Docstoc

Holly Township

Document Sample
Holly Township Powered By Docstoc
					                             Holly Township
                  Planning Commission – Special Meeting
                        Minutes of October 3, 2005

     Call to Order: Vice Chairperson Bill Angus called the October 3, 2005 special
     meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Holly Township Hall,
     102 Civic Drive, Holly, MI 48442.

     Roll Call:

 1   Commissioners Present                      Others Present
 2   Ted Gurski (late 7:05pm)                   Greg MacAlpine, Zoning Administrator
 3   Steve Ruth                                 Laura DeVault, Building Clerk
 4   Mark McHalpine                             Brian Oppmann, Township Planner
 5   Lalaine Kilbourn                           Karyn Stickel, HRC Township Engineer
 6   Rick Stevens
 7   Bill Angus
 8
 9   Absent
10   George Barton
11
12       Commissioner Kilbourn moved to excuse Chairperson Barton and
13      Commissioner Gurski. Commissioner Ruth supported the motion. A voice vote
14      was taken; all those present voted yes; the motion carried by a 5/0 vote.
15
16   Agenda Approval:
17
18       Commissioner Kilbourn moved to approve the Agenda as written.
19        Commissioner McHalpine supported the motion. A voice vote was taken; all
20        those present voted yes; the motion carried by a 5/0 vote.
21
22   Public Hearings:
23
24          1. Application for Special Land Use and Site Plan Approval. Steve
25             Nannoshi, Applicant, requests Special Land Use permit and Site
26             Plan Approval for a Commercial Development on Parcel #01-25-
27             200-004.
28
29       Commissioner Kilbourn moved to open the Public Hearing at 7:03p.m.
30        Commissioner McHalpine supported the motion. A voice vote was taken; all
31        those present voted yes; the motion carried by a 5/0 vote.
     Holly Township Planning Commission Regular Minutes October 3, 2005 2 of 6


 1
 2   There were no comments from the public.
 3
 4       Commissioner Kilbourn moved to close the Public Hearing at 7:04p.m.
 5        Commissioner McHalpine supported the motion. A voice vote was taken; all
 6        those present voted yes; the motion carried by a 5/0 vote.
 7
 8   Approval of Minutes: None
 9
10   Communications:
11
12          1. Letter from Zoning Administrator to Green Thumb Landscaping
13             regarding Special Land Use and Site Plan requirements for
14             Contractors Yard.
15
16   Gregg MacAlpine, Holly Township Zoning Administrator, sent a letter urging Mr. Zito of
17   Green Thumb Landscaping to take steps towards requesting a Special Land Use Permit
18   and Site Plan review from the Holly Township Planning Commission. Letter dated
19   September 14, 2005.
20
21   Reports:
22
23          1. R.C.O.C. Report of the Strategic Planning Process 2005.
24
25   The Oakland County Road Commissions report of the strategic planning process for 2005
26   did not appear to have much, if any, approaching activity for the Holly area.
27
28   Old Business: None
29
30   New Business:
31
32      1. Application for Special Land Use and Site Plan Approval. Steve
33      Nannoshi, Applicant, requests Special Land Use Permit and Site Plan
34      Approval for a Commercial Development on Parcel #01-25-200-004.
35
36   Mr. Steve Nannoshi, the applicant, is proposing to construct a 7,260 sq ft gas
37   station/convenience store on the southwest corner of Grange Hall Road and Mackey
38   Road. In 2004, the same applicant proposed a similar concept on the property
39   immediately west of this site. That proposal never received approval.
40
41   The subject site is 6.67 acres in size and is zoned C-2 General Commercial. The northern
42   portion of the site, where most of the development is proposed, is a relatively open field.
43   The southern portion of the site will be kept in its natural condition. Two wetlands are


                                                                                               2
     Holly Township Planning Commission Regular Minutes October 3, 2005 3 of 6


 1   located on the site.
 2
 3   The fact that one owner will be developing both this property and the property to the
 4   north, provides a great opportunity to create a cohesive and compatible development at
 5   this highly used and visible intersection of the Township. In meeting with the applicant,
 6   Carlisle/Wortman has indicated that it would expect that development on this property to
 7   be considerate of future development on the property north of the site. Carlisle/Wortman
 8   would also expect the ingress/egress points from the subject site and the "Feed Store" site
 9   to match up to create one designated point of access. This could greatly improve the
10   redevelopment of these properties and help to lessen the extreme traffic problems that
11   currently exist in this area. Other opportunities for such would be the ability to use
12   similar materials, facade appearances, landscaping schemes, and similar, to create a more
13   cohesive development.
14
15   Carlisle/Wortman recommends the following:
16
17          Encroachment/disturbance of wetlands and applicable permits.
18          Township Engineer approval of on-site utilities and storm water management.
19          Water Quality.
20          The Planning Commission should consider reducing the amount of parking
21           required on the site.
22          Township Engineer input regarding the traffic study.
23          Indication on the site that no overnight truck parking will take place.
24          Decrease maneuvering land width on the western portion of the site.
25          Due to maintenance and vulnerability, consider replacing some or all of the Crab-
26           Apple trees with Bradford Pear and other suitable vegetation.
27          Revise the photometric plan to meet Ordinance requirements.
28          Provide a sign plan consisting of details of all the signs to be installed on the site.
29          As a condition of approval, do not allow extended periods of time that truck are
30           allowed to stay on the site.
31
32   Commissioner McHalpine asked, in regards to the Townships Sign Ordinance, if window
33   signs counted towards the sign size limits for the building.
34
35   Brian Oppmann, Carlisle/Wortman, stated that there is a section in the Sign Ordinances
36   on page 9 section 12 that states that they require a permit to receive approval for a
37   window sign or poster. However, he did not feel that this would be an issue with Mr.
38   Nannoshi in particular.
39
40   Commission Stevens asked what the distance from Grange Hall to the first Mackey Road
41   entrance is.
42
43   Ron Kachman, the Applicants Engineer, stated that the distance from the centerline of
44   Grange Hall Road to the first entrance on Mackey Road, including the 40-foot throat of
45   the approach is a total of 140 feet.
46


                                                                                                   3
     Holly Township Planning Commission Regular Minutes October 3, 2005 4 of 6


 1   Commissioner Stevens was concerned that the distance did not fit the plan and that it
 2   would not flow well.
 3
 4   Mr. Kachman stated that the first entrance is a semi-truck entry.
 5
 6   Vice-Chairman Angus asked the applicant how he plans to keep the fuel from flowing
 7   into the wetlands if there was a gas spill and asked how often the basins are cleaned.
 8
 9   Mr. Kachman stated that there are two large catch basins (6 foot) as well as underground
10   storage that have sheet separators to filter the fuel sediment from the water. This system
11   is cleaned out bi-annually for general maintenance purposes with immediate response in
12   the event of a spill.
13
14   Hubbell, Roth & Clark recommend the following:
15
16         Grange Hall and Mackey Roads are under the jurisdiction of the RCOC.
17          Therefore, permits are required for all work within the respective road rights-of-
18          way. It appears as though RCOC has completed one review of the plans and
19          requested revision. For final site plan approval, RCOC preliminary approval
20          should be on file. Prior to construction plan approval, the Applicant should
21          provide a copy of the permit.
22         The Applicant has provided preliminary comments from MDOT regarding this
23          site. A permit from MDOT is required for all work within the I-75 right-of-way
24          prior to construction plan approval.
25         The traffic study recommended a signal at the intersection of Mackey/Grange
26          Hall/I-75 as well as at the NB I-75/Grange Hall Road intersections. These are not
27          shown on the plans. Per review of the traffic study, it is unclear whether the
28          traffic signal is warranted at the Mackey/Grange Hall/I-75 intersection. This issue
29          must be resolved prior to final site plan approval. RCOC and MDOT must
30          approve the installation of any traffic signal.
31         A soil erosion and sedimentation control permit is required from the Oakland
32          County Drain Commissioners office. Also a NPDES storm water discharge
33          permit may be required from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.
34          The applicant is responsible for making all applications and copying this office
35          and the Township on all permits prior to construction plan approval.
36         Any impacts to regulated wetlands on site will require a permit from the MDEQ.
37          MDEQ should also review the water quality measures that are proposed. The
38          Applicant must clarify if the small pond to be filled in is State regulated by virtue
39          of its proximity to the large regulated wetlands. A copy of the wetland
40          consultant’s report must be provided. The wetland consultant responsible for all
41          of the wetland flagging should be identified on the plans also.
42         The storm water for this site is to be stored in an underground detention system in
43          the parking lot and discharged at a restricted rate. The applicant has provided
44          sizing calculations for the volume required and restrictor design and these appear
45          to be in order. The final site plan has provided information on the volume being



                                                                                                  4
     Holly Township Planning Commission Regular Minutes October 3, 2005 5 of 6


 1          provided in the underground storage tank. The plans should indicate how the
 2          storage volume per chamber was calculated.
 3         The storm water in the parking lot is proposed to sheet flow to the underground
 4          storage system. As indicated in our previous review, a storm sewer system should
 5          be placed in the parking lot to better convey the storm water, with catch basins
 6          placed at all low points.
 7         It appears as though the south end of the site is to be built up to facilitate the
 8          construction of the parking lot. The Applicant has provided some proposed spot
 9          grades. Proposed contours should also be provided to more clearly define the
10          grating limits. Is a retaining wall to be constructed? From the spot grade
11          information, it appears the resultant grade could be as steep as a one on three (1:3)
12          slope. Also, the contour information will help clarify the grating limits so that
13          there is no encroachment into the wetlands.
14         For final site plan consideration, the applicant should indicate if the OCHD has
15          reviewed and approved this site for the construction of an on-site disposal system
16          (septic) and for the installation of the proposed well.
17
18   Commissioner Kilbourn commented on a traffic signal being installed at the intersection
19   of I-75, Mackey Road and Grange Hall Roads.
20
21   Mr. Kachman stated that this was out of their hands and was up to MDOT.
22
23   Commissioner Gurski commended the applicant, stating that he has done a great job with
24   the whole plan and informed the applicant that he can always appear before the Zoning
25   Board of Appeals for a brighter parking lot.
26
27   Commissioner McHalpine commented on the number of parking spaces.
28   Mr. Kachman stated this included the parking spaces and any spaces at the gas pumps.
29   He also stated that it is better to have more than not enough.
30
31       Commissioner Kilbourn made a motion for the approval for the Special
32        Land Use for Commercial Development use for Parcel #01-25-200-004.
33        Commissioner McHalpine supported the motion. A roll call vote was taken.
34        All those present voted yes. Commissioner Stevens abstained. The motion
35        carried with a 5/0 vote.
36
37       Commissioner Ruth made a motion to approve the Site Plans for Parcel #01-
38        25-200-004 intendment on the items pointed out by HRC, and to lower the
39        lighting to meet with the current zoning laws. Commissioner Gurski
40        supported the motion. A roll call vote was taken. All those present voted yes.
41        Commissioner Stevens abstained. The motion carried with a 5/0 vote.
42
43       Commissioner Stevens made a motion where as the Holly Township Planning
44        Commission desires to make the intersection and area of Grange Hall and
45        Mackey Roads safe; and where as it has been demonstrated this area has a
46        large increase in traffic in recent years and has resulted in numerous vehicle


                                                                                               5
     Holly Township Planning Commission Regular Minutes October 3, 2005 6 of 6


 1          accidents with some injuries and death; and where as rapid increase in
 2          commercial development and residential traffic has dramatically increased
 3          the potential for accidents; therefore the Holly Township Planning
 4          Commission recommends to the Holly Township Board of Trustees, and the
 5          Oakland County Road Commission, to install a traffic light immediately at
 6          this intersection. Commissioner Kilbourn supported the motion. A voice
 7          vote was taken. All those present voted yes. The motion carried with a 6/0
 8          vote.
 9
10   Public Comment: None
11
12   Adjournment: 8:07 p.m.
13
14   Vice-Chairman Angus, hearing no other business, adjourned the meeting at 8:07 p.m.
15
16   ____________________________________________________________
17   Mark McHalpine, Secretary
18
19
20   ____________________________________________________________
21   Jacquelyn Gaul, Recording Secretary
22




                                                                                          6

				
DOCUMENT INFO