Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson Churella.

PRESENT: Members Churella, Kocan, Markham, Nagy, Paul (late arrival), Richards, Ruyle, Shroyer.

ABSENT/EXCUSED: Member Canup

ALSO PRESENT: Planning Director David Evancoe, City Attorney Tom Schultz, Staff Planner Beth Brock, Planner Barbara McBeth, City Engineer Nancy McClain, Landscape Architect Lauren McGuire

Chairperson Churella asked if there were any additions or changes to the Agenda.

Chairperson Churella removed Brae Pointe Estates SP 02-08 from the agenda because the proper items were not submitted to the Commission. He added Matters for Discussion Item #1 – Educational Seminars.

Moved by Kocan, seconded by Ruyle, CARRIED (7-0)*: To approve the agenda with the removal of Brae Pointe Estates SP02-08 as the proper items were not submitted to the Commission and the addition of Matter for Discussion Item #1 – Educational Seminars.

Yes: Churella, Kocan, Markham, Nagy, Richards, Ruyle, Shroyer

No: None

None

None

Member Kocan asked if it was necessary to plan a public hearing was necessary for the Master Planning & Zoning Committee.

Beth Brock Staff Planner indicated that the Planning Commission must hold a public hearing to approve the Master Plan for Land Use Map, which has not been scheduled at this time.

Member Nagy noted a meeting held that was public. No changes were made to the Master Plan for Land Use, therefore, there was not a reason to have a public hearing.

None

None

None

Consideration of the request of Channel Partners for approval of a Preliminary Site Plan. The subject property located in Section 9 in the Beck West Corporate Park on the southeast corner of Humboldt and Magellan Drive in the I-2 (General Industrial) District. The developer is proposing a 25,000 square foot speculative light industrial building. The subject property is 2.53 acres.

Barbara McBeth Planner introduced Magellan Commerce Center. The site is shown as heavy industrial on the Master Plan for Land Use, as are the properties to the north, south, east and west. To the northwest the properties are shown to be Master Planned for Light Industrial. The properties to the north, east, south and west are zoned I-2 (General Industrial District) and the properties to the northwest are zoned I-1 (Light Industrial District). Surrounding developments include the recently approved Fallone Brothers to the north across Humbolt Street, to the northeast is the Owens Corning Building, to the east is Weingartz Golf & Turf, to the south and west are vacant lots and to the northwest is Dantom Systems Inc. The Site Plan is for a one-story, twenty-three (23) foot tall speculative industrial building. There is a parking lot and landscaping along the Humbolt frontage. The parking exceeds Ordinance requirements by seven (7) spaces. The additional parking spaces would provide some flexibility. She noted when the ultimate end user is selected, it will be confirmed that the parking is adequate for the site and the end user of the building. Along the back of the building is a parking and loading area with access off of Magellan Drive. An emergency access connection is proposed at the southeast corner of the property for a connection through to the Weingartz Golf & Turf property, which is located to the east. She noted the connection was a recommendation from Fire Marshall as desirable and it is not absolutely required. She noted that because it is a loading area there is sufficient room to turn large trucks around. She noted the north portion of the property and the parking lot located at the front. The Planning Department review took into account that the parking in the front was permitted providing that certain conditions were met. She briefly highlighted these conditions. that the site be a minimum of 2 acres (site is 2.53 acres), that the parking does not extend into the required front yard building setback (which it does not), the parking spaces do not occupy more than 50 percent of the area between the front yard setback and the building line (approximately 20 percent is occupied by parking), the parking area is screened from all rights of way by a landscaped berm (which it is along both street frontages), and finally, that the Planning Commission makes a finding that the parking area and lighting is compatible with the surrounding development. If approved by the Planning Commission there are minor comments need to be addressed at the time of final site plan approval. Comments from the other disciplines are as follows: There are no regulated woodlands or wetlands on the site. Only minor comments are required for the landscape plan review as Ms. McGuire and the applicant’s architect worked diligently to address the landscape concerns prior to the plan being submitted for Planning Commission review. Traffic Engineering, Civil Engineering and the Fire Marshall all had minor comments to be addressed on the Final Site Plan. The façade review revealed that the use of integrally colored smooth concrete masonry units (CMU) is consistent with the intent and purpose of the ordinance and therefore qualifies for a Section 9 Waiver. This CMU product has been used on many other projects in the City of Novi on the basis that the unique size, color, and texture of the material produced and overall visual effect make it virtually indistinguishable from brick. She showed the Commission the materials. The staff reports indicate that the Planning Commission needs to make the finding that the parking in the front yard is compatible with the surrounding developments in the area. A Section Nine Façade waiver is required. She noted there were a number of comments in the review letters, which should be addressed on the Final Site Plan.

Brad Klintworth indicated that Magellan Commerce Center is their third building in Beck West Corporate Park. He noted that he did not have any comments and would be available to answer questions.

Member Nagy did not find any real problems with the application. However, she commented on the traffic report, specifically the end islands. She suggested an increase in the footage. She read from the Birchler & Arroyo Traffic Review Report dated April 25, 2002, "Since the island on the east side of the drive is only 11-feet wide, the use of a 15-foot main radius would require the back up curb on the nose to be set back 3-feet from the aisle, with a 2-foot minor radius into the first stall." She asked Ms. McClain if this was something that the applicant would be able to provide.

Nancy McClain City Engineer indicated applicant could make minor adjustments to make it work.

Member Nagy noted the Weingartz driveway stub. She stated that it appeared that no one seemed to be in agreement of having a stubbed/shared drive and instead there would be gravel.

Ms. McClain indicated that the Fire Marshall requested the area be stubbed through. She explained that they do not own the property to the south. However, they are exploring the option of temporary access until the property is developed. After the property is developed, the connection would go in as pavement in the parking lot.

Moved by Nagy, seconded by Ruyle, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: In the matter of Magellan Commerce Center SP02-17 to grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Section Nine Facade Waiver with the finding that the front parking area is compatible with the surrounding developments, subject to the Staff and Consultant’s comments and conditions.

Member Kocan commended the Developer and the City for working together. She noted her appreciation of the Applicant’s letter indicating he addressed all of the issues raised by the Consultants and Staff and his agreement to comply and make the changes. Member Kocan noted a comment from the Planning Review letter dated May 6, 2002 which read, "Since the building is speculative, the useable floor area can not yet be calculated; a noted will be added to the Final Site Plan that states the useable floor area will not exceed 95% of the useable floor area." She asked if this wording was correct because the wording "useable floor area" was used twice.

Ms. McBeth made the correction and stated the correct verbiage, "…it should not exceed 95% of the gross leasable floor area…"

Member Kocan stated there appeared to be three (3) large loading doors and one (1) smaller door. Previously she asked the Planning Department if these doors would be backed into, driven into or side drives. The Planning Department indicated that it would depend upon who moved into the building and how it built-out. She asked the applicant if he had any further comments to add.

Mr. Klintworth indicated that there are four (4) loading doors, four (4) entry doors at the front and four (4) overhead doors at the rear. He anticipated tenants with a mix of 30%-50% office use and a warehouse operation in the back. These types of operations generally involve a step-van or an occasional large delivery. However, it is not a trucking-type use and he did not desire truck wells at the facility. He anticipated light users that would distribute, such as prototype parts and utilize the van to deliver the parts. The van would back up to the overhead door to load the parts and then make their delivery. Three of the four tenants in the park have technical centers at the back of those spaces and do not take truck deliveries. He explained that he was not able to entirely correctly answer her question because the building is vacant.

Member Kocan clarified that he would not be applying for Final Site Plan Approval until there is actually a tenant.

Mr. Klintworth answered, no. He indicated that he would apply for Final Site Plan Approval and construction would take place prior to a tenant. He noted that the tenants he spoke to were not far enough along. He added that the park currently has no availability. He believed they were hitting the market at a good time and would be able to fulfill the need of the next group of users coming in. He commented on the useable floor area verses the gross.

Member Kocan noted that the transformer at the northwest corner was not landscaped.

Ms. McGuire stated the existing transformer could be landscaped. However, because it is close to the corner clearance major trees could not be used to screen. She advised that often the addition of a group of shrubs could bring more attention to the transformer.

Member Kocan noted that it was unusual to have it located close to the road and she was curious if it was temporary or permanent.

Ms. McGuire confirmed that the transformer is permanent.

Member Kocan indicated her support of the motion.

Member Shroyer thanked Mr. Klintworth for his cooperation with the City. He noted Mr. Klintworth’s letter in which he agreed to comply with the Consultant’s comments and recommendations. He asked the Mr. Klintworth if he was aware that the motion would grant approval conditional upon the conditions and comments of the City Staff and Consultants. Therefore, comments in the review letters, from both the City Staff and the Consultants, would need to be adhered to.

Mr. Klintworth complimented the City on the new Plan Review Center. He agreed to comply with all comments of the review letters from both the Staff and Consultants. He stated the intent of his letter was to be inclusive of all letters.

Member Nagy asked Ms. McGuire if it would be feasible to create a circular brick wall around the transformer similar to the Telecom Credit Union site.

Ms. McGuire anticipated that could be feasible on three sides. She asked Mr. Klintworth for his opinion.

Mr. Klintworth stated the box is a substation for the park. The substation must be located in various locations. It existed prior to the purchase of the land. He was not certain how often they would need to access it.

Yes: Churella, Kocan, Markham, Nagy, Paul, Richards, Ruyle, Shroyer

No: None

Member Kocan made minor corrections to the minutes.

Member Paul made minor corrections to the minutes.

Moved by Ruyle, seconded by Nagy, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the minute of the Regular Planning meeting of April 3, 2002 as amended.

Yes: Churella, Kocan, Markham, Nagy, Paul, Richards, Ruyle, Shroyer

No: None

Member Paul indicated her neighbor offered to ask his firm to give educational seminars free of cost. There could be one or two seminars that would last approximately one hour each. He provided a list of items that he believed would be beneficial to the City, which included items such as residential lots, open space lots, parking lots, watercourse and lake buffers. The Councilmembers, Commissioners and City Staff could attend the seminars. She suggested the commissioners read the letter and if they agree then push the item forward.

Chairperson Churella thought these seminars would be a good idea. He suggested that the Commission align a couple of anticipated days for the seminars. In the past he noted the Commission held the seminar 6:30pm – 7pm (before the regular Planning Commission meeting) or started the seminar at 7pm and ran it a half hour into the regular Planning Commission meeting (for example 7pm-8pm).

Member Paul noted other areas of possibilities for educational seminars. She noted that Councilmember Bononi contacted the State Legal Bar and Michigan Architectural Firms and both would be able to give seminars. She felt the seminars should be open to everyone, including the public. She recalled Member Shroyer’s request to have a calendar put together to help the Commission run more smoothly. The subcommittees, Commission and the City Staff would be able to have the appropriate time needed to make good decisions. She asked that the seminars be included on the calendar every three months. She felt the Staff would then be able to plan the future agenda to accommodate these seminars.

Chairperson Churella suggested that the commissioners continuing to serve on the Commission include the new commissioners’ comments into consideration for the calendar. He suggested Member Shroyer and Member Paul create a draft calendar.

Member Shroyer indicated the City Staff is creating a preliminary calendar.

Ms. Brock indicated the Staff would be creating a calendar starting July 1 and running through the fiscal year. She indicated that target dates.

Chairperson Churella did not feel the Staff clearly understood what the Commission was requesting. He suggested Member Shroyer create the calendar.

Member Shroyer asked if it would be acceptable for Member Paul and himself to meet with the City Staff.

Member Kocan indicated that she would be submitting her conference materials from the Chicago Planning Conference for the Staff copy and distribute to the other commissioners. She stated the conference taped a track of Planning Commissioners and other elected officials that is available for purchase on DVD and webcast. She requested Mr. Evancoe to explore the possibility of purchasing these because she felt the discussions would be valuable to the other commissioners.

Member Nagy commended Ms. McBeth for her excellent presentation.

Member Paul agreed with Member Nagy’s comments.

None

None

Moved by Nagy, seconded by Ruyle, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adjourn the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 8:30 p.m.

Yes: Churella, Kocan, Markham, Nagy, Paul, Richards, Ruyle, Shroyer

No: None

________________________________

Donna Howe - Planning Assistant

Transcribed by: Christine Otsuji

June 7, 2002

Date Approved: June 19, 2002