APPROVED MINUTES
THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF DOUGLAS
PLANNING COMMISSION
DOUGLAS CITY HALL
Wednesday, August 13, 2008

1. The Meeting was called to order at 7:10 PM by Chairperson Nern.

2. Roll Call: Dave Burdick, Christopher Nern, Alexa Urquhart, Karen VanPelt, Renee Waddell
Also in attendance: Dave Kowal, City Manager; Andy Mulder, City Attorney; Ryan Kilpatrick, Community Planner, Williams and Works
ABSENT: Ron Dellartino

3. Approval of Minutes

A. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 9, 2008
VanPelt noted the misspelling of recuse on page 2, line 24.

Motion by Urquhart, second by VanPelt, to approve the Minutes of the July 9, 2008 Planning Commission as corrected

Roll call: Urquhart, yes; VanPelt, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; Nern, yes
Motion carries

B. Planning Commission Workshop Meeting Minutes of July 16, 2008

Motion by Urquhart, second by Waddell, to approve the Minutes of the July 16, 2008 Planning Commission Workshop as presented

Roll call: Urquhart, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; VanPelt, yes, Nern, yes
Motion carries

4. Agenda Changes/Additions/Deletions
Kilpatrick reported that the applicant for item 8.A has requested to be removed from the agenda.
Motion by Urquhart, second by VanPelt, to remove item 8.A from the agenda

Roll call: Urquhart, yes; VanPelt, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; Nern, yes

Kilpatrick asked to add New Item 8.A Saugatuck Schools Site Plan Review
Mulder gave some background information so that the members of the audience would have a better understanding.

Motion by Nern, second by Urquhart, to add as new item 8.A Saugatuck Schools Site Plan Review

Roll call: Nern, yes; Urquhart, yes; VanPelt, yes; Burdick, yes; Waddell, yes
Motion carries

Kilpatrick asked that correspondence from Paul Sendra, Amity Lane, be added as Item 6.C

Motion by Waddell, second by Urquhart, to add as item 6.C correspondence from Mr. Paul Sendra

Roll call: Waddell, yes; Urquhart, yes; Burdick, yes; VanPelt, yes; Nern, yes
Motion carries

Motion by Urquhart, second by Waddell, to approve the agenda of the August 13, 2008 Planning Commission as amended

Roll call: Urquhart, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; VanPelt, yes; Nern, yes
Motion carries

5. Hear from the Audience

Jim Wiley, 314 Union Street, does not feel that the community is informed enough about what this new Ball Field is; he would appreciate it if someone could go over the plans.

Tara Frey, 483 Amity, we feel ill-informed, taken by surprise; we have tried to stay informed. Last week at the School Board, Mr. Wood addressed the ball park development and indicated that there were two items from the state list that still needed to be addressed; information is probably known but is not being disclosed. The governments and the school district need to work together.

Kate Casey, Union Street, noted that this is a home rule city; land development is a city issue, how does the state have a right to be in our planning process.

Mulder reminded the commission that the Public Hearing has been held previously.

Nern said that item 10 on the agenda allows for public comment.

Urquhart said that she would like to allow public comment during the discussion.

Burdick added that the changes in the site plan are slight and that the discussion needs to be among the commissioners.

6. Written Communications

A. Michigan Township Services Summary of Permits issued in June, 2008
Burdick said that the construction at 3081 Lakeshore Dr seems to be pushing the envelope. Kilpatrick responded that the office is aware of the concerns and is watching the progress carefully.

B. Letter from Jim Wiley, Douglas resident and business owner, to Carol Wolenberg, Michigan Department of Education, regarding the Saugatuck Public Schools proposed baseball field.
Nern referenced the content of the letter.

C. e-mail communication from Paul Sendra and Dale Deitzel regarding the proposed ball field by the Saugatuck Public Schools
Nern again referenced the content of the communication that was based on the nine-point letter from the state received in April.

7. New Business

A. Motion to approve, approve with conditions, deny, or table the proposed application for Site Plan Review submitted by Tony Herrell and Dana White for “Christo’s Roadhouse”

Consideration of an application for a proposed single-story restaurant establishment to be located at 2935 Blue Star Highway in the C-2 District (Property Parcel #03-5-021-018-78). Site is proposed to accommodate between 67 and 100 guests and currently includes 25 parking spaces with access from both Blue Star Highway and Enterprise Drive.

Agenda Materials for Item 7A Include:

1) Memo from Ryan Kilpatrick, dated August 7, 2008: Staff level Site Plan Review

2) Application for Site Plan Review, submitted on 7/30/2008

3) Site Plan submitted by Dana White and Feenstra & Associates, dated 8/20/2007

4) Proposed floor plan, dated 9/22/07

5) Proposed elevation sketches, date 12/10/2007

6) Additional Notes submitted by Dana White, dated 7/30/2008

7) Lighting specifications

Kilpatrick gave a brief summary of the application; the applicants would like a preliminary review.

Dana White, builder and Tony Herrell, owner spoke. They would like some input from the commissioners on what the commission would like to see.

Urquhart had questions concerning the parking and the number of patrons. She would like to see more complete landscape plans. There are lighting questions: the actual wattage and height of the fixtures need to be specified. Herrell responded that there is tons of parking on site already; the electrician is local.

VanPelt asked if there is an increase in parking, will all of the spaces be paved. White responded that almost all of the lot is currently paved but they will top coat it so that it does not look like a patchwork.

Burdick suggested that they look at the fire code; it appears as if there is not a secondary exit from the dining room, the only secondary exit is through the kitchen. White said that he questioned that himself.

Waddell asked if there could be a sidewalk included on the site plan. Kilpatrick said that is not currently in the ordinance but it will be in the new one. Waddell asked about a liquor license. Herrell said there is one in escrow, just waiting for building approval.

Motion by Nern, second by Urquhart, to table site plan review for the proposed single-story restaurant establishment to be located at 2935 Blue Star Highway in the C-2 District, Property Parcel # 03-5- 021-018-78 until a further date

Roll call: Nern, yes; Urquhart, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; VanPelt, yes
Motion carries

8. Old Business

A. Saugatuck Public Schools: Site Plan Review

Mulder gave a detailed review of the history of the process of this application. At the March 19, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting a conditional special use was approved for the additional six classrooms and two bathrooms addition to the Douglas Elementary School. The materials relating to the proposed varsity baseball diamond were received too late from the Saugatuck Public Schools to publish proper public notice for this portion of the project. The Public Hearing pertaining to the proposed expansion of the ball field was held on April 16, 2008. There were extensive revisions to the proposed site plan submitted to the Planning Commission during the public hearing; the Planning Commission determined that more time would be necessary to review the modifications. In a letter from Stanley Skopek, Michigan Department of Economic Growth dated April 24, 2008 it indicated the state was requesting items needing to be addressed before MDOE approval could be recommended. At the May 21, 2008 Planning Commission a decision was made by the Commission to table consideration of the site plan until the commission could see how off-site conditions were going to apply to the MDOE site plan criteria. Since that time there hasn’t been additional information from the Schools; an alert citizen noticed there was activity on the issue at the state level. E-mails were exchanged attempting to obtain those plans. On Friday, August 8, 2008 we did receive a letter from Scott Smith indicating the state had given approval of the site plan. The approval indicated the project had been reviewed and was in compliance with the published criteria. The approval letter also indicates that the environmental approvals for noise control and soil erosion can be deferred submittals.
The site plan drawings on display this evening are as approved by the state; they are not substantially different from those discussed on May 21, 2008. The fire access/emergency road is shown; the press box has been removed; there is a new pan-handle shaped addition of property on the west side of the plan; the landscaping that is shown is to be placed on the Amity property and gifted to the property owners, this would extend along the border to Mr. Wiley’s property; there is additional netting near the Waypoint Restaurant.
A letter was sent in response to Mr. Scott’s communication today, August 13, 2008.

Kilpatrick went to the easels to show comparison between site plan 1 and site plan 2. He included a review of the noted changes as they relate to the nine-point letter from Stan Skopek, Bureau of Construction Codes, and dated April 24, 2008. The size of the parcel has changed a little, unsure whether there had been a lot split undertaken. The access to the dumpster enclosure looks to be according to Skopek’s recommendation. According to zoning jurisdiction, the press box needed to be removed and it was removed.

Mulder talked about filed correspondence with the Saugatuck Public Schools relating to the use of this particular property covering four areas: that there would be no public address system, no field lights, and use would be limited to 15 home games of high school varsity baseball, that community recreation could use the facility for summer activities.

Burdick asked about the 25 foot tall poles to hold the nets and where the scoreboard was going to be located. Kilpatrick said that there will be screening. Mulder asked about the netting near the Waypoint Restaurant. Kilpatrick said that the netting is farther from the property line. Burdick asked if the distance is more than the collapse distance. Kilpatrick responded that no, it is not.

Urquhart said that in the sketch of the legal description, this is a change. This kind of change would need to have approval from the City Council. What is the legal status? Kilpatrick said that Article 17 regulates the changes of land ownership. According to the County Tax Maps, the size of this parcel has changed; we will check it to make sure that it is legal. Urquhart also noted that the section would need to be a part of the landscape plan, those trees are not on the site.

Burdick said that the issue is that there is no screening, not within the site that we are looking at. Mulder responded that there is a portion that is part of the school property. Kilpatrick continued that all of the trees on the southwest corner are school property; the nine trees on private property are to be gifted to the condominium association.

Nern asked if all of the off-site issues have been addressed.

Burdick wondered if there were any remaining drainage issues. Kilpatrick said that per the May 15, 2008 site plan, all drainage issues were taken care of and met the requirements of the engineer.

Nern asked for a five minute recess at 8:25 PM
The meeting resumed at 8:40 PM

Burdick questioned the continuation of the property line and the trees on the neighboring property. Kilpatrick added that the office will need to do a check on the lot split. Smith responded that the property has been purchased; the title work may not be done yet. Burdick continued to say that the site needs to be under single ownership.

Urquhart asked if a deed had been recorded for those twenty feet. Property transfer has to have Council approval as an agenda item. Kilpatrick said that as long as the division does not create a non-conforming lot there should be no problem.

Mulder referred the commissioners to the Relevant Excerpts from Article XXV, Special Use Procedures prepared as criteria for making any decision on this issue. He said the Planning Commission has to decide tonight to deny or grant based on appropriate findings-of-fact. The commission will need to quantify those findings tonight or have staff prepare a review of that decision. Kowal said that a decision would need to be at a formal meeting, the next meeting on the 20th of August is a Workshop Meeting. A Special Meeting could be posted and held before the Workshop Meeting. Mulder said to be sure to use relevant standards in the decision.

Nern directed the Commissioners to The Relevant Excerpts from Article XXV, Special Use Procedures and Article XXVI Special Use Standards.

Kilpatrick said that item d) is referring to public service such as Police or Fire and public utilities like Electric.

Nern said that there have been many discussions concerning item e). Urquhart said this item is pertaining to the economic well-being of those close by; also to the Village as a whole. Burdick noted safety concerns: the collapse distance for the safety nets combined with the screening to protect the property (along with the screening not actually being on the site); poles are an attractive nuisance. The trees are nice and can act as a screening but with them not being on site, I don’t know if we can count them. Nern said to use our ability to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community; the struggle is to balance the conflict and part of the process within the confines and boundaries of the law.

Kilpatrick said he is not aware of any conflicts concerning f).

Nern noted that there has been some discussion on g). Kilpatrick went on to say there has been nothing specific from either the Police or Fire Departments. There is always a question of whether there is adequate parking.

Mulder suggested looking at the Planning Reports prepared for the meeting in thinking about section h). It might be beneficial to relate to those criteria. Kilpatrick made note of the April 11, 2008 Memorandum, page 4 as a place to review comments. Mulder added that the question becomes what adverse impacts this issue raises.

Nern said that j) is equally of concern with item h). Kilpatrick went on to say that a specific concern is the site of the batting cages; they are much closer and more intense a use than is present currently. Noise during certain portions of the day could be problem.

Nern said that he does not understand this as a temporary use; the surrounding property is already fully developed. Urquhart added that the Village Comprehensive Plan lists the area as being used for Elementary students. It is designated in the original site plan as elementary facilities, not for varsity events.

Mulder suggested looking at one of the criteria set forth in the Michigan Department of Education Site Plan Review; would the Planning Commission like to consider any of the state requirements concerning setbacks? Use the criteria to compare suggestions from the state with what has been presented.

Urquhart asked that the Athletic Fields and Play Areas portion of the Michigan Department of Education document be read into the record. Nern read:
Athletic Fields and Play Areas
All athletic fields shall comply with National Federation of State High School Association dimensional and layout requirements. Athletic fields and play structures not more than 100 feet from a residential property line shall have 8 feet high evergreen trees with sufficient density to screen the play area from a residential property. Visual screening is not required for athletic fields and play structures more than 100 feet from a residential property line.

Motion by Urquhart, second by Waddell, to deny the request for Special Use for the ball field portion of the Douglas Elementary School property, parcel nos. 59-016-047-00 and 59-016-065-21 based on the review of the Special Use Procedures, Article XXV, Standards; and the Special Use Standards, Article XXVI, Schools; the Michigan Department of Education Setbacks, and Athletic Fields and Play Areas sections of the Public School Site Plan Review Reference Guide; and to incorporate the letter from Stanly Skopek, MDOE, dated April 24, 2008 into the deliberations.

Roll call:
Urquhart, yes; Waddell, yes; VanPelt, yes; Burdick, no; Nern, yes
Motion carries

Motion by Urquhart, second by Waddell, that the City of the Village of Douglas staff, in conjunction with the Law Office of Cunningham and Dalman, prepare a draft of the decision for consideration by the Planning Commission on August 20, 2008.

Roll call:
Urquhart, yes; Waddell, yes; Burdick, yes; VanPelt, yes; Nern, yes
Motion carries

9. Zoning Administrator’s Report

A. Letter from Saugatuck Township, dated July 2, 2008, to the City of the Village of Douglas, pertaining to Saugatuck Township’s intent to amend a portion of the Tri-Community Comprehensive Plan.

B. Letter from Ryan Kilpatrick, Planning and Zoning Consultant, dated July 3, 2008, to Deborah Green pertaining to Zoning Ordinance violations.

C. Letter from Ryan Kilpatrick, Planning and Zoning Consultant, dated July 16, 2008, to Mary Bates pertaining to Zoning Ordinance violations.

D. Letter from Ryan Kilpatrick, Planning and Zoning Consultant, dated July 19, 2008, to Gerry and Joyce Osicek pertaining to Zoning Ordinance violations.

E. Letter from City Attorney Andrew Mulder, dated July 31, 2008, to Attorney Scott Smith, Clark Hill PLC, pertaining to the Zoning Violations of the Saugatuck Public Schools Early Childhood Center.
Mulder said that at the last Council Meeting an extension was granted in order for a mutually agreeable resolution to the matter between the parties.

F. Kowal review of questions regarding Tower Marine. The city has done title searches for what is considered the Tower Marine property. Kowal had detailed drawings to help explain the survey results. The city retains easement and riparian rights. Kowal mentioned that RJ Peterson has been granted permits from the DEQ but has to grant a conservation district. The DEQ does not supersede the Planning Commission.

10. Hear from the Audience

Kate Casey reported that their attorney had not heard from the School’s Attorney regarding the Educare facility settlement.

11. Commissioner Comments

Urquhart noted that spaces are being rented out to recreational vehicles inside the parking lot. She would also like to thank the staff for the exhaustive research done in helping us come to a decision on the ball field.

Burdick reported that the Tri-Community Joint Planning Committee will explore unified zoning administration. Many of the best things about the community are things that we do together.

VanPelt said thank you for the organization and assistance.

Nern said it is interesting as they guide us through this transformation as a community.

12. Adjournment

Motion by Urquhart, second by Burdick, to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 PM
Motion carries

Respectfully submitted,

Alan McPhail
Recording Secretary