Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e e e e

e e e e this is the Seline City Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday January 8th 20125 please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance I pled alance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation

under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all will the recording secretary please call the role Young here Carol here ftic is absent Marl here hereb here here report staff present tonight are community development director Atkin uh recording secretary katnik and uh o ohm advisers MC morritz is there a motion on the table to approve the agenda as amended or distributed I'll move to approve as amended Madam chair I want to briefly discuss the zba appointment under the discussion portion of tonight's agenda second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes is there a motion on the table to approve the meeting minutes of November 13th 2024 as amended or submitted so move to approve as submitted second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes public comment under the open meetings act any Citizen May Come forward at this time time and make comments the person is requested but not required to State their name and address for the record comments will be limited to 3 minutes per person seeing no public comment we'll move on to new business 25-01 election of officers um is there would anybody like to be a chairperson next year I don't if I may Madam chair I don't think that um our existing officers have reached their um prescribed termal limit so I would make a motion then to elect the same slate to serve in 2025 as served in uh 2024 so I believe that's for the record that's young as chairperson Carol as Vice chair and is it fosic uh as secretary treasurer yes okay that's my motion I Believe Miss heft has [Music]

seconded okay any discussion okay for I guess we can move all three of them and approve together all those in favor all those opposed motion passes new business 25-2 application from amk Holdings LLC for a combined site plan review at 6971 North Maple Road Seline Michigan 48176 parcel number 18-12 31-20 5- 019 in our packet we had a report dated December 27th 2024 from community development director Atkin and a memo data January 2nd 2025 from omm advisor boss and morons yeah so this uh plan was brought before the Planning Commission I think back in September me September uh at that time it was going to be a two-phase project it s changed to a singlephase um so the existing all the existing structures that are on site will be removed uh same with the subd in the well and uh installation of two 6,50 ft uh metal structures on them parking be uh I think there's 23 spaces total uh all new pavement there's a detention Basin in the back uh this will be for um contractor services and some warehousing uh currently the applicant will be occupying half of the western most building which be as closest to uh North Maple uh the other half will be for lack of better turn white box and so will the uh back unit uh or back structure there'll be three separate units in there so four will be um unused

uh but up for lease for similar type uses in the future there are some uh [Music] parking based on what what uh ordinance States there's a bit of a gap in what is required versus what is going to be uh offered there this proposed on the site I think it was a difference uh 13 spaces versus uh plan 23 uh so we just want about the additional parking um for that to be clarified um and then also the parking spaces are in front of the overhead doors which are uh building parking spaces FR is behind being able to access those um for landscaping or then I added the fire chief's comments in there too about having access around all the buildings and I believe engineering spoke to having a hydrant on the site also um most of what is noted in our report there's just some clarification and some you know installing parking bumps or bumpers excuse me um then the sign proposed sign in front does not meet the height requirements and why I'm thinking of it also there's in the previous review that was done when there was two-phase project uh the building was going to be put the one building was going to be put furthers to the East and the parking that is currently there was going to remain and in the ordinance it states that any parking near the

RightWay needs to be screened with a wall so the the site plan showed uh two 3ft tall walls on either side of the current entrance well now that that it's a single phase the parking is going to be the parking lot is going to set back from the road I think 50 to 75 ft and it's not uh required since it's going to be new parking s back further at the Planning Commission has the discretion to wave that requirement uh my opinion is that that wall will just appear to be out of place um that close to the road and with the parking lot being so far back there it will be Landscaping um along the front in in the uh buffer and then or in the Green Space there and then also some trees uh in front of the parking lot that will also hide it and hide the sight of it so um but with the [Music] uh I items to be addressed and um some non zoning related information that had issues uh we don't feel that the site plan is ready for approval the combin preliminary final site plan um and that is also being driven by uh some of the comments received through fire department and the engineering thank you engine Mars do you have anything to add no not too much I'll keep it brief um in our letter for um your consideration tonight we just had

three comments um for you to um to to look over and discuss um and all of them are kind of connected uh the first comment under General um mentions uh that you know the nearest fire hydrant is on the western side of Maple Road um and so this uh the the building and the parking lot to the east on the Eastern side of this site both of those fall outside of the 250 ft service radius of that fire hydrant um so in our letter we deferred to the fire department to see you know if this is acceptable to them or if they have other requirements um and it looks like the fire department does want to see um more coverage on the site the second comment that we had under utilities is kind of related um right now proposed are uh two Water Service leads um these are uh right now proposed to just be 2 in water service leads one going to uh the first building the other going to the second building um and these leads would be uh 200 ft long and 300 ft long uh respectively and there's there's nothing in the standards that prohibits that exactly it's just not necessarily common practice in the industry to have a water lead that long with a pipe that small um they sell those segments in 100 foot segments so there will be some joints um we try to avoids after the curb stops so you don't get leaks essentially um but we on this one you know we defer to the to the city engineering department if they want to say that that's okay in this instance but it seems like this comment might be a move point because of the fire department's comments because of wanting to have um more hydrant coverage on the site so um and the final comment that we

had was related to uh providing a turning template for emergency response vehicles um the biggest of which is obviously a fire engine so I feel like our comments really kind of echo what the fire chief had pointed out um and will probably all be resolved um by addressing what the fire department wants to see so um the rest of the comments are really construction plan level um and it was nothing major it's just some details with storm water management to make sure the Cals are tight and that everything lines up um and I think that's that's what we've got of note tonight thank you very much any questions uh is there a motion on the table to acknowledge the receipt of the report dated December 27th from uh community community development director Atkin and the memo dated January second from omm advisers I'm move to acknowledge receip Madam chair second any comments all those in favor I all those oppos motion passes uh we will now allow the applicant developer comments uh limited to 10 minutes yeah I'm Jack Brown good evening with amk Holdings um I did receive the packet and understand all the issues that we need to resolve um basically just here let you know they're in process of being resolved so Architects already sent back new elevations with different building materials on the outside to meet the criteria uh for what's required and the surveyor site site plan prepare is um fixing basically per email all of the issues that were noted so iance to resubmit hopefully by next month with all the issues rectified and here to answer any questions you might have from us great thank you questions for the developer and applicant yes what do you plan on your phasing for the construction when will the house and such be demolished or is that all going to happen at the same time or are you going to continue to to

use some of the buildings yeah um you mean what's there now yep yeah um we're not going to do anything with the site until we have site planine approval but once we have site planine approval we move forward with demoing and permits and utility disconnects and all that sort of stuff but until we obtain site plan approval we're not planning on doing anything really okay thank you uh What uh this the parking discrepancy between the 10 10 sites or 13 sites and 23 sites what are you we're just having them removed all the excess parking which will take care of them being in front of the Mand doors frankly I think that was an oversight from the site plan gu you forgot to probably delete those so um yeah we're just going to remove all the ones in front of all the overhead doors and even if he does that there's still technically a few extra spots but still meeting the requirements of [Music] parking I know not necessarily a question that you can answer right now but um when do you how long do you think Construction last when do you expect to be up and running yeah good question um right now between 12 and 18 months okay and then start got it and then with all of your changes that your um engineer is making do you plan on having any variances that will be required for the building now with either the sign the materials or anything like that okay great um just one other question on the um they mentioned that there was not um any expectation would be any sort of delivery trucks or anything coming in will that be the case in in the event that you're actually like leasing this out to other tenants and that there's possibility that might change when you say delivery trucks you mean like an end user that's occupying one of the spaces having deliveries made well just it said uh in the where is it in the packet about how um the there was no plan for there to actually be any sort of um expectation of being any uh no rece or distribution of trucks and or delivery vehicles are planned for this

development I mean besides we don't we don't have any end users L up for this project yet so it would be whoever can occupy it based on light industrial zoning and what their requirements are I suppose but we personally don't have any for our occupant use of the first half of the building delivery of any kind besides their Amazon UPS yeah I think the intent behind that was when they're doing the parking C culations in the first site plan review was for loading zones for larger trucks Panel trucks UPS trucks um that they a lot more maneuverable than you know just the expectation of you're leasing it out to other tenants are there going to is there any expectation that the other tenants might have larger vehicles or more frequent trips or more frequent Tri trips yeah Ian that's something that comes down to who they rent to and and the type of use so it's I think it's General industrial so there can't be any heavy machinery or anything like that that in any of the uses that are permitted in the zoning District additional questions for applicant thank you very much is there a motion on the table to open the uh public comment at 7:15 p.m. second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes seeing no comments is there a motion to close the public hearing at 716 second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes any additional questions or comments from Planning Commission members for uh community development director yes so the recommended action then would be to postpone to a date certain we're not going to be recommending uh approval or rejection to city council there's no there's public hearing required for this

since it's just site plan review so we don't have to I mean you can just postpone till whenever the applicant is prepared it doesn't have to be a date he said submit within the next 30 days so that would take us to our next regular meeting on February the 12th uh possibly I mean I already have the architectural literally got them today okay with that part the site plan uh true nor surveying and site plan said he should have it by mid next week that put us into yeah the next February 11th meeting or the date is yeah okay is there any issue with the fire fire I did want to ask that question I forgot um who should I be communicating with to get affirmative requirements for the truck turnaround the fire marshal or chief or is that through the panel is who do I who should I talk to the the fire chief is going to be the person who ultimately signs off to say like yes we can you think it's okay for me just to contact him and say okay can you talk me through this okay connect you guys y yep if you don't have his contact information we can provide it that was one question that we had that the we just need a clarification on besides that everything else is in process yes uh just a couple things um the Aesthetics of the building and Gateway and all of that does any of that apply to this the Gateway plan I don't believe the Gateway plan applies to this uh um just standard or general um building design the Aesthetics are the for the North Maple side is what being one of the concerns being that is the entryway into our community and that that building is on a main road that we're very consistent with the residential that I think we should be somewhat consistent with um this building too on that potential so I don't know what means Landscaping setback all of that but I think that should be considered in

the final the landscaping and set back meet the requirements um the excuse me the actual exterior of the building the design of the building you know certain percentages of material they didn't meet those requirements so uh I'm assuming that those would be in the architectural plans coming up because what was submitted is are just metal buildings now with no uh deflections or or um any brick or anything anything like that to add any aesthetic upgrades um one thing I noticed on there it said to make a recommendation to Selen city council to approve Selen city council doesn't do that so that motion is incorrect on there right yeah oversight this correct that next it's written as if it was a PUD yeah yeah this is standard site plan yeah um no concerns with connecting to our water and sewer and all that on the uh on that site I don't know what we've done out there and what we have yeah um no no question about sewer um that's also on all the utilities are on the west side of North Maple Road and shouldn't be a a challenge to connect to the the big question is just going to be water to see if you know if they do want to it's it's a quite small site to do a loop on I know that's what the um correspondence from the fire chief has suggested was doing a loop um but on a on a on this short of a run um I think the city engineer would be open to considering um if you had uh a water man extended onto the site where there's a hydrant at the end so that they can flush that that main one they need to

and then run the service lines off of that would probably be ideal um but if your I don't know if your engineer is still kind of playing around with that layout um but it would it might be worth a phone call to the city engineering department to see you know are they would they be okay with a a a dead end on this one just because the loop would be so so tight on this side could a condition be made where in the future should leave here redevelop their property that somehow that would be connected to I don't know what they're going to do in terms of their looping cuz we required them to you know um Loop their connection but if they should develop that property that this get connected into it so just looking forward to the future the property of the north yeah okay yeah it's all these these dead ends like this have always been a problem for our I know it yeah it doesn't it doesn't 10 years later you're kicking yourself kind of thing um yeah so in in this instance because it is kind of this in between distance um I don't want to promise that you know a loop would be absolutely required or that a dead end would be absolutely permitted but I think it would be worth a phone call with the city engineering department to say you know in this exact layout what would be acceptable fair enough um just the one last thing knowing the entrance for where this property has and maple wood entrance is there any concern with that intersection that cross right there it's offset I didn't know how much the distance is from there whether that'll be an issue for uh traffic flow yeah and are you referring to I think it's the what will be a dentist on that other side of the road next to it well there is the entrance of Maplewood and then you come down there but yeah I guess it would be both of that that whole area is

there any concern with the entrance in the Maplewood more Woodland Drive and anticipate this generating a lot of traffic um it seems that well knowing the issue with the schools and how they're redesigning all of that area and all this knowing that this is a not one of the other businesses that we have on that it's not residential so just understanding the frequency and so forth considering the size and there's essentially five units or five six units well it also remains to be seen one thing is we're not demising the besides the front building where we're going to OCC half the back building is not going to be demised until we find an End user yeah it could be one for the entire building it could be in half it could be third we're designing it to be thirds but someone could still take half or two Mand so the number of end users Still Remains deing yeah it's I don't anticipate the type of use that's going in there it's going to generate a lot of traffic a lot of trips uh right not coming in the morning and leaving in the afternoon or after in evening okay that's it for me additional questions or [Music] comments uh then noting the recommendation um from staff and the comment from the petitioner Madam chair I move to postpone consideration to a date certain of February 12th 2025 here in council chambers at 7: p.m. 7 additional discussion all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes uh new business 25-3 Planning Commission bylaws is there a motion on the table to approve as presented as amended the Seline Planning Commission bylaws actually I'll let you accept your seat right now for discussion

absolutely this driven BYU on second I second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes on to you so the reduction in number of planning commissions from 9 to 7 uh the ordinance was adopted or amended uh in the general code Monday evening um and then which drove the bylaws to need to be uh amended as well and I uh took the liberty of there were some that were passed I think it was in 20 21 um in reading through those I didn't feel that they were a good representation of the planning enabling act and Zoning enabling act uh there was some uh important information that was left out and I think having them in the bylaws and everybody's Forefront and and as opposed to referencing uh those two acts when necessary to have them all in one place um there are certain things in there that just reference those specific acts uh but the those [Music] are references are two lesser used sections of those laws so I rearranged them um as you see in front of you with a red line uh then there's more additions and there are uh um other revisions in there uh just to kind of spell out how this commission is to function um moving forward so but there's I didn't put anything in there that isn't uh hasn't been followed uh by the Planning [Music] Commission questions and

comments um is there anything significant and just for you um Chris that changed or anything that I mean you just kind of summarized that but anything that's been taken out of here because I went through the red line version and seemed like a lot of paragraphs are struck out but it was really just reorganizing within the Articles was it yeah most of it was reorganizing the one section that did I did add was for [Music] um I added about proxy voting exp parte Communications and uh uh uh uh work session uh agenda but other than that there's there's nothing outstanding in there that or anything in there that is that changes and nothing that we we're doing that we shouldn't be doing going forward or should be doing that we were Tak care of okay um article 11 which talks about you know the uh let me get down here again it's basically the order of business is that our form of business or is that the recommendation from the uh um Act it just L it just list call to order Pledge of Allegiance roll call all of that I was just curious that's that's our current [Music] order thank you any additional questions or [Music] comments there's no additional discussion Madam chair I'd move to um amend to to appr as presented as presented yes excuse me S additional discussion all those in favor I all

those oppos motion passes uh 25-4 2024 annual report um is there a motion on the table to accept with or without Amendment and authorized reporting secretary katnik to forward the 2024 annual report to Seline city council unless you'd like to discuss it Mr we can discuss it real quick before there's a motion that's fine I was only here for one meeting in 24 so I'm the one that wrote it it was pretty um I reviewed the minutes um that from all of the meetings that were here I didn't see anything that jumped out as being incorrect on it but if there's anything else that you'd like to add um we did have uh one preliminary site application one final site application uh three combined preliminary final site applications one special land use application and recommendation to city council uh zoning text Amendment we had four of those uh zoning map Amendment one uh planned unit development one and final site plan change one so no final site plan extensions and no sign exemptions uh in 2024 I I think it's good I maybe Mr gebod disagrees with me I I always think it's valuable particularly for Planning Commission and some of our more impactful boards and committees to do a a formal report before city council um with some visuals and that's usually conducted or performed by the by the chair and and support staff so um at a minimum yes let's forward this to city council but if there is a desire from this body or if Mr gebau concurs I think it would be valuable sometime in the next maybe 30 to 60 days to have um a special presentation at the top of our Council agenda to to receive the annual report from Planning Commission and generally it's just a short presentation I think one of the things that's nice about it is that it actually gives planning attempt to give a communication to the community at a council meeting

what's been accomplished and done so it's real simple maybe a couple pictures of whatever we done I mean for me when I was looking at this I forgot that U Mitch Road's project was called just in time or just just ause just a fuse I'm sorry and I was like thinking who is that and it's like okay and I was keep thinking Autos but um yeah if that's fine to do something simple like that it's very short not a long 5 minutes Atty for uh Council to ask one or two questions there you go Chris welcome 2025 truthfully it would help either I might myself or um Adrien we can help if you don't feel comfortable with doing some of the I I think IDE I think IDE I think ideally the presentation is is staff and the chairperson no absolutely do um the Leon Bill the Pud we still have not heard anything from Danny very just as a followup but I think he said February wanted he'd get back [Music] so but assuming the um the the report is uh approved I'd try to work this into um one of our February agenda meetings y i I'll move to accept second without Amendment yeah okay any additional discussion all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes uh mayor Marl zoning portion yeah so the Planning Commission has um sent a liaison to uh to the zoning board of appeals for the past several years it's uh has been um chairperson young prior to uh chairperson young it had been former commissioner Beardsley and before that it had been uh commissioner hft all the individuals have done an outstanding job um uh chairperson young has asked to rotate off so we need to find a new representative from the Planning Commission to the zoning board of

appeals zoning board of appeals usually meets on Thursday evenings if I'm not mistaken Mr Atkin yes not every month though only on an as needed basis I think this past year they met twice okay so I would say averag is between two to six times per year um uh uh Mr Atkins was gracious enough to review the enabling act and it cannot be um either myself or Mr gearball since we're members of the the city's legislative body um so if any of you are interested in the the zba appointment uh please follow up with my office I'd like to make that appointment sometime in the next uh month or [Music] so thank you um the next meeting is scheduled for February 12th 2025 at 700 p.m. is there a motion on the table to excuse the absence of Mr P second all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes is there a motion on the table to adjourn at 7:32 all those in favor I all those opposed motion passes thank you thank you and there's a card for Mr