Crystal Report Viewer

1000 Rochester Hills Dr.

Rochester Hills, MI

48309

(248) 656-4600

Home Page:

www.rochesterhills.org

Rochester Hills

Minutes

Planning Commission

Chairperson William Boswell, Vice Chairperson Deborah Brnabic

Members: Gerard Dettloff, Kathleen Hardenburg, Greg Hooper, Nicholas O. Kaltsounis,

David A. Reece, C. Neall Schroeder, Emmet Yukon

7:30 PM

1000 Rochester Hills Drive

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

CALL TO ORDER

Chairperson William Boswell called the Regular Planning Commission

Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Auditorium.

ROLL CALL

William Boswell, Deborah Brnabic, Kathleen Hardenburg, Greg Hooper, C.

Neall Schroeder and Emmet Yukon

Present

6 -

Gerard Dettloff, Nicholas Kaltsounis and David Reece

Absent

3 -

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

2008-0248

May 6, 2008 Regular Meeting

A motion was made by Yukon, seconded by Schroeder, that this matter be

Approved as Presented.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

Chairperson Boswell clarified for members of the audience that there

were several Public Hearings and if someone wished to speak about any

topics on the agenda, that they should fill out a card and bring it to the

Secretary.

COMMUNICATIONS

A) Charter Township of Shelby Auburn Road Streetscape Corridor Plan

There were no further Communications brought forward.

NEW BUSINESS

2008-0152

Request for Approval of the 2009-2014 Capital Improvement Plan (Public Hearing)

Ms. Jenuwine referred to the memo she had provided (on

file), dated May 5, 2008, which addressed some of the

issues brought up by Commissioners at the April 15

workshop. There were some suggestions about making the

document more user- friendly, and she hoped the

Commissioners’ concerns were satisfied and that they

would adopt the CIP. She said she would be happy to

answer any questions.

Ms. Brnabic asked if the motion to adopt the CIP could be

made without reading it in its entirety. Chairperson

Boswell did not believe the motion had to be read entirely; it

just had to be in the Minutes entirely.

Chairperson Boswell opened the Public hearing at 7:35

p.m.

Melinda Hill, 1481 Mill Race, Rochester Hills, MI 48306

Ms. Hill stated that in the 2009-2014 CIP, there were two

revised projects, WS-14A, Water Main - Washington Road

from Tienken to Dequindre, and SS-14, Sanitary Sewer -

Washington Road, Tienken to Dequindre. What had

changed was that Mill Race, Carter, Mead and Winkler Mill

had been removed from both the projects and were now

new projects - WS-14B and SS-14B, and they were totally

removed from the regular list and placed as Pending

Projects. She found it interesting because the complete

area was in the 2000 CIP as Water, WS-17, with an

estimated cost of $5,378,000.00, and construction time for

2005. In 2002, they added the Sanitary Sewer project, with

an estimated cost of $7,160,000.000 and construction time

in 2005. In the 2003-2005 CIPs, the projects remained the

same, and in 2006, the Water project changed numbers

from WS-17 to WS-14, and the cost increased to

$5,700,000.00, with a construction time of 2009. The

Sanitary Sewer cost was reduced to $3,800,000.00, and the

construction time was scheduled for 2009. In 2007 and

2008, the two projects remained the same but now in the

2009 CIP, she noted that they had been totally removed.

She stated that she had lived in the City for 31 years, and

her area was one of the few remaining without sewer and

water. They kept getting pushed to the back burner, even

though they were some of the City’s biggest tax payers, and

those with the least demands on City services. It was sort

of a catch-22, because it was noted in the 2009 CIP that

there were too few residents and larger parcels, so the City

should wait for development, yet the new Master Plan

called for a new Estate zoning, with a minimum of one-acre

parcels. To have septic, the County was requiring one

acre. One of the larger parcels was recommended by the

Green Space Advisory Board for purchase from the City’s

Green Space millage. She stated that there were several

large parcel owners that had absolutely no intention of

splitting their property and selling it at any time in the near

future. Many of those parcels contained flood plains,

wetlands and steep slopes, and some people had horses.

On Mill Race, there was a two-acre minimum for lots. She

stated that there was not going to be development

happening, so they could not wait for development to have

more sanitary sewer and water users. She reminded that

the policy of the City had been to extend sanitary sewer and

water to all areas of the City, yet there were many projects

happening in the meantime and placed in the CIP, but the

Winkler Mill, Mill Race, Carter and Mead Roads projects

were basically deleted from the 2009 CIP. She asked that

they be put back in the CIP as regular projects, not pending,

even without a dollar figure or a date. Taking them out took

them off the radar, and she felt that was unfair. She

understood why they were changed, because they were

being pushed to put sewer and water down Washington

Road because the County wanted to pave it in 2010 or

2011. The City did not have the money to complete

everything out there, but she did not agree with the reasons

of the CIP Team or the City, and she did not feel they were

really in touch with the taxpayers in that area of the City.

She requested that those two projects be put back in the

CIP.

Ms. Hill questioned the introduction of recurring projects

under the title of Rehabilitation Programs. She stated that

one of the premises of the CIP was that the projects were

non-recurring, yet in the 2008 CIP, MR-03, Major Road

Concrete Slab Replacement, and LS-03, Local Street

Concrete Slab Replacement were introduced as recurring

projects. In 2009, SS-02B, Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation

was also a recurring project of approximately $2,000.000.00

per year. She believed that the recurring programs were

blurring the line of the intent of the CIP. She found it

interesting that in the original CIPs, in 1999 and 2000, there

was an area called Capital Maintenance Programs. She

read, “Capital Maintenance Programs are an important

supplement to the Capital Improvement Plan. These

programs represent the ongoing costs to support and

protect the investment of approved Capital Improvement

Projects. Although Capital Maintenance Programs are not

approved as part of the CIP process, since their funding is

included in the City’s operating budget, it is important to

recognize the impact of these ongoing costs as

consideration is given to approving new projects.” She felt

that these programs, which were recurring costs to the City,

even though they were Capital projects, were much more

capital maintenance-type projects to original road work or

sanitary sewer in the City that needed rehabilitation. She

doubted that any changes would be made for this year, but

she asked whether the CIP Team could truly scrutinize it for

future years and take a closer look at what was being

considered as a non-recurring or recurring project.

Ms. Hill also questioned what happened to SS-02A, the

Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Study from 1999 for

$450,000.00. It became a $900,000.00 project and had

been an ongoing, alternating cost between SS-02B, which

was the new recurring Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation for

$2,000,000.00 per year. She asked if the evaluation was

complete and why it had disappeared and was placed on

the pending list.

Chairperson Boswell closed the Public hearing at 7:48 p.m.

He recalled that Mr. Rousse, Director of Engineering

Services had mentioned SS-02A and B, and asked Ms.

Jenuwine is she could explain anything further.

Ms. Jenuwine advised that SS-02A, the evaluation of the

lines, and B, the rehab, would be conducted in house rather

than using a consultant. Mr. Rousse believed that the

Asset Management System was incorporating data on a

daily basis with the field people. They would collect

manhole information in the subdivisions and on the roads,

and Staff would populate the Asset Management System

rather than pay a consultant to accumulate the information.

Mr. Hooper confirmed that the City purchased a television

camera last year for the purpose of televising the sanitary

sewers rather than having a consultant do it.

Mr. Schroeder thought that Ms. Jenuwine could take Ms.

Hill’s concerns back to Staff to be able to answer the

questions, because the Commissioners did not have the

ability to address them. Ms. Jenuwine thought that Ms. Hill

was making statements more than asking questions. Ms.

Hill reiterated that she would like to have WS-14B and

SS-14B placed back in the CIP as projects, because they

were off the radar screen, and that went against the policy

of the City.

Mr. Schroeder remembered discussing paving Washington

Road, but not the details, but he indicated that the City

would not pave the road until the water and sewer were in.

Ms. Jenuwine said that the Engineering Dept. stated that

they had pushed the Mill Race, Carter, Mead, and

Washington project to the back because the cost versus the

number of people who would benefit per parcel was

extraordinarily high, and they could not justify it. Mr.

Schroeder said that historically, the City had always waited

for the developers to bring in the lines, and he noted that a

portion of the northeast corner of the City was done by Elro

Corporation. It was very, very expensive and they were

paid back with taps. He concluded that almost all of the

major water mains and sewers were done in cooperation

with development. Mr. Schroeder moved the following

motion:

MOTION by Schroeder seconded by Brnabic, that the

Rochester Hills Planning Commission Approves the

Capital Improvement Plan that has been proposed for the

years 2009-2014. The Rochester Hills Planning

Commission has determined the following:

WHEREAS, the Municipal Planning Act, Act 285 of Public

Acts of 1931, as amended, requires the Rochester Hills

Planning Commission to annually accept a Capital

Improvement Plan for the benefit of the health, safety and

welfare of the community as those criteria relate to the

physical development of Rochester Hills; and

WHEREAS, the Rochester Hills Fiscal Office has consulted

with the City's professional staff who carry on the business

of planning for and providing for the present and future

needs and desires of the citizens of Rochester Hills; and

WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan is meant to

consider the immediate and future needs and goals of

Rochester Hills, as identified by the public, City Boards and

Commissions, and the Mayor's staff, in light of existing

projects and plans and anticipated resources; and

WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan is a flexible

document, necessarily meant to be reevaluated and

amended each year, to project into the six (6) succeeding

years, and further amended as needed to address practical

realities as they relate to policies and philosophies of

relevant Boards, the City Council and the Mayor's office.

WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan is a guide and

forum to aid the Rochester Hills Mayor's Office and the

Rochester Hills City Council in making decisions regarding

the physical development and infrastructure maintenance

of the City and determining what, if any, resources can or

should be available to carry out City Council's policies and

budgetary decisions; and

WHEREAS, the components of the Capital Improvement

Plan have been subject to public hearings, public review,

and constant citizen committee reviews over the course of

several years and a duly noticed full public hearing on May

20, 2008 and further previous invitation for public input on

April 15, 2008; and

WHEREAS, the components of the Capital Improvement

Plan having been arrived at through a point system using

variables that included, among other things, whether the

project has begun, funds committed; sources of funds; prior

City Council decisions, Planning Commission or

administrative recommendations and decisions.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Capital

Improvement Plan presented for review on April 15, 2008,

and presented with minor changes, referenced in the memo

from J. Jenuwine dated May 15, 2008 (on file), for review on

May 20, 2008 is adopted and;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Plan should be

published and attested to according to law.

Chairperson Boswell referred to the projects Ms. Hill

mentioned, noting they were placed as projects under

review. He said he could understand that she wanted them

in the Plan itself, but if they were not put in with a dollar

amount, he wondered what the point would be. Ms.

Jenuwine suggested that they could find the latest project

estimates from the Engineering Department, although they

did not plan on doing them, if the Commission wanted them

back into the body of the document. Chairperson Boswell

did not think it was necessary for them to go back in; he

would rather it stay the way it was for now. He said he

could certainly understand Ms. Hill’s concerns, but the

problem was that they were not going to get done, whether

they were there or not. Ms. Hill remarked that the City

should change its policy of extending sewer and water

throughout the City. She felt it was contradictory.

Chairperson Boswell agreed.

Mr. Anzek reminded that the CIP was a six-year program,

and the Engineering Department did not foresee doing the

projects in that period. They were put into a table (page 87)

as projects under review, and every year when the Policy

Team began the process, they looked at those projects to

see if they were worthy to bring forward. If so, they would

bring them forward to the next projected six years. He did

not think it had fallen off the radar screen. It used to be

called the Companion Section of the CIP, and it was still

something they looked at in the beginning of every cycle.

The Policy Team would take the question up with the Staff

that proposed the projects to see if they were viable, but to

move it into the year 2013 and put a dollar amount was

being unrealistic if it would not happen in that six-year

timeframe. They could take up the policy with Council.

A motion was made by Schroeder, seconded by Brnabic, that this matter be

Adopted.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

Chairperson Boswell stated for the record that the motion

had passed six to zero.

2008-0249

Request for Approval of Conditional Land Use - Buffalo Wild Wings Outdoor Seating, for

the seasonal sale and service of food and beverages, located at the Boulevard Shoppes,

on Walton east of Livernois, zoned B-2, General Business, A.F. Jonna Development &

Mgmt. Co., applicant.

(Reference: Staff Report prepared by Derek Delacourt,

dated May 20, 2008 had been placed on file and by

reference became part of the record thereof.)

Present for the applicant was Kent Ward, Franchisee of

Buffalo Wild Wings, representing Arkan Jonna, the

developer.

Mr. Anzek agreed that Mr. Jonna, the owner of the

Boulevard Shoppes, had processed the request. Mr. Anzek

referred to the plan, and said he thought it worked pretty

well. There was plenty of parking on the site, including

banked parking. He believed that it was a straightforward

request, and noted that the Ordinance required a

Conditional Land Use Permit for outdoor seating and

service. He said he would be happy to answer any

questions.

Ms. Hardenburg asked if the structure would be permanent,

which was confirmed by Mr. Ward.

Mr. Yukon asked if they would use umbrellas or shading,

noting that it would face the west, and would be fairly warm

in the summertime. Mr. Kent advised that the ultimate plan

was to have a permanent awning covering the whole patio.

He believed the drawing only showed architectural

awnings. Mr. Yukon asked if there would be umbrellas, and

Mr. Kent answered that he did not think they would be

necessary because there would be a full canopy.

Mr. Schroeder asked if the sidewalk would match what was

there, which was a special stone treatment. Mr. Ward said

they met with Mr. Jonna a few weeks ago, and as a group

decided that they did not want to go with the same concrete

because of the pebbles in it. It was hard to try to keep

clean, so they decided to go with stained concrete. It would

probably be a little darker than what was there so it would

not show the dirt. He noted that there were multiple Buffalo

Wild Wings around the country and some had the original

color, which was a real fight to keep clean and they had to

power wash it almost nightly. Mr. Schroeder asked if they

would serve beer and wine, which was confirmed. He

asked if people would have to access the patio through the

building. Mr. Kent said that was the full intent, but they had

to have emergency exits on the patio, and he could not say

that no one would never enter or exit through them, but the

intention was that they all came and went through the front

door.

Mr. Hooper commented that the awning might be an issue

for the Fire Department. He said he could not recall that a

liquor license had been brought into the community for their

restaurant. He asked if that would come before City

Council in the future. Mr. Anzek said that Staff did not

process that, but he was sure it would be. Mr. Ward said

they had applied to bring a liquor license into the

community, and he thought he should hear something any

day from the City Clerk about when they would meet with

the local liquor board. Mr. Hooper said he was excited to

welcome them to the community.

Mr. Anzek asked Mr. Hooper if he would prefer that the

outdoor seating came to the City Council at the same time

the liquor permit did. Mr. Hooper said he would not have a

problem with that. Mr. Anzek then said he felt he should

retract that request so the applicant could get started on

construction. If they did not get a liquor permit, they would

still have restaurant capabilities outside. Mr. Hooper did

not think there was a Buffalo Wild Wings without a liquor

license. Mr. Anzek said he would bring the Conditional

Land Use Request forward as soon as possible, because

he did not want to tie it to the liquor permit, as it would delay

construction.

Chairperson Boswell opened the Public Hearing at 8:00

p.m. Seeing no one come forward, he closed the Public

hearing.

Ms. Brnabic moved the following motion, and Chairperson

Boswell clarified that Mr. Ward was familiar with the two

conditions, including dates of operation, and the Building

Department’s request for more detailed dimensions.

MOTION by Brnabic, seconded by Hardenburg, in the

matter of City File No. 77-505.4, the Planning Commission

Recommends City Council Approve the Conditional

Land Use for outdoor sales and service of food for Buffalo

Wild Wings, located at the Boulevard Shoppes on Walton

Blvd., east of Livernois, based on the site plan dated

received by the Planning Department on April 22, 2008 with

the following five (5) findings and subject to the following

two (2) conditions:

Findings:

1. The subject seating area will be surrounded by a

railing and then a sidewalk adjacent to the driveway,

and does not appear that it will be detrimental,

hazardous, or disturbing to existing or future

neighboring uses, persons, property or the public

welfare.

2. The existing development does promote the intent

and purpose of this chapter.

3. The subject site has been designed, constructed,

operated, maintained and managed so as to be

compatible, harmonious and appropriate in

appearance with the existing or planned character of

the general vicinity, adjacent uses of land, the natural

environment, the capacity of public services and

facilities affected by the land use, and the community

as a whole.

4. The subject site is served adequately by essential

public facilities and services, such as highways,

streets, police and fire protection, drainageways,

refuse disposal, and the persons or agencies

responsible for the establishment of the land use or

activity shall be able to provide adequately any such

service.

5. The subject site does not create additional

requirements at public cost for public facilities and

services that will be detrimental to the economic

welfare of the community.

Conditions:

1. Address comments in Building Department memo dated

April 30, 2008, prior to Building Plan Approval.

2. Dates of operation shall be from April 15 to October 31st.

A motion was made by Brnabic, seconded by Hardenburg, that this matter be

Recommended for Approval to the City Council Regular Meeting.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

2008-0243

Request for Approval of a Revised Conditional Land Use - American House of Rochester

Hills, a proposed 80,500 square-foot convalescent senior living facility, part of the

American House complex, located on Adams Road, north of South Boulevard, zoned SP,

Special Purpose; Fusco, Shaffer & Pappas, Inc., applicant

(Reference: Staff Report prepared by Ed Anzek, dated May

20, 2008 had been placed on file and by reference became

part of the record thereof.)

Present for the applicant was Jeremy Griffis, Fusco, Shaffer

& Pappas, 30800 Northwestern Hwy., Suite 100,

Farmington Hills, MI 48334, the project architect.

Mr. Anzek recalled that in December 2007, the applicants

came before the Planning Commission to present a

concept for a revised component of the American House

complex, stating that their market situation had changed.

Previously, they were approved to construct several

one-story, independent living units, but they had found that

there was a stronger market for dependent, or convalescent

care. The new building would have 24/7 nursing care, and

that meant a different level of care than previously

proposed. The new design showed one building, which

would have three stories on the back where the land sloped

down, and he noted that three stories required a Height

Modification. Mr. Anzek advised that the plans had been

through numerous technical reviews, and that the

applicants made many changes to accommodate the Fire

Department, including adding stairwells for evacuation.

The applicants had been very cooperative with any

requests made by Staff to get the plans technically

compliant.

Mr. Griffis showed the overall Site Plan for a 71-bed

convalescent home. There would be medication, meals

and housecleaning provided, and it would be a home for

the aged, licensed through the State of Michigan.

Mr. Griffis advised that they would improve the landscaping

all along the Adams Road frontage, with new entrance

walls of stone and brick to match the new building. The

landscaping would unify the whole development. The

proposed building would be the tenth building of the

American House campus. The other buildings on campus

were either independent living or apartment-type buildings,

without medical care provided. He explained that the

building would present two stories along Adams, and that

the site sloped down and the rear portion would be

essentially like a walkout lower level. It would not be a

basement. They would like to improve the existing pond,

and were providing a terrace area and more landscaping at

the rear of the building.

Mr. Schroeder said he had never seen a casual and a

formal dining room on plans he had looked at. He asked if

there would be a quick place to come for a sandwich versus

a formal sit down dinner. Mr. Griffis said it was a trend in

senior living to give people options. There would be more

hours of operation with the casual dining. Mr. Schroeder

asked if everyone would get the same meal at the formal

room or if there would be a selection. Mr. Griffis was not

sure, but he was aware that they would present different

options.

Ms. Hardenburg asked if the home would be for people

entering the last stages of their lives or if it would include

someone who just got out of the hospital who could not go

right home. Mr. Griffis said that it could be, or that people

could go right from their home if they needed help with

medication every day. It would depend upon a person’s

condition.

Mr. Anzek added that if someone was a Medicare patient,

they would have to be released to a nursing home for rehab

before going to their regular type of living. He suggested

that it was a hard question to answer without knowing what

someone needed.

Chairperson Boswell opened the Public Hearing at 8:12

p.m.

Janet Tate, 3680 Adams Rd., Auburn Hills, MI 48126.

Ms. Tate indicated that she had no objection to the

proposal, but she lived across Adams and the developers

had built up the land where they wanted to put the building,

and there had been a drainage problem since. The road

was always flooded and water crossed the road into her

property and flooded it when it rained. It was eventually

working its way up to her home, and she wanted to know if

they would be able to correct it. She stated that no one was

doing anything about it now.

Mr. Anzek said that if it was happening now, it was not the

responsibility of the current applicant. Ms. Tate said she

had talked with the Road Commission. Mr. Anzek

maintained that the City’s Engineers would very much like

to be made aware of the problem to try and find a solution,

in cooperation with the Road Commission. Ms. Tate said

that there was always a truck doing something, and a

marker saying there was water over the road. Mr. Anzek

thought there was something plugged or that the pathway

was in a valley. He assured that he would discuss it with

the City Engineer right away.

Mr. Schroeder asked Ms. Tate if she had talked with Auburn

Hills about it, and she advised that she had. Her neighbor

had the same problem, and the City put a drain in the ditch

by his home to solve the problem. It ran down into a pipe.

Mr. Schroeder asked if she knew who she talked with, and

said that the City could work with that person. Ms. Tate

responded that the City said it was the Road Commission’s

problem. Ms. Anzek asked her to write down her

information, and he promised that the City would work with

her.

Chairperson Boswell closed the Public Hearing at 8:16 p.m.

Mr. Yukon recalled that at the December meeting, there

was some discussion about pedestrian safety around the

pond and for the walkways. He asked Mr. Griffis to

elaborate.

Mr. Griffis said they had done further development along

the pond. The entire curved walk would meet the barrier

free requirements. The slope of the pond would be very

gradual. Mr. Yukon asked how deep the pond would be,

and Mr. Griffis noted that the deepest part would be three to

four feet at the center. There would be a stone retaining

wall and large plantings. The grades did not change more

than 30 inches, so a metal railing was not required. Mr.

Schroeder asked how they would keep the water from

becoming stagnant. Mr. Griffis said it would have an

aerator fountain.

Mr. Anzek informed that much of the sidewalk layout was

dictated by the Fire Department - when they evaluated it for

ladder placement and access to the upper floors. He felt

that the architects had been very cooperative. He added

that there was no landscaping added between the front

sidewalk and the building because of the Fire Department.

The materials west of the front sidewalk were intensified.

Mr. Griffis had several meetings with the Fire Department,

and Mr. Anzek felt that overall, the advantage of the plan

was due to the fact that the applicant came before the

Commission previously, gathered the input and made

refinements.

Mr. Yukon referred to the architectural renderings, and

commented that it would be a very nice building. He

thought the applicant had taken time with the design, and

he said he liked it.

Ms. Brnabic asked if any further consideration was given to

renovation of the façade of the adjacent school building.

Mr. Griffis said they proposed a lot of landscaping in front of

it to improve the overall street appearance of the project, but

he was not sure if they were going to do anything with the

school building.

Chairperson Boswell asked the Commissioners if anyone

had a concern with the Tree Removal Permit or Height

Modification requests. Ms. Hardenburg asked about

drawing A202, the partial west elevation, which showed

three stories. She asked if it should be east, and

Chairperson Boswell agreed it should be southeast. Mr.

Griffis suggested that it be called the northeast corner of the

building at the west side. Ms. Hardenburg pointed out that it

would be southeast. Mr. Anzek said that a simple revision

would be to label the angled portion the

southwest/northeast elevation. Ms. Brnabic moved the

following motion:

MOTION by Brnabic, seconded by Schroeder, in the matter

of City File No. 99-007.4 (Rochester American House), the

Planning Commission recommends to City Council

approval of the revised Conditional Land Use, based on

plans dated received by the Planning Department on May

8, 2008, with the following fourteen (14) findings.

Findings:

1. The development is for a select group of the

population, the elderly, whose special needs require

the close physical proximity of accessory uses and

support facilities.

2. The project consists of a different type of living unit

(convalescent care) constructed pursuant to an overall

comprehensive plan for an entire parcel.

3. The development is located just north and west of,

and will have common Adams Road access with,

other existing American House facilities which

provide other senior housing and care opportunities.

4. Accessory and support facilities are present in the

building and are available to future residents of the

subject site.

5. The proposed development is required to provide

9,585 square feet of ancillary facilities and has

provided 9,835 square feet.

6. The proposed development is required to provide

2,485 square feet of common facilities and has

provided 7,489 square feet.

7. The proposed building is two to three stories in height;

three stories can be recommended for approval by the

Planning Commission per Section 138-1111(i).

8. The proposed development is required to provide 800

square feet of land area for each bed and has

provided 1,839 square feet.

9. 36 parking spaces are required and 42 are being

proposed.

10. The provision of housing for the elderly is consistent

with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance in

general and of Section 138-933(9) in particular.

11. The development has been designed and will be

operated, maintained, and managed so as to be

compatible, harmonious, and appropriate in

appearance with the existing character of the general

vicinity, adjacent uses of land, the natural

environment, the capacity of public services and

facilities affected by the land use and the community

as a whole.

12. The development is or can be adequately served by

essential public facilities and services, and all utilities

are available to the site.

13. The development is not detrimental, hazardous, or

disturbing to existing land uses, persons, property, or

the public welfare.

14. The development does not create additional

requirements at public cost for public facilities and

services that will be detrimental to the economic

welfare of the community.

A motion was made by Brnabic, seconded by Schroeder, that this matter be

Recommended for Approval to the City Council Regular Meeting.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

2008-0254

Request for Approval of a Height Modification - American House of Rochester Hills

MOTION by Hardenburg, seconded by Yukon, in the matter

of City File No. 99-007.4 (American House of Rochester

Hills), the Planning Commission recommends to City

Council approval of a Height Modification to allow three

stories on the rear portion of the building, based on plans

dated received by the Planning and Development

Department on May 8, 2008, with the following three (3)

findings:

Findings:

1. The side and rear yard setbacks are at least equal in

depth to the height of the proposed building.

2. The proposed roof slope and building will be consistent

with other buildings on the entire development.

3. The increased height will be compatible with the

surrounding and nearby topography, existing and

reasonably expected development, the Master Plan

for the area, and the health, safety and welfare of the

City.

A motion was made by Hardenburg, seconded by Yukon, that this matter be

Recommended for Approval to the City Council Regular Meeting.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

2008-0244

Revised Tree Removal Permit - City File No. 99-007.4 - American House of Rochester

Hills

MOTION by Yukon, seconded by Schroeder, in the matter

of City File No. 99-007.4 (Rochester American House), the

Planning Commission grants a revised Tree Removal

Permit, based on plans dated received by the Planning

Department on May 8, 2008, with the following two (2)

findings and subject to the following one (1) condition.

Findings:

1. The proposed removal and replacement of regulated

trees on-site is in conformance with the Tree

Conservation Ordinance.

2. Of the 76 regulated trees on the subject site, the

applicant is proposing to replace 69 regulated trees

with 69.5 replacement trees on-site.

Condition:

1. Address conditions in City’s Landscape Architect’s letter

dated May 12, 2008, prior to Final Approval by Staff.

A motion was made by Yukon, seconded by Schroeder, that this matter be

Granted.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

2008-0245

Request for Approval of a Revised Site Plan - American House of Rochester Hills, a

proposed 80,500 square-foot senior housing facility on 3.4 acres on Adams, north of

South Boulevard, zoned SP, Special Purpose, Fusco, Shaffer & Pappas, Inc., applicant

MOTION by Schroeder, seconded by Brnabic, in the matter

of City File No. 99-007.4 (Rochester American House), the

Planning Commission recommends to City Council

approval of the revised Site Plan, based on plans dated

received by the Planning Department on May 8, 2008, with

the following six (6) findings and subject to the following

eight (8) conditions.

Findings:

1. The proposed phase is a continuation of the existing

American House Community, which serves the

population with several types of senior care living,

from independent living to convalescent care.

2. The revised site plan and supporting documents

demonstrate that all applicable requirements of the

Rochester Hills Zoning Ordinance can be met, subject

to the conditions noted below.

3. The location and design of the driveways and walkways,

providing vehicular ingress to and egress from the

site, have been designed to promote safety and

convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic,

both within the site and on access and adjoining

streets.

4. Parking areas have been designed to avoid common

traffic problems and promote safety.

5. There is a satisfactory and harmonious relationship

between the development on the site and the existing

development of contiguous land and adjacent

neighborhoods.

6. The proposed development does not have an

unreasonably detrimental or an injurious effect upon

the natural characteristics and features of the parcel

being developed and the larger area of which the

parcel is a part.

Conditions:

1. Approval by City Council of the revised Conditional Land

Use.

2. Provision of a performance and maintenance guarantee

in the amount of $146,637.00, as adjusted if

necessary by the City, to ensure the correct

installation and maintenance of the proposed

landscaping. Such guarantees to be provided by the

applicant prior to issuance of a Land Improvement

Permit.

3. Correct table on Sheet A001 regarding Terrace Level

common area calculations, adding Chapel Activity

square footage to total and revising Total Building

Common Area Required, prior to Final Approval by

Staff.

4. Appropriate approvals from the Road Commission for

Oakland County for work in the Adams Road

right-of-way must be obtained prior to issuance of a

Land Improvement Permit.

5. Soil Erosion Permit from the Oakland County Drain

Commission must be obtained for sedimentation

control, prior to issuance of a Land Improvement

Permit.

6. A Land Improvement Permit must be obtained prior to

beginning any work on the site.

7. All references and notations stating “Assisted Living”

shall be changed to “Congregate Care” on all sheets,

prior to Final Approval by Staff.

8. Delete all Junipers and other shrubs shown on Sheet L3

within 5 feet of the asphalt sidewalk, prior to Final

Approval by Staff.

A motion was made by Schroeder, seconded by Brnabic, that this matter be

Recommended for Approval to the City Council Regular Meeting.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

Chairperson Boswell stated for the record that the motions

had passed unanimously and thanked the applicant.

2007-0448

Revised Tree Removal Permit - City File No. 07-009 - Crittenton/Karmanos Cancer

Treatment Center, for the removal of 5 trees for the development of a 30,343 square-foot

facility on 5.1 acres, located south of Star Batt, east of Crooks, zoned B-4, Parcel No.

15-28-151-006, Crittenton Hospital Medical Center, applicant.

(Reference: Staff Report prepared by Ed Anzek, dated May

20, 2008 had been placed on file and by reference became

part of the record thereof.)

Present for the applicant was Michael Strother, and Mike

Pacheko, Albert Kahn Associates, 7430 Second Ave.,

Detroit, MI 48202-2798; and Teon Sujak, Mickalich &

Associates, 2359 Avon Industrial Dr., Rochester Hills, MI

48309.

Mr. Anzek stated that Staff had been working with Mr.

Strother since the last approval, noting that the health care

industry was a dynamic process. As the applicants

continued to work on refining the interior spaces, the plan

evolved. It now had a slightly different look, and there were

other changes driven by the need for less parking. Staff

thought it was important for the matter to come back before

the Planning Commission for approval of a Revised Site

Plan due to the elevation changes and the increase in size

of the building.

Mr. Strother showed an image of the first project. They tried

to come up with a building to accommodate the land, which

was somewhat unique in shape, and there were buildings

around it that they tried to connect to with pedestrian ways.

They also wanted to have the building recognizable from

different vantage points. One of the primary themes was

the tall element that was referred to as the “beacon.”

Mr. Strother explained that the new building would be in

almost the same location, connecting to the hotel and

restaurant. They increased the program by about 5,000

square feet, and looked in more detail at the objectives of

the project. The biggest thing was to have a place that was

welcoming, and they used natural stone, and the glass

would provide a lot of daylight. They adjusted the roofline

height slightly, but it would still be below 30 feet. They felt

they had a really nice design, and they were ready to move

forward if approved. He said he would be happy to answer

questions.

Mr. Anzek advised that the Site Plan had gone through a

complete technical compliance review. It had been

approved by the Fire, Engineering, and Building

Departments and all applicable reviewers.

Ms. Hardenburg noted that there would be a metal roof.

She questioned the drawing that showed straight lines

going down and the colored rendering showing rectangular

pieces. Mr. Strother said that at one point they were going

to use a metal roof with a little bit of a pattern, but they

decided to go with more of a standard seam for the roof

material and a more traditional look. Ms. Hardenburg said

that she liked that one better.

Ms. Brnabic asked for a brief summary of the types of

treatments planned for the facility.

Mr. Pacheko said there would be an infusion area, linear

accelerator area, machines for radiology, exam rooms,

diagnostics for general x-ray and for simulation before the

linear accelerator and radiation therapy. It would all be tied

in to cancer treatment. Ms. Brnabic noted that there would

be a designated timeframe for people to have radiation

therapy. It was stated in the report that “the nature of the

medical center for cancer treatment does not generate high

levels of traffic turnover.” She was not quite sure that was a

fair statement, because of what a cancer patient went

through for treatment. Radiation was scheduled for many

weeks, and there would be a constant stream of traffic, even

if it were the same people. The cancer rate was high and

people could overlap as they came and went.

Mr. Strother agreed there would be patients coming in and

out, but he did not think it would be high volume. It would

be a fixed number, based on the size of the building and its

capacity. Ms. Brnabic said that she speculated that every

half hour or 20 minutes, people could be coming for

radiation, so she was not sure the statement about traffic

was totally accurate. She said she liked what they did with

the building. She was happy to see that it was being

dedicated to cancer treatment, and she felt that was

wonderful.

Mr. Schroeder asked the applicants if they had considered

green building and the LEED program while developing the

site. Mr. Strother said they had gone through the LEED

checklist, but they were not pursuing LEED certification. In

their materials and some specifications, they were

definitely looking at sustainable ways to build. Mr.

Schroeder said there were LEED roofs that were similar to

what they were proposing. Mr. Strother said they were

trying to pursue LEED specifications, but they had not

looked at the exact roof material yet. Mr. Schroeder asked

if they were going to treat the stormwater before it exited the

site. Mr. Sujak noted that the stormwater treatment had

already been provided, and it had been designed for the

impervious surface of the proposed center.

Mr. Yukon asked how much change in elevation there was

with the Revised Site Plan compared with the first Plan. Mr.

Strother pointed out the mullions, the piers in between with

natural stone, the color of the metal, and he said that the

biggest difference was that everything, including the

materials, was exactly defined, where before it had been

conceptual. He showed some colored samples of the

stone. He went into detail about the illustration, and said

that the building would have an inside/outside appeal to it

so people could feel relaxed. Hearing no further

discussion, Mr. Schroeder moved the following motion:

MOTION by Schroeder, seconded by Yukon, in the matter

of City File No. 07-009 (Crittenton/Karmanos Cancer

Treatment Center), the Planning Commission grants a

Revised Tree Removal Permit, based on plans dated

received by the Planning and Development Department on

April 15, 2008, with the following three (3) findings.

Findings:

1. The proposed removal and replacement of regulated

trees is in conformance with the Tree Conservation

Ordinance.

2. The applicant is proposing to replace 5 regulated trees

with heavily landscaped trees and shrubs, far

exceeding the requirements of the TCO.

3. The original Tree Removal permit was granted by the

Planning Commission on July 17, 2007 and the

revision is for one additional tree removal.

A motion was made by Schroeder, seconded by Yukon, that this matter be

Granted.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

2007-0018

Revised Site Plan Approval - City File No. 07-009 - Crittenton/Karmanos Cancer Center.

MOTION by Yukon, seconded by Schroeder, in the matter

of City File No. 07-009 (Crittenton/Karmanos Cancer

Treatment Center), the Planning Commission approves the

Revised Site Plan, based on plans dated received by the

Planning Department on April 15, 2008, with the following

seven (7) findings and subject to the following six (6)

conditions.

Findings:

1. The revised site plan and supporting documents

demonstrate that all applicable requirements of the

Zoning Ordinance, as well as other City ordinances,

standards, and requirements, can be met subject to

the conditions noted below.

2. The proposed improvement will promote safety and

convenience of vehicular traffic both within the site

and on the adjoining street. Walkways have been

incorporated to promote safety and convenience of

pedestrian traffic and access to adjoining services.

3. Off-street parking areas have been designed to avoid

common traffic problems and promote safety.

4. The proposed improvements should have a

satisfactory and harmonious relationship with the

development on-site as well as existing development

in the adjacent vicinity.

5. The proposed development will not have an

unreasonably detrimental nor an injurious effect upon

the natural characteristics and features of the site or

those of the surrounding area.

6. The improvements will allow Crittenton Hospital to

expand the cancer treatment services it provides to

the region.

7. The original Site Plan was approved by the Planning

Commission on July 17, 2007 and the building is

increasing less than 5,000 square feet; no other

significant changes are occurring to the Site Plan.

Conditions:

1. Tree Protection Fencing must be installed, inspected,

and approved by the City’s Landscape Architect prior

to issuance of the Land Improvement Permit for this

development.

2. Provide a landscape bond for replacement trees and

landscaping in the amount of $168,935.00, prior to

issuance of a Land Improvement Permit for this

development.

3. Appropriate approvals from the Oakland County Drain

Commissioner must be obtained prior to issuance of a

Land Improvement Permit for this project.

4. Address all comments in the memo from the City’s

Landscape Architect dated May 15, 2008, prior to

Final Approval by Staff.

5. Address comments from Building Department memo

dated April 29, 2008, prior to Building Plan approval.

6. Address comment two in the HRC letter dated April 29,

2008, regarding site distance for the proposed drive

approach, prior to Construction Plan approval.

Ms. Hardenburg recalled that when the applicants came

previously, they proposed a private healing garden. She

asked if that was now gone. Mr. Strother said that the

project still had it. Ms. Hardenburg asked where it would

be, and Mr. Strother pointed out the area south of the

building. The sidewalk went by it and people on the inside

could look out onto it.

A motion was made by Yukon, seconded by Schroeder, that this matter be

Approved.

The motion CARRIED by the following vote:

Aye

Boswell, Brnabic, Hardenburg, Hooper, Schroeder and Yukon

6 -

Absent

Dettloff, Kaltsounis and Reece

3 -

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Anzek announced that the Master Thoroughfare Plan

was being reviewed by McKenna Associates, for correlation

with the Master Land Use Plan and to see if there were any

issues or concerns. They would be bringing the Plan

forward in the near future for adoption by the Planning

Commission.

NEXT MEETING DATE

The Chair reminded the Commissioners that the next Regular

Meeting was scheduled for June 3, 2008.

ADJOURNMENT

Seeing no further business to come before the Commission

and upon motion by Yukon, the Chair adjourned the Regular

Meeting at 8:56 p.m., Michigan time.

_____________________________

William F. Boswell, Chairperson

Rochester Hills Planning Commission

_____________________________

Maureen Gentry, Recording Secretary