Planning
Commission Minutes
MINUTES
Cascade Charter Township Planning Commission
Monday, June 4, 2007
7:00 p.m.
ARTICLE 1. Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:01
p.m.
Members Present: Koessel, Lewis, Logue, MacAllister, McDonald, Postma,
Richards, Robinson
Members Absent: Waalkes (excused)
Others Present: Planning Director Peterson, Admin. Assistant Hern, and
Members of the Public.
ARTICLE 2. Chairman McDonald led the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag.
ARTICLE 3. Chairman McDonald requested motion for approval of the
June 4th Agenda.
Member Robinson motioned for approval of the agenda as presented,
supported by Member Lewis. All in favor with none opposed, the motion
carried.
ARTICLE 4. Approve the Minutes of the May 14, 2007 and May 21, 2007
Meetings.
Chairman McDonald noted there are two (2) sets of Planning
Commission Meeting Minutes that need approval and opened the meeting
for revisions, corrections or a motion for approval of the minutes.
Member Robinson noted a correction in the May 14, 2007 Minutes
under Article 4, Chairman McDonald should be listed as Chairman, not
Vice-Chairman.
Member Lewis motioned for approval of the May 14, 2007 Minutes with
the correction and the May 21, 2007 Minutes as presented, supported by
Member Richards. All in favor with none opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 5. Case # 07-2874: Julia Teerling
Address of Property: 8081 45th Street, Ada
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: The Applicant is requesting a Type 1 Special Use
Permit to construct a 1,200-square foot accessory building.
Planning Director Peterson showed the aerial photo of the property
located on the north side of 45th Street between Whitneyville and
Cherry Lane.
The property is approximately 3-acres in size and the Applicant's
request is to construct a 1,200-square foot building in the northwest
corner of the property. The building is 40-feet by 30-feet and the
Township requires a Public Hearing for all accessory buildings over
832-square feet.
The building measures approximately 12.5-feet tall to the midpoint.
This requires a minimum setback of 10-feet on the side and 25-feet in
the rear. The setbacks proposed are in compliance.
The size of this property would allow for two (2) accessory
buildings. The building being proposed this evening is the only
accessory building on the property.
The Applicant does not indicate any outdoor lighting on the
building and the home was built in 2004.
The building will be used for personal storage and will have steel
siding with asphalt shingles.
The proposed building is 1,200-square feet and the house is
approximately 3,200-square feet. In looking around the neighborhood,
there are not many other accessory buildings but would consider this
type and size of accessory building to be consistent with this area of
the Township. There is one (1) accessory building a couple of lots
down from this one that is comparable to what the Applicant is
proposing.
The land is generally flat and open with the north side of the
property heavily wooded. Planning Director Peterson did drive the
north end along Cascade Road and could not see any of the homes from
the road due to the trees.
The Applicant will not be adding any new access and the building
should be difficult to see from adjoining streets.
Staff recommends approval of the accessory building with the
following conditions:
1. The building will not be involved, directly or indirectly, with any
business, trade, occupation or profession.
2. Any outdoor lighting for the building will be shielded or downcast.
Planning Director Peterson said that one (1) letter was received from
one of the neighbors inquiring as to what the building would look like
in relation to the property and concerned they would be able to see
the building from their place. The letter indicated the neighbors
would prefer the building be located in the far northwest corner, as
the Applicant has indicated on their site plan. Planning Director
Peterson does not believe these neighbors would be able to see the
building due to the existing vegetation. This is the only
correspondence received from the public notices.
Chairman McDonald asked if the Applicant is proposing to construct
the building in the northwest corner and Planning Director Peterson
reviewed the site plan with the Commission indicating that is the
proposed area with a 27-foot setback off the rear and 72-feet from the
side yard.
Chairman McDonald also questioned the second condition listed by
Staff does not the Township typically say that the exterior lighting
would be shielded and downcast? Planning Director Peterson said Staff
could specify that the lighting be shielded and downcast, typically it
has been stated as shielded or downcast. Chairman McDonald noted that,
technically speaking, it should be "shielded and downcast"
so no one misinterprets it to mean the lighting could be shielded to
the left or right, it must be downcast.
There were no other questions of Staff by the Planning Commission
and Chairman McDonald invited the Applicant to approach the Planning
Commission.
Julia Teerling, 8081 45th Street, and her son, Ethan Teerling
approached the Planning Commission. Mrs. Teerling said that Staff
summarized their project well. She said she will be adding exterior
lighting and agreed that it will be downcast.
There were no further questions of the Applicant by the Planning
Commission.
Member Robinson motioned to open the Public Hearing, supported by
Member Lewis. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All in
favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was opened.
There were no members of the Public who wished to speak.
Member Lewis motioned to close the Public Hearing, supported by Member
MacAlliser. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All in
favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was closed.
Member Lewis noted that only one (1) letter from the Public was
received and the Planning Commission recognizes that. The Applicant
has met the requests of the Township's Ordinance regarding setbacks
and other requirements.
Member Lewis motioned to approve the Applicant's request for a Type
I Special Use Permit to construct a 1,200-square foot accessory
building at 8081 45th Street, Ada, with the conditions set forth by
Staff, supported by Member MacAllister.
Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All in favor with
none opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 6. Case # 07-2877: Faulk and Foster
Address of Property: 5231 Burton Street
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: The Applicant is requesting a Type I Special Use
Permit to co-locate a communication antenna with a small equipment
structure at the existing Consumers Energy lattice tower site.
Planning Director Peterson said that the Planning Commission has
approved several of these requests in the past but this is the first
case of a collocation in the residential zone. This particular antenna
is located in an R1 District just north of Burton Street, east of
Spaulding Avenue and runs through this area of the Township. This is
the first request that falls under the newly amended ordinance.
Planning Director Peterson showed the lattice tower and the pole
that will run up the middle of the tower. He noted the equipment
shelter inside the base of the tower.
Planning Director Peterson reviewed the site and the tower is
similar to what the residents view at Burton Pointe.
In Staff's report it is requested that the Applicant shall provide
documentation for access onto the site from the antenna company for
the rights to go through the area. The subdivision is there and the
Applicant will need to gain access either through the subdivision
streets or through the Consumers Power property. Staff would like the
written documentation regarding the access to the antenna.
Staff is recommending approval of the Type I Special Use Permit to
allow the co-location of the antenna at the tower at 5231 Burton
Street provided they provide documentation that access to the site has
been approved.
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for questions from the
Planning Commission of Staff.
Member Lewis noted that poles with a small top antenna is not too
offensive but he is curious if they start hanging more than just their
antenna on the pole, can this happen with this particular issue?
Planning Director Peterson said that nothing else can be hung on the
pole going up the middle of the lattice tower since the antenna would
be inside the lattice. Member Lewis asked if they could go higher and
Planning Director Peterson said they would have to come before the
Planning Commission for the request to increase the height.
There were no other questions of Staff. Chairman McDonald invited
the Applicant to add any comments.
Applicant Jamie Abbgy, Zoning Specialist from Faulk & Foster
showed an aerial photo noting Consumers Power's property. He showed
Burton Street on the map and its relation to Consumers' property and
they have permission to go across the property in this area. They are
also working with Consumers regarding an easement at Spaulding Road
involving the condominium association. They will provide the proper
easement documentation as requested by the Township.
Applicant Abbgy also said that there will not be any other
co-locations on the tower. Their co-location is right at the top of
the tower itself and if someone were to co-locate any lower, they
would be too close to the power lines.
There were no questions of the Applicant. Chairman McDonald
requested a motion to open the Public Hearing.
Member Lewis motioned to open the Public Hearing, Member Robinson
supported the motion. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question.
All in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was opened.
Chairman McDonald asked Staff if they had received any phone calls
or letters regarding the project. Planning Director Peterson said he
did receive a couple of phone calls and believes they are in
attendance at the meeting. Chairman McDonald invited the Public to
approach the Planning Commission.
David Branch, 2214 Christine Court, said his property is directly
behind the existing tower. He noted that there is another lattice
tower that is closer to Burton Street and does not understand why the
Applicant has chosen this tower that is surrounded by homes and
backyards.
He also noted a picture he received at the meeting of the structure
and asked why it is taller even though the Applicant says it is not
taller. As a resident in the area, he is opposed to the co-location in
his neighborhood. To service the antenna, they have to drive past the
first lattice tower to get to this one and does not understand why the
co-location is not on the first structure.
Applicant Abbgy said that he is the one who supplied the photo to
Mr. Branch as a general idea of what the structure will look like. The
drawing represents exactly what their co-location will look like. The
photo shows a building and the co-location does not require a building
but a small cabinet that will be housed inside the lattice tower.
The top of the antenna will not extend above the tower as shown in
the photo; the drawing reflects what the tower will look like. The
antenna will act as a "top" to the tower. In the photograph,
the antenna sits approximately 15-feet above the tower, in the
drawings the antenna sits on top of the antenna like a "T".
Mr. Branch asked why the co-location cannot be moved to one of the
other structures near this antenna. Applicant Abbgy said this project
involves more than one tower as an entire network is being built for
wireless service for the entire Grand Rapids area. The service ring of
each antenna is one-quarter of a mile. Each site chosen is linked to
the next site that is chosen and all depend on the main site that each
communicates to and is an interdependent structure. There are
approximately fifty (50) sites over Grand Rapids and the radio
frequency engineer selected the locations based on the one-quarter
mile frequency.
ClearWire prefers to co-located their antennas and are not looking
to build any new ones. There are engineering reasons why certain sites
are chosen.
Member MacAllister asked what other sites does Faulk & Foster
have within Cascade Township and Applicant Abbgy said there is one
located at the Township Hall. The project will be built in phases as
the customer base expands. Member MacAllister said it would be nice to
review ClearWater's vision for the wireless coverage and review their
phases of wireless coverage. Applicant Abbgy does not believe that the
other phases have been developed yet as their goal is to get phase one
up and running and to obtain customers. He did say that he will supply
the Township with a map of the Greater Grand Rapids area coverage for
phase one in hopes that may help provide some clarity and
understanding for what ClearWater is trying to accomplish.
Member Koessel asked if the difference in coverage is that great if
the other tower closer to Burton St. were utilized. Applicant Abbgy
said that though he is not an engineer, he does know that the
ClearWater engineers placed the co-location on this particular site
for a reason as they do not wish to enrage anyone with their
co-locations but they do have their reasons for placing them where
they do and they choose the locations carefully. Member Koessel
wondered what the distance is between the two antennas and Member
Postma noted it is over one-quarter mile. He also noted that the
current location for the antenna would service Watermark and other
surrounding communities and can understand why they selected the
Consumer's tower.
Chairman McDonald asked how tall the lattice tower is and Applicant
Abbgy showed him the photograph picture presented earlier noting that
the antenna on the top is not how theirs will look but the lattice
tower is the same. Applicant Abbgy said that the pole will run up the
center of the lattice tower and the antenna will sit on top of the
lattice tower like a "T", it will not be elevated on top of
the tower.
The cabinet for the equipment will be a small three-foot by
three-foot cabinet that will be housed in the base of the tower.
Maria VanTil, 2239 Burton Pointe Boulevard, the distance from the
two towers is approximately 600-feet and the distance should not be a
question. Private streets would have to be used either by Burton
Pointe or by Watermark to service this antenna and if there is an
alternative to placing it elsewhere, without using private streets,
that should be preferred. She would prefer the Applicant use one of
the other towers.
There were no other comments from the public.
Member Lewis motioned to close the Public Hearing with support from
Member Koessel. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All
in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was closed.
Member Koessel noted that they have dealt with this issue with
towers in the neighborhoods and the Township cannot do much about
antennas. The Township wrote into their ordinance that towers and
antennas are not allowed in front yards or structures, no new towers
and no equipment housing located in front yards. This site does not
have any of the antenna, tower or housing in the front yards of the
residential area. He is not sure if tabling the case so Faulk &
Foster can see if the other tower would work would solve the problem
since it may destroy the rest of the network they are trying to
construct.
Member MacAllister supported tabling the item to see if the
six-hundred feet in difference would make a difference for the
co-location.
Member Lewis supported finding out if the other tower may serve
ClearWire wireless network.
Applicant Abbgy noted that ClearWire has been pushing to get this
project up and running and neighboring cities have been very excited
over the project. He feels they have met the standards of the
Ordinance and have gone out of their way to build onto an existing
structure instead of building on a raw land site. He can request the
information if needed but feels that they have met all the
requirements to gain approval tonight.
Chairman McDonald said that knowing if the other tower could hold
the co-location would be beneficial since none of the residents mind
it on that tower. There is still the easement issue that needs to be
documented. If the item were tabled, this would allow the Applicant
time to resolve both issues.
Applicant Abbgy is confident that the engineers planned for this
site to work in conjunction with the others around Grand Rapids and is
not sure if the other tower would work or not.
Member Robinson asked the Applicant if the antenna covers
one-quarter mile and the Applicant said that is correct. Member
Robinson noted that is equivalent to approximately 1300-feet and if
this antenna were moved to the tower closer to Burton Street, the
antenna would be moved by fifty-percent out of where ClearWire wants
it.
Planning Director Peterson noted that if the case is tabled for
consideration of moving the antenna's location, the public should be
notified since there were residents with comments tonight the
residents of the other potential co-location sites should be notified
if the antenna is re-located and another Public Hearing should be
held. Planning Director Peterson also noted that if ClearWire does not
co-locate on this tower, it is likely that someone else will
eventually co-locate on the tower as well since we do not allow new
towers in the residential zone.
Member Richards believes that if ClearWire's antenna is not
co-located on this tower, another will go up eventually. She also
acknowledged the excellent point Member Robinson brought up regarding
the fifty-percent movement of the antenna if moved closer to Burton
Street and does not believe ClearWire will be able to move it. The
public wants the cell phone coverage, wireless and unfortunately the
antennas come with providing those services.
Chairman McDonald asked if there are any lights on the antenna and
the Applicant said no, there is not.
Member Logue asked if the center pole is currently existing and the
Applicant said it is not, that is what they are constructing. Member
Logue asked if the mast would be free-standing if the tower were not
there. Applicant Abbgy said it would not be a free-standing pole and
Member Logue asked what would happen if Consumers removed the lattice
tower. Applicant Abbgy believes that Consumers will not be taking the
tower down any time soon but said that if the Consumers tower is
removed, they would remove theirs as well. Member Koessel noted that
this is part of the Township's Ordinance.
Member Koessel noted to the Public Members at the meeting that if
the case is tabled, the antennas are allowed by the Township. Cascade
Township will be receiving additional cellular and wireless coverage,
the services will be coming in the near future and if ClearWire does
not put an antenna on this particular tower, someone else will.
Member Richards clarified that the Township wrote an ordinance to
help control the antennas but a Township cannot ban antennas.
Chairman McDonald clarified that the co-location for the antenna is
allowed and Staff has listed a condition regarding easement onto the
property.
Member Robinson motioned to approve the request for a Type I
Special Use Permit to co-locate a communication antenna with a small
equipment structure at the existing Consumers Energy lattice tower
site at 5231 Burton Street providing documentation to access the site,
supported by Member Richards.
Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All in favor with
none opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 7. Case # 07-2863: Esplanade Shopping Center
Address of Property: 5755 28th Street
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: Amending the existing Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.)
to revise wall signage to comply with current sign code.
Planning Director Peterson said the owner of the Esplanade Center
has asked to amend the sign portion of the existing PUD Ordinance to
match the current Township Sign Code and the amended language is
included within the Commissions' packet.
Staff does not have a problem with this and recommends approving
the changes and having taken the liberty of providing a copy of the
ordinance for the Commissions consideration.
Member MacAllister asked if the additional signage they have placed
on Kraft Ave is included in this amendment and Planning Director
Peterson said no and staff has asked them to remove those signs.
Member MacAllister asked if all of these store owners would still
be within compliance and Planning Director Peterson said that this
amendment will allow them to fall in line with the current sign
regulations.
Chairman McDonald invited the Applicant to approach the Planning
Commission.
Applicant Brian Burmana, representing the Applicant, said that
Staff presented an accurate report. He supports the plan to help
regulate the signage within the Township and the new conformity will
help make it easier for everyone going forward.
There were no questions of the Applicant and Chairman McDonald
requested a motion to open Public Hearing.
Member Robinson motioned to open the Public Hearing, supported by
Member MacAllister. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question.
All in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was opened.
There were no comments from the Public. Planning Director Peterson
said that no letters or phone calls were received.
Member Lewis, supported by Member MacAllister, motioned to close
the Public Hearing. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question.
All in favor with none opposed, Public Hearing was closed.
Member Koessel motioned to recommend to the Township Board a
favorable recommendation for adoption of the amended P.U.D. supported
by Member Logue.
Chairman McDonald called the motion to question. All in favor with
none opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 8. Any Other Business: Chairman McDonald opened the meeting
for any other business.
Planning Director Peterson said that the Township has received a
correspondence from Sheldon Cleaners that is included in the
Commissions' packets.
Planning Director Peterson also spoke with the micro-brewery on
Patterson and they are aware that they are to keep their patrons
inside the facility with their beverages unless he would like to
expand his license. He does not believe that the shop has been
expanded.
ARTICLE 9. Adjournment
Chairman McDonald requested a motion for adjournment.
Member Robinson supported by Member Lewis moved to adjourn. The
motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jack Lewis, Secretary
Lisa Hern, Recording Secretary
Government
~ Departments ~
Community
Business ~
Reference Desk ~
What's Happening
Help ~
Home ~ Search ~ Site Map
Comments? Feedback? Questions? Click here to send an email.
Site Use Policy
This page last modified
06/08/04.
All information © 2003-2004Cascade Township, Michigan
|
Site
Design/Development by
 |
|
