. The details need to be stated on the plans to establish the intent on record.

 

Culbertson asked about the comment from the Police Department regarding the lighting and asked if the unit would have fire systems. LeChavelier stated the fire alarm system would be extended from the main building. More lighting could be added but there is presently 5000 watts of light already. Culbertson suggested he speak to the Police Department because they might not realize what is already there. LeChavelier noted there is a camera system as well for security. Mosier noted the Police Department might not realize that. Subotich asked if the ordinance requires the use of the building to be specified and if so would it be enforced. Cairns stated yes the use could not change.

 

Lewandowski asked why review comments for the entire site were not included. Cairns stated he did note the front set back was not met with the main building however; this unit does not impact that problem. Mosier asked about water retention problems as a result of the new building. Cairns stated that would need to be addressed by the city engineer. Culbertson noted the current drain is on higher ground then the current water basin. LeChavelier stated when new concrete was put in the sides were raised eight-inches so water would not leave the property. Cairns stated since there were no comments regarding problems with the water retention he has to assume there is no anticipation of problems.

 

Kurtzweil asked what would be stored in a unit this size. LeChavelier stated that when the car wash was built it was the 1960s. They have fourteen chemicals for the machines and because of the hard water they use a minimum of 30 bags of softener per month. In the winter they go through fifteen bags of salt per day to keep the parking lot and driveway clear. Kurtzweil asked there are different chemicals for the different types of machines. LeChavelier replied yes. Kurtzweil asked if the unit could be made more appealing to match the neighboring businesses. LeChavelier stated it would be on the back lot. Kurtzweil stated it would still be seen. LeChavelier stated that is why they would add the pitch and the brick. Cunningham noted it would be helpful to have detailed drawings of the building so the Commissioners could visualize the building. LeChavelier asked the Commissioners what they would want to see. Mosier stated he would like a drawing with the color of the brick. LeChavelier asked what type of roofing material. Mosier replied he should match the main building. Cunningham stated the materials and detailed drawings could be provided at final if preliminary were granted. Ron Morelli, 179 Eagle Crest stated that he spoke with the city’s attorney who told him this application would open up the whole site so that everything that could be brought up to code could be fixed or if not, the problems should be taken to the Zoning Board of Appeals for variances.

 

Cairns stated the only issue he is aware of would be the front set back. Culbertson asked about the sidewalk. Morelli stated it might need to be delineated but signage, parking, and green space would need to be addressed and they might meet the standards but it should be reviewed. In his opinion, the green space would not meet the standards. Culbertson asked if this questions means a conversation with the building department should happen. Cunningham stated she would find out but typically these concerns would be addressed through Cairns. Culbertson asked if they could be addressed at final review. Cairns noted some things might need a variance but he would check with the city attorney.

Motion by Culbertson, supported by Subotich

To table South Lyon Auto Wash - PC#01-06 Preliminary Site Plan until the first meeting in May so the city could review the existing buildings for variances to current codes to determine what actions would be necessary.

Vote                                       MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Rezoning Request – Sidwell #21-20-176-002, Property at the end of Mills St. – IRO (Industrial Research Office) to RM2 (Residential Multiple)

 

Tim Storey of PEA and Mike Furnari of Fairview Builders, the applicant

Storey stated the site is 40 acres and currently zoned IRO but would like to request rezoning to RM2. He presented a conceptual plan for a mixed residential use with inter-connected walkways and a pool. The number of units would be flexible and they want the site to make everyone proud. The property is surrounded by residential and should not be considered industrial. He feels it would be important to maintain the public trail access.

 

Furnari explained the conceptual drawings and how a traditional development would cut off the public trail access.

 

Storey provided statistics from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments report that provides employment trends from 1999 through 2002. He discussed growth trends, unemployment trends, and business economic trends for the area. Furnari summarized by stating he believes this development would be win for the city, a win for the homeowners, and a win for the developers. He stated the city would receive a higher tax base then an industrial building and he would not want an industrial building near his home if he lived in that area. From a maintenance standpoint the city would not have to maintain the roads because it would fall under the homeowners’ association. The waste and sewer systems would be improved as part of the construction so there would be no burden on the city for at least 30 years. If an industrial site was developed they could close their doors at any time. Regarding the price range of the homes there would be condos, multi-family units, and single-family homes that would range from the 190s to the 300s. He stated he realized in the past this type of proposal was not successful.

 

Mosier questioned the economic statistics of a loss of 65% of industrial business in this area because he remembers only one business that shut down and there is currently a new one being built. He has been on the board for the past eight years and does not recall any other proposals to change the IRO.

 

Kurtzweil stated it was interesting that the market would absorb this many homes. Furnari asked if it was true that the homes in this area are over $300,000. Kurtzweil replied no. Furnari asked if it was better to have this then to have it vacant property surrounded by a residential area. Kurtzweil stated there weren’t that many homes in that area. Furnari stated he would not be that crazy about living next to an industrial building should one be built. He thinks it is in the best interest of everyone to have it residential.

 

Subotich stated there is an over supply of residential in this area, which is creating a slow down in home sales.

 

Lewandowski stated that the site would not necessarily be one large industrial building. Cairns stated there could be a big discussion regarding what type of uses could be built but the only question that needs to be addressed is could this land be used for something better than what it is zoned for. Housing is down and industrial is down. Whenever a property is rezoned there is no guarantee that this applicant would end up developing the site. What is critical to consider is would it be a better use then what it is currently. He pointed out that next year the master plan would be under review and that is when he believes the Commissioners should consider changes to zoning. If the Commissioners were to recommend zoning now they would be contradicting the city’s master plan.

 

Subotich stated as a Commission they have all been in support of strengthening the master plan and he thinks they should all remember that. Cairns stated there must be some degree of following the plan because deviating from it only weakens the city’s ability to defend the legality of that plan. This site could be a series of small, low profile use buildings that could fit very well and was the point of making this property an IRO. He thinks now is not the time to change the use.

 

Public Hearing opened at 7:58pm

Mosier explained the rules of the hearing for the audience.

 

Mark Hipp, 691 Grand Court

Hipp stated he was the resident who would be at the end of the cul-de-sac of the proposed plan. According to the proposed place he would have a house in front of his window. This particular plan does not make him happy. He commended the Commissioners for defending the master plan. He does not have a problem with industrial. He bought his home knowing it would be industrial. This is a prime piece of property and he does not want to see it given to the first guy that came along. He thanked the Commissioners for their time.

 

Dorothy Koski, 757 Knollwood

Koski stated she just moved to this area and would there be a development it would be at her front door. Colliers has a sign up that says “Coming Soon” which has been there for four years. She would prefer residential because her home would not be worth anything if industrial were to be built. She asked where the trail would be on the plans.  Lewandowski stated the plan is only conceptual. There would be no guarantee that the drawing presented would be the development built.  Koski stated she would prefer residential.

 

Eric Anson, 809 Eagle Heights Drive

Anson asked if it were to be rezoned what would be the options for residential. Mosier stated it would only be a recommendation to City Council. Lewandowski stated the applicant has requested RM2.

Anson asked how the process works. Mosier explained the process to change the zoning.

 

Nancy Iacovacci, 720 Kestrel Court

Iacovacci asked if they could put in apartments if the property were zoned multi-family. Cairns stated there would be no way to guarantee what they would actually build. Furnari stated some communities are requiring contracts to secure the development type. Cairns stated the applicant would have to initiate that. Furnari noted it would make sure the development is the right use. Iacovacci asked if that would come before the Planning Commission. Furnari stated there are lots of communities going that direction. Cairns stated there are a lot that are not because it has been fraught with problems besides; the municipality may not initiate the contract plan.

 

Patrick Nugent, 766 Challenging Trail

Nugent asked if there would be one road into the complex because that would not work. Mosier stated the plan is only a concept. Nugent asked if they found they needed to add a road would it come back to the Commission. Mosier stated he would have to come back to tie in the roads. Subotich noted the Commission is only considering the zoning.

 

Hipp asked if approximately ten years ago if this property went to the Michigan Supreme Court who decided that it would have to remain the zoning of the master plan. It was noted that he was correct in his recollection.

 

The Public Hearing closed at 8:13pm.

 

Bradley stated the precedent is that the Commission should stick with the master plan, as Cairns recommends, because it would leave the city open to so many problems.

 

Motion by Lewandowski, supported by Bradley

To recommend denial to City Council for Rezoning Request – Sidwell #21-20-176-002, Property at the end of Mills St. – IRO (Industrial Research Office) to RM2 (Residential Multiple). 

 

 

Vote                                       MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

New Business

No new business

 

Staff Reports

Cunningham stated there would not be a meeting at the end of April. South Lyon Auto Wash would probably be back in May and they could begin talking about the property maintenance code. 

 

ADJOURNMENT

Motion by Culbertson supported by Bradley

To adjourn the meeting at 8:17 p.m.

Vote                                       MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

 

 

_____________________                              _   ____________________   _______

Pam Weipert, Chairperson                             Jennifer Knapp, Recording Secretary

 

________________________

Keith Bradley, Secretary