Planning Commission Minutes
CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF BLOOMFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Bloomfield Township Hall
I. ATTENDANCE:
PRESENT: Salz, Goldberg, Stefanes, Mintz, Reisinger, Stark
ABSENT: None
Staff Present: Patricia McCullough, Planning and Building
Director, Christopher Gruba, Assistant Planner, and Robin
Carley, Development Coordinator
Mr. Dave Payne, Township Supervisor, was present in the
audience.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Motion was made by Mintz, seconded by Goldberg and was
unanimously supported to approve the Planning Commission
minutes of August 6, 2007, as written.
YEAS: Salz, Goldberg, Stefanes, Mintz, Reisinger, Stark
NAYS: None
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Proposed Amendment to Research Park District
Ms. McCullough introduced this item to the Commissioners,
and highlighted the proposed ordinance language, which was
provided to the Commissioners and submitted to the file. She
reviewed several of the existing uses within the current
Research Park District, which included:
Office with product warehousing
Office with light manufacturing
General office
Wholesale office with storage
Service office with warehousing
Technology office with warehousing
Ms. McCullough noted that the newly adopted 2007 Master
Plan recognized the Research Park District as a mixture of
uses that included commercial, office, and light industrial
facilities. The Zoning Map was also highlighted, showing that
the district was confined to a contiguous 114 acres north of
Square Lake Road, on the east and west sides of Franklin Road.
A survey of several surrounding communities found that
office and service facilities were common uses permitted in
their Research Park and Light Industrial Zone Districts. It
was noted that this district is not intended to be an office
or retail district, requiring short-term parking, with uses
that would reasonably be allowed in an office or business zone
district.
Ms. McCullough stated that the proposed ordinance amendment
language had been reviewed by the Township Attorney’s office.
The proposed ordinance amendment was noticed in the local
newspaper a minimum of 15 days prior to this public hearing.
Mr. Salz asked for questions or comments from the
Commissioners to Ms. McCullough.
Mr. Stark commented on the uses found in the survey, and
the subsequent use of wording in the proposed ordinance,
including training uses.
Ms. Stefanes noted that the current Research Park zone
district has not changed in size and that the Master Plan did
not call out for another Research Park district. She also
questioned the use of the title / name for the Research Park
district.
The Commission discussed the current naming of the
district, with a suggested name "Light Industrial".
Ms. McCullough noted that this amendment was not intended
to change the spirit or integrity of the existing district,
and thus the current and proposed title and terminology.
Dr. Goldberg noted that recreational uses were permitted
uses prior to this proposed amendment. He also questioned the
numbering of the subsections.
Ms. McCullough noted that the numbering of the subsections
would be corrected.
Mr. Salz opened the public comment portion of the meeting.
Mr. Doug Allen, 1195 Fairfax, commented on the term light
industrial or light manufacturing and cautioned the Commission
on changing the name of the current zone district. He stated
that typically a research park district was more restrictive
than an industrial district.
It was noted that the Township currently has an M-L, Light
Manufacturing District, which allows for more intense
industrial and manufacturing type uses, and is typically not
adjacent to residentially zoned property within the Township.
There were no additional public comments and Mr. Salz
closed the public hearing.
Mr. Salz asked for a motion.
Motion was made by Stefanes, seconded by Stark and was
unanimously supported to forward a recommendation for approval
to the Township Board of Trustees for the proposed ordinance
amendment to the Research Park District.
YEAS: Salz, Goldberg, Stefanes, Mintz, Reisinger, Stark
NAYS: None
B. Proposed Mixed Use District Provisions
Ms. McCullough introduced this item to the Commissioners
regarding the incorporation of a new mixed-use district
ordinance. She reviewed the proposed provisions, including
allowing for an increase in building height to allow for
commercial, office, and residential uses within one structure,
with a shared parking requirement. Ms. McCullough noted the
three following locations proposed for mixed use districts, as
called out in the newly adopted 2007 Master Plan:
Southeast corner of Woodward and Big Beaver,
Southwest corner of Telegraph Road and Square Lake
Road,
Southeast and Southwest corners of Telegraph Road and
Long Lake Road
It was noted that the Mixed Use Zoning would be an overlay
district, with the underlying zoning provisions still
applying, if the owner / developer chose to develop under the
current underlying zoning.
Highlights of the Mixed Use Overlay District were reviewed,
including:
Retail uses, with frontages encouraged at the first
floor level,
Specialty foods, such as ice cream parlors, bakeries,
and coffee shops,
Personal service uses, such as barber and beauty
salons, cleaners, and tailors,
Other uses similar to the above uses,
Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to
the above permitted uses,
Upper stories may be commercial, office, or residential
uses, with conditions,
No dwelling units shall occupy any portion of a
commercial or office building at ground level or below
ground level,
In those instances where a residential use is proposed
to occupy the same floor as an office use, the Planning
Commission shall determine the compatibility of the
residential use and office uses. Such findings may include
compatibility of hours of operation, and noise of the
operation that would be detrimental to either use, and
excessive foot traffic,
A use, once established, shall not require Planning
Commission review when a change of occupancy occurs,
provided that the same or similar type of use is continued
with the change of occupancy.
Ms. McCullough also noted the proposed maximum building
height of 45 feet, the allowance of two signs for businesses
fronting on two streets, and parking requirements determined
by a shared parking plan provided to the Commissioners and
approved by the Township’s traffic engineer.
Proposed setbacks for the district were reviewed, noting
the need for continuity and compatibility with adjacent
buildings or developments. Standards for the district were
reviewed, including providing a minimum of 50% residential to
ensure a true mixed use development.
The draft ordinance amendment was provided to the
Commissioners and submitted to the file. Ms McCullough noted
that the ordinance language had been reviewed by the Township
Attorney’s office.
The proposed ordinance amendment was noticed in the local
newspaper a minimum of 15 days prior to this public hearing.
Mr. Salz asked for questions or comments from the
Commissioners to Ms. McCullough.
Mr. Stark questioned the setback language, also noting that
language should be included requiring the orientation of
buildings to parallel the streets.
Dr. Goldberg questioned the approval power of the Planning
Commission for mixed use developments.
Ms. McCullough noted that the Planning Commission was a
recommending body and would still make recommendation to the
Township Board of Trustees for final site plan approval.
The Commission discussed the possibility of matching
setbacks of adjacent buildings.
It was noted that the language stated "may" match existing
setbacks of adjacent buildings.
Grammatical errors were noted, with corrections to be made
prior to review by the Township Board of Trustees.
Mr. Mintz commented that the language may be too
restrictive, relative to the percentage of uses required, and
would not allow developers enough latitude to construct
according to market demands. Mr. Mintz suggested to the
Township Board of Trustees that perhaps the ordinance language
should be amended relating to the percentage of uses required.
Mr. Salz opened the public comment portion of the meeting.
There were no public comments and Mr. Salz closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Salz called for a motion.
Motion was made by Reisinger, seconded by Goldberg, and was
unanimously supported to forward a recommendation for approval
to the Township Board of Trustees for the proposed Mixed Use
District Provisions, with the inclusion of additional language
requiring the orientation of buildings to parallel the
streets.
YEAS: Salz, Goldberg, Stefanes, Mintz, Reisinger, Stark
NAYS: None
C. Proposed Regulations for Wind Energy Systems
Ms. McCullough introduced this proposed ordinance amendment
to the Commissioners to establish regulations for wind energy
systems. She reviewed the highlights of the ordinance
amendment, including:
Allowing a wind energy system in a single-family
residential district or in the light manufacturing
district subject to a special use permit.
Requiring a minimum of 5 acres for a single wind energy
system.
Maximum height of 100 feet in residential districts and
150 feet in light manufacturing districts under specified
conditions.
Clearance height from bottom of rotor blade to grade is
20 feet.
Limiting the sound levels produced by a wind energy
system to 65 db.
Landscaping to obscure visibility from roadways.
Setback distance equal to a minimum of 6 times the
height of the wind energy system.
Minimal impacts by shadow flicker of the rotor blades.
Removal procedures to restore the land to its original
condition upon discontinuance.
Ms. McCullough commented that testing results, along with
recommendations from a certified professional, would be
required certifying that the height proposed is the minimum
height required to provide sufficient air flow for operation
of the wind energy system. She also noted that the sale of
electricity shall not be allowed and shall only be for the
primary purpose of serving the principal lot. Only one wind
energy system would be allowed per lot.
Landscaping, soil conditions, aesthetics and lighting,
vibrations, and compliance with all State and Federal
requirements were noted.
Skystream 3.7 information was provided to the Commissioners
as an example of the developing technology currently underway.
The proposed ordinance amendment was noticed in the local
newspaper a minimum of 15 days prior to this public hearing.
Mr. Salz asked for questions or comments from the
Commissioners to Ms. McCullough.
Mr. Mintz questioned if any municipalities within the
immediate area have a similar ordinance. He asked what
generated the interest in this topic.
Ms. McCullough commented that the school district had
approached the Township with an inquiry regarding placing a
wind energy system on school property, more specifically at
the Bowers Farm.
The Commission noted that the school districts would be
allowed to have this system if it could be proven that it was
for educational purposes, thus not subject to our zoning
requirements.
Ms. McCullough noted that a House Bill had been introduced
requiring local communities to allow wind energy systems, and
that the Township should be proactive in setting our own local
requirements or parameters, thus not solely bound by State
requirements
Mr. Salz stated that the Township should also encourage
other energy sources, including solar energy.
Discussion followed regarding height, location, impact to
surrounding properties, and the preferred material for the
proposed structures.
Mr. Mintz commented that perhaps more research needed to be
done to determine the time frame for the proposed House Bill
and the likelihood of it being passed.
Mr. Payne reiterated that the Township had received a
request from the School District to construct a wind energy
system, and that after discussion with the Township Attorney’s
office, it was recommended that the Township develop an
ordinance to address this issue.
Mr. Mintz commented that he felt this ordinance amendment
was premature in nature.
Mr. Salz opened the public comment portion of the meeting.
There were no public comments and Mr. Salz closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Salz called for a motion.
Motion was made by Stefanes, seconded by Reisinger, and was
supported to forward a recommendation for approval to the
Township Board of Trustees for the proposed Regulations for
Wind Energy Systems.
YEAS: Salz, Goldberg, Stefanes, Reisinger, Stark
NAYS: Mintz
IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
A. Cursory Review – Bloomfield Park 425 Agreement Site Plan
Ms. McCullough introduced this cursory site plan review for
the proposed Bloomfield Park Development within the 425
Agreement area, on the easterly side of Telegraph Road, north
of Square Lake Road. The proposed Phase I and Phase II were
highlighted, noting that only Phase I was before the
Commission and was to be reviewed by the Joint Development
Council at their meeting on September 19, 2007. Ms. McCullough
reviewed the conditions of the 425 Agreement and noted that
Dan Devine was the Township’s representative on the Joint
Development Council.
Ms. McCullough stated that the Township and the City of
Pontiac have collectively reviewed this project, subject to
the 425 Agreement requirements and the City of Pontiac’s Town
Center Ordinance.
Ms. McCullough’s staff report was provided to the
Commissioners and submitted to the file. The staff report was
also provided to Mr. Gary Ceepo, representative of DDR. The
following issues were still to be addressed, relative to the
425 Agreement:
Developer needs to verify compliance with submission of
rooftop plans that locate rooftop equipment accordingly.
Developer needs to include annual or perennial flowers
in the landscape plan for the Telegraph Road frontage.
The overall project / site plan was reviewed under
Pontiac’s Town Center Ordinance, including setbacks, heights,
and floor area requirements. Several issues still needed to be
addressed, including:
Revisions to the landscape plan, including complying
with tree density requirements.
Revised locations of the loading areas and trash
dumpsters, with required screening, for Buildings H2 and
H3.
Verification for compliance with the tree removal and
replacement requirements of the City of Pontiac’s
Woodlands Preservation Ordinance.
Entry wall signage along Telegraph Road to be reviewed
and approved.
Agreement between City of Pontiac and the developer
must be approved to allow a reduction in the required
right-of-way widths within the development.
Ms. McCullough also noted that the developer must complete
the traffic impact study as specified in the MDOT report dated
August 31, 2007, with reviews by the traffic consultants for
both Bloomfield Township and the City of Pontiac to be
coordinated with MDOT’s review.
The Township’s Departmental reports were provided to the
Commissioners and submitted to the file. Several concerns were
noted including those from the Engineering and Environmental
Department, the Police Department, and the Fire Department.
The five concerns as stated in the Fire Marshall’s report,
dated August 21, 2007 were reviewed and submitted to the file.
Mr. Salz asked for questions or comments from the
Commissioners to Ms. McCullough.
Mr. Mintz questioned the "not for construction" statement
on the plans. He questioned if the plans as presented were
actually intended to be complied with for construction
purposes. Mr. Mintz once again stated that he felt the
developer was not providing all the necessary information and
that the submittal was once again woefully inadequate.
Ms. Stefanes questioned the proposed build out schedule of
2035.
Ms. McCullough noted that Phase I was only being proposed
at this time and that Phase II would require a separate site
plan review process and would be reviewed as a separate, stand
alone development relative to parking.
The Commission questioned the shared parking plan and the
traffic impact study.
Mr. Michael Labadie, Township’s Traffic Consultant with
Tetra-Tech, reviewed the shared parking plan as presented,
including the shared hours of operations and the parking
demand. Mr. Labadie noted that the proposed Phase I contained
most of the parking and that the parking demand associated
with Phase II exceeded the amount of the overall parking
provided in both Phase I and Phase II. The removal of Phase II
from this proposal has now allowed the amount of parking
provided for Phase I to be in compliance.
The travel distance for the parking required for certain
uses was discussed. Mr. Labadie noted that his letter dated
August 27, 2007, as provided to the Commissioners and
submitted to the file, addressed this issue. Mr. Labadie noted
that the proximity of the parking to the buildings greatly
exceeded the 300 feet maximum travel distance requirement of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Mintz asked what the industry standard was for a
reasonable travel distance for parking.
Mr. Labadie noted that typically parking was provided
within the immediate area of the buildings / uses to which
they served, i.e., within the same block. He stated that he
had not previously reviewed any development constructed in
this manner, relative to parking distances.
Ms. Reisinger commented that the parking decks would be
paid parking, according to the developer, and that the overall
operation of the internal roads would be affected with cars
waiting for on street parking.
The number of parking spaces provided were adequate,
however, the Commission expressed concern over the travel
distance from the proposed parking to the commercial uses,
including parking for the proposed Cinema within Bloomfield
Township.
Mr. Salz commented that if the parking layout becomes a
problem, the patrons will not come and the lack of business
will become the developer’s problem. He felt the parking issue
would eventually become a marketing problem.
Mr. Labadie commented that the local municipality has a
responsibility to approve the best project to ensure the
long-standing vitality of the development for the benefit of
the overall community. Mr. Labadie commented that the
Township’s ordinance currently requires a maximum 300 foot
travel distance.
Ms. Stefanes stated that the Township representatives have
a responsibility to require the best and most functional
project.
Mr. Labadie reviewed the Traffic Impact Study, which
included both Phase I and Phase II, for purposes of reviewing
the overall traffic impact for the entire project.
Mr. Labadie reviewed several concerns as stated in his
letter dated August 27, 2007 including the lack of a traffic
mitigation plan. He noted that the service levels at several
intersections within and outside the Township deteriorated
greatly, with no solutions offered. He referenced the first
bullet point on page 3 of the aforementioned letter. Mr.
Labadie also noted the MDOT report dated August 31, 2007, as
provided to the Commissioners and submitted to the file,
calling out several issues that must yet be addressed. He
stated that a great amount of work was still required
regarding the traffic impact study.
The Commission discussed safety issues along Telegraph Road
and the need for MDOT to thoroughly review this project and
respond to the Township’s concerns relative to safety and the
proposed traffic impact. The Commissioners were greatly
concerned with the negative affect the proposed amount of
traffic would have on response times for emergency vehicles
traveling Telegraph Road and the surrounding intersections and
roadways.
Ms. Stefanes complimented Mr. Labadie on his thorough
review of this project and requested that he provide his
reports and comments relative to the traffic impact study to
both MDOT and to the Joint Development Council.
Mr. Salz questioned the emergency vehicle access from Golf
Drive to the site, through the Midwestern Baptist College
property.
Ms. McCullough stated that the revised access easement
agreement was provided to the Commissioners and submitted to
the file.
Mr. Labadie stated that he was still unclear regarding the
access from the City of Pontiac roads within the 425 Area of
the development to the private roads within the Bloomfield
Township portion of the project.
Mr. Doug Allen, 1145 Fairfax, expressed concerns with the
traffic congestion along Telegraph Road and Orchard Lake Road,
and the proposed traffic impact this would create for the
surrounding residential roads, including Ward Road.
Mr. Labadie stated that the scope of the traffic impact
study was provided by MDOT. He stated that according to MDOT
standards, delays should not be created without being
corrected or mitigated. Traffic congestion along Telegraph
Road and Orchard Lake road should not be alleviated with the
use of Ward Road as an alternate route. Mr. Labadie commented
once again on the need for a mitigation plan to be provided by
the developer.
B. Items Not on the Agenda
There were no additional items discussed.
V. GENERAL BUSINESS:
The next Planning Commission meeting was scheduled for
Monday, September 17, 2007, as a study session with Mr.
Labadie, Traffic Consultant
VI: ADJOURNMENT:
The Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, September 5,
2007 was adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia McCullough, Director
Planning and Building
rc
Home |
Government |
Services |
Community |
Current Events |
Resources
Contact Us |
E-mail List |
Forms
Still can't find what you're looking for?
Use our comprehensive Search or
Site Map pages!
Charter Township of Bloomfield
4200 Telegraph Road
P.O. Box 489
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303-0489
248.433.7700
This site is best viewed in Internet Explorer
5.5 or higher and Netscape 6.0 or higher.
Having trouble accessing our site forms?
Your browser may not have the Acrobat Reader plug-in
that is required.
Click here to download a free copy of this software.
Site Design/Development
by
Proudly serving our community online since
1999.
Named #1 Township Website in Michigan by Cyber-state.org
Site Use
Policy
All information © 2008 Bloomfield
Township, Michigan
|
