| Mr. Breuckman provided an overview of what has transpired. He indicated he |
|
| has been working with Mr. Bruhn for a number of months now - he has been |
|
| before this Commission for chimney and other structural work on the house. |
|
| His long term plans for the site go beyond the structural work, as he intends to |
|
| establish a commercial use on the site. That being the case, he has to go to the |
|
| Planning Commission for site plan and conditional use approval, as well as |
|
| getting a Certificate of Appropriateness approval for a number of items in |
|
| connection with the property. Because site plan review imposes a somewhat |
|
| higher standard of submittal requirement and expectation, this process needs to |
|
| be coordinated with HDC's review of the site. Accordingly, Mr. Bruhn went |
|
| before the Planning Commission last month to have an informal discussion to |
|
| gain their initial input on the site plan and the proposed use of the property. Mr. |
|
| Breuckman reported the Planning Commission was supportive of the use and |
|
| had suggestions about the location of the parking lot. The Commission also |
|
| suggested that Mr. Bruhn get in touch with Oakland County who has a small |
|
| business assistance program and classes. That is the reason the applicant is |
|
| not here tonight. As the applicant will have to submit more detailed plans to the |
|
| Planning Commission, what is being asked for tonight is more informal |
|
| discussion with the HDC similar to what occurred at the Planning Commission, |
|
| to give the applicant guidance and input as he develops his site plan. The HDC |
|
| is not being asked to act on anything tonight, but rather input on the four items |
|
| he is asking guidance for. Included in the packet is a letter from the applicant |
|
| outlining the items - the use of the property including patios with plantings in the |
|
| garden rooms (HDC approval is necessary for the exterior applications, but not |
|
| the use); the addition of 24 gravel parking spaces to the south of the house; the |
|
| removal of evergreen shrubs from the front of the house, and the installation of |
|
| an ADA approved handicap ramp beginning in the garage going out to the east |
|
| covered porch or on the front walkway leading to the front door. After tonight's |
|
| discussion, the applicant's next step will most likely be to go back to the |
|
| Planning Commission before bringing these issues back to the HDC for final |
|
| approval. Mr. Breuckman turned the floor back to the HDC and/or the |
|
|
| Mr. Caleb Bruhn summarized each of the items outlined in his father's letter. |
|
| The use is proposed as a restaurant, outdoor gardens and a gift shop. This |
|
| doesn't so much entail changes in the actual design or physical element, it is |
|
| just the use. He feels the shrubs on either side of the front entryway to the |
|
| house hide the structure too much. He proposes to remove them and replace |
|
| with low growing, period-appropriate plants or ground-cover to enhance the view |
|
| of the front of the home. He explained a sketch of the 24 parking spaces - Mr. |
|
| Bruhn wants to have the driveway wind around behind the house and have the |
|
| parking in the rear. The applicant is trying to save as many trees as possible |
|
| as evidenced by indentations within the parking lot. The parking lot material is |
|
| proposed as limestone - the Planning Commission was supportive of this idea |
|
