Planning
Commission Minutes
MINUTES
Cascade Charter Township Planning Commission
Monday, June 18, 2007
7:00 p.m.
ARTICLE 1. Chairman McDonald called the meeting to order at 7:01
p.m.
Members Present: Koessel, Lewis, Logue, McDonald, Richards, Robinson,
Waalkes
Members Absent: MacAllister (excused), Postma (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 18th 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 June 4, 2007 Meeting.
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for revisions, corrections or
a motion for approval of the minutes.
Member Koessel noted a correction in the June 4, 2007 Minutes under
Article 6, Page 8, third paragraph down regarding Member MacAllister
supporting Member Koessel's comments and "supported tabling the
item", Member Koessel does not believe she was actually
supporting a motion to table the item and it should be re-worded
accordingly.
Member Lewis motioned for approval of the June 4, 2007 Minutes with
the revision, supported by Member Robinson. All in favor with none
opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 5. Case # 07-2858: Sturbridge Valley
Address of Property: 2350 & 2358 Buttrick Avenue
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Requested Action: Consider recommendation to Township Board for new
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) rezoning and Ordinance.
Planning Director Peterson noted that the last time the Planning
Commission reviewed this case was at the Public Hearing that was held
on March 5, 2007. The project was awarded preliminary approval of the
P.U.D. rezoning subject to the following conditions:
1. Revise the plans to comply with Township Engineer.
2. Obtain soil erosion control permit prior to site work.
3. No mineral extraction from the site.
4. Incorporate the storm water agreement in the P.U.D. Ordinance.
5. Approval from the Kent County Health Department (KCHD).
6. Approval from the Michigan Department Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
for the small wetland crossing at the entrance.
7. Provide an airport recognition statement in Master Deed and P.U.D.
Ordinance
8. Provide a landscaping bond in the amount of $12,800 for the street
trees.
9. Show the easement for the neighbors' access on the plan and provide
documentation of that easement.
10. Agree to participate in the future sewer special assessment
district.
11. Have the name of the private street approved by the Kent County
Road Commission (KCRC).
12. Indicate on the plans that the Applicant will be providing a split
rail fencing provision to identify the access to the school property.
If the Township Board approves the project the Applicant will then be
required to deposit in escrow an amount equal to the cost to pave the
path. Pathway to be constructed when school property is developed.
13. Provide an evergreen tree buffer adjacent to the home at 2300
Buttrick Avenue.
Planning Director Peterson said that the Applicant has addressed
the items listed in Staff's report and been incorporated into the
proposed P.U.D. Ordinance to regulate the project. The Applicant has
reviewed the P.U.D. Ordinance and has agreed with the wording.
Planning Director Peterson also noted that the Applicant has
addressed Item 12 and 13 slightly differently than planned.
Regarding Item 12, the Developer has proposed to install the
chipped stone path now. His thought was that this would identify the
area now and the Developer would not have an outstanding obligation in
the future to take care of.
Item 13 is shown on the plan as a general area for landscaping with
the exact tree locations to be worked out after the road is installed
with the neighbor and Township Staff. The Developer is planning on six
6-foot tall pine trees and plants them when the road is installed. The
Developer will place the trees in areas advised by Staff and the
neighbor at 2300 Buttrick Ave along that area.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive
recommendation to the Township Board for approval of the P.U.D.
rezoning with the P.U.D. Ordinance. The Township Board would then hold
an additional Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation.
Chairman McDonald asked if the walkway is between Lots 5 and 6 and
Planning Director Peterson indicated that is correct and showed the
pathway on the site plan noting that it is to be 10-feet wide and will
connect to the future school.
Chairman McDonald asked the Planning Commission if they had any
questions of Staff, there were no questions.
Chairman McDonald invited the Applicant to add his comments
regarding the project.
Rob Berends of Exxel Engineering approached the Planning Commission
and introduced John Koetje of Koetje Builders.
Mr. Berends said that they intend to fulfill all their obligations
to the Township regarding the project and would like to install the
stone path at this time instead of waiting for the school to be built.
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for any questions of the
Applicant from the Commission.
Planning Director Peterson noted on the site plan by Buttrick
Avenue that the cross-hatched areas of open space, if the Planning
Commission recalls, the lots would have had frontage on Buttrick and
he had the Developer include them as open space to avoid any confusion
for someone requesting access to that road from their property.
There were no further questions of the Applicant and Chairman
McDonald opened the meeting for discussion by the Planning Commission.
Chairman McDonald noted that Staff's report included comments
received from the Township's Engineer. Planning Director Peterson also
said the approvals from the DEQ and Health Department, City of Grand
Rapids are also included in the Planning Commissions' packets.
Planning Director Peterson said that the Township's Attorney has
reviewed the Ordinance language.
Member Robinson motioned for a favorable recommendation to the
Township Board for a new Planned Unit Development rezoning and
Ordinance for 2350 & 2358 Buttrick Avenue. Member Richards
supported the motion. Chairman McDonald called the motion to question.
Member Lewis thanked the Applicant for keeping the area low density
and he appreciates that. The project stays within the overall
philosophy of the Ordinance.
All in favor with none opposed, motion carried.
ARTICLE 6. Case # 07-2880: Main Street Developers/Spruce Meadows
Address of Property: 5375 28th Street Court SE
Requested Action: The Applicant is requesting Basic Plan review to
consider amendment to existing P.U.D. to allow for Hotel use.
Planning Director Peterson referred to the location map of the
property. The property is approximately five (5) acres with one (1)
existing building.
When Spruce Meadows was originally done, back in the early 1990's,
it was originally zoned B2 but there were several modifications to the
Ordinance. One of the things that was done is the Township lists the
permitted uses either by right or by special use and hotel use was not
a listed use, either by right or by special use. The Applicant is
seeking to amend the P.U.D. to allow for the construction of a hotel
in the P.U.D.
Staff recommends that if the Planning Commission is comfortable
with the information they have been presented, Staff would advise the
Applicant to develop their site plan and bring it through the Planning
Commission as part of the P.U.D. for a preliminary Public Hearing.
Member Robinson noted there is another hotel in the area and
Planning Director Peterson noted there is a couple in the area and
noted their locations on the map. He also noted future interest in
another hotel in a different vicinity.
Member Lewis noted the Township has redone the Ordinance several
times since the Township Ordinance was originally presented. If this
project came before the Planning Commission now, the underlying B2
Zoning would allow for a hotel. Planning Director Peterson noted under
Special Use, hotels are allowed. Member Lewis also recalled that
Spruce Meadows, at that time, did not include a hotel use and Planning
Director Peterson noted at the time, there was concern with the
project backing up to the homes along Kraft and the Township made
modifications to our standards and in exchange for that the uses were
limited to less intense uses from the office and commercial zoning
district. The setbacks were modified and the building height was
lowered so it was intended to be a transition use from commercial
along 28th Street to the residential south of Burton Street.
Member Lewis acknowledged the Planning Commissions' reasoning back
then especially regarding the houses on Kraft Avenue. He does not see
how banning a hotel would have the same impact as initially presented
since there is no impact to the people who live on Kraft Avenue. He
believes the area is a transition from commercial into residential. He
does not see any traffic problems with the project and the hotel is in
the underlying B2 use.
Chairman McDonald asked if the 28th Street Court is the access road
into Spruce Meadows along with MVP. Planning Director Peterson said it
is along with the Meijer drive. Chairman McDonald clarified that the
closest homeowner is on Kraft Avenue south and Planning Director
Peterson said that Turnberry would be closer once that development is
completed. He also noted property next to Spruce Meadows that is
Master Planned for residential and there is the potential.
There were no further questions of Staff and Chairman McDonald
invited the Applicant to provide his comments to the Planning
Commission.
Applicant Randy Feinstra of Feinstra and Associates provided new
drawings to the Planning Commission. He showed the new plan generated
from a previous meeting between the Developer and the Township and
there were concerns with setbacks, height of the building and parking.
Mr. Feinstra distributed the new site plan and pro-type of the
hotel. Member Lewis clarified that they have never reviewed the
information he is currently distributing and Mr. Feinstra said that is
correct.
Mr. Feinstra said that the hotel would have one hundred (100) rooms
and the Township's ordinance states they need one parking site per
room plus one (1) per employee. The site plan shows only ninety-two
(92) sites and noted the parking to the west that they will seek a
cross parking agreement with the Cascade Commons for the hotel.
He also noted the steep banking in the rear of the property that is
approximately 25-feet high and referred to the buffer yard
requirements that they have met. The drawing indicates some
landscaping and signs the meet the Township's Ordinance. Mr. Feinstra
referred to the rendering of the hotel showing the exterior of the
building and its elevations.
Mr. Feinstra's understanding is that Staff needs to bring this
project to full site plan review and he supports this process. He
would appreciate the Planning Commissions' comments so they can
proceed with the project.
Planning Director Peterson noted that the project could be
recommended for approval by the Township Board by either doing an
amendment to the current P.U.D. to allow for hotel use or by going
through a P.U.D. Ordinance with the actual site plan.
Mr. Feinstra noted the driveway into the property being located
directly across the street from the other drive and they plan to place
the dumpster in the far rear of the property.
Vince DeMario of Main Street Developers approached the Planning
Commission noting that he has built various hotels throughout the
Midwest. A feasibility study was conducted a couple of months ago to
develop a Candlewood Suites. All 100-units will consist of at least
2-room suites and the feasibility study showed that Grand Rapids could
with stain two (2) of these types of hotels. The Developer selected
Cascade Township for a number of reasons, one being the market
characteristics and the location near MVP. The hotel is generated
towards family guests.
The hotel will contain all suites and will have kitchenettes in
each the hotel will not provide food service or a restaurant. The
facility will have a large outdoor grill and a gazebo for guests, the
average stay in a Candlewood hotel is 14-nights. This does not mean
that the typical stay for all Candlewood hotels is this long but the
average is based on the 220-hotels throughout the U.S.
Mr. DeMario said that he had met with Staff regarding the project a
few weeks ago discussing the elevations of the project. The elevations
submitted at tonight's meeting are those of a new prototype hotel and
the Developer hopes the first one to be built will be in Cascade
Township.
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for questions from the
Planning Commission of the Applicant.
Member Lewis asked if there are 220 hotels of this type throughout
the U.S. and Mr. DeMario said there are and they include Holiday Inn,
Holiday Inn Express and Continental. Member Lewis asked how the hotel
would approach potential customers, would they be relying on road
signs and how will they promote their hotel as a suite long-stay
hotel? Mr. DeMario said that the general manager and sales go through
training for marketing and will begin approximately four (4) months
prior to the hotel's opening. Typically, the hotels are built within
six to seven months and the marketing would focus on
colleges/universities, military bases and Cascade shows a booming
economy.
Member Lewis acknowledged their unique marketing scheme and asked
what kind of signage would they want for the site since their location
is off the beaten path and behind a Meijer's store? Mr. DeMario said
that they will not being asking for any type of signage other than
what is allowed for a hotel in the Township. He also noted that guests
who are long term prefer hotels that are away from the congestion
heavier populated areas and this is part of the reasoning for
selecting this particular site.
Member Logue asked the Developer when they would like to break
ground for the project if all proceeds accordingly and Mr. DeMario
said they would like to begin this fall and plan to open within seven
months of ground breaking, spring of 2008. Member Logue asked that if
the Planning Commission chose the plan of having the Applicant proceed
with a Site Plan approval that would fit within the Developer's
timeline? Mr. DeMario said that it would.
Chairman McDonald noted that the Planning Commission does not have
to take any further action except to define if they believe the
Applicant should proceed with a Site Plan approval for amending the
P.U.D. Ordinance with a recommendation to the Township Board. Planning
Director Peterson said that Staff is suggesting that the Planning
Commission handle the project as a new P.U.D. and attach the site plan
to the ordinance. This would ensure what type of hotel is built on the
site. The Planning Commission would also have to decide if the hotel
would be allow as a Special Use or a Use-by-Right should they decide
to go the alternate route with the project.
Member Koessel asked how many parking spaces is the project short?
Chairman McDonald noted eight (8) plus one for each staff member.
Member Koessel asked how many employees would be at the hotel and Mr.
DeMario said two (2), one (1) at the front desk and one (1) in
maintenance.
Member Koessel asked what the likely hood is that they will obtain
a shared use permit from the other property for parking? Mr. DeMario
said they have met with the owner and need to apply for the permit.
Planning Director Peterson noted that the Township's Ordinance does
require one (1) parking space per unit as a minimum. The Township's
theory is that if the parking agreement were to cease in the future,
the hotel still has enough parking per the Township's minimum
requirement.
Member Koessel noted that Staff's suggestion in amending the
ordinance for the property along with a Site Plan Review does make the
most sense for this project.
Member Lewis is curious to know why the parking for this hotel is
primarily located in the front of the building as the Ordinance states
most of the parking should be in the rear of the property. Planning
Director Peterson noted this is a good point and the B2 Zoning does
have the limitation of no more than sixty percent in the front of the
building as designed primarily for businesses along 28th Street. This
is something that could be worked on during the Site Plan Review.
Member Robinson asked if there are only two (2) employees per
shift, what about maintenance and housekeeping staff? Mr. DeMario said
that there would be one (1) staff member at the front desk and one (1)
part-time maintenance employee; housekeeping staff is also part-time.
Her further explained that the original site plan had one hundred four
(104) parking spaces that included parking in the rear of the
building. The Developer recognizes the potential for residential being
developed in the rear of the property, north of the hotel, and elected
to move the parking to keep it away from the residential area.
Chairman McDonald asked if there are any other hotels in Cascade
Township that are near residential zoning and Planning Director
Peterson noted that Centennial Park has the Crowne Plaza but there is
a transition from the hotel to office to residential but there are not
any, most are along 28th Street.
Planning Director Peterson wanted to clarify that if the Planning
Commission proceeds with the project, the setbacks and building height
would go through to B2 Zoning requirements as opposed to the current
P.U.D. requirements.
Member Koessel does not believe the Township Board would oppose the
project and the parking in the front of the building since the north
property is zoned R1. He believes the applicant shoud be held to the
same standards as the others in the area.
Member Robinson asked Staff for the pro's and con's of the two (2)
different approaches the Planning Commission could pursue with this
project. Planning Director Peterson said that if a hotel use wer
simplay added to the permitted uses, then that would allow for hotel
use under the current P.U.D. standards which are different than those
for other hotels in the area. If the project is tied to the P.U.D. and
a Site Plan Review is done, then the Township would know what exactly
is being built.
Member Waalkes asked if their basic site plan conforms to the
current P.U.D. and Planning Director Peterson said it does not.
Member Logue supported pursuing the Site Plan Review and Planning
Director Peterson summarized that the Applicant will pursue the P.U.D.
amendment with the Site Plan Review and the Planning Commission
agreed.
ARTICLE 7. Any Other Business
Chairman McDonald opened the meeting for any other business.
There was no other business.
ARTICLE 8. Adjournment
Chairman McDonald requested a motion for adjournment.
Member Robinson supported by Member Richards moved to adjourn. The
motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 7:53 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
 |
|
