Crystal Report Viewer

1000 ‎Rochester Hills Dr‎. ‎

Rochester Hills, MI ‎

48309‎

(‎248‎) ‎656‎-‎4600‎

Home Page‎: ‎

www‎.‎rochesterhills‎.‎org‎

Rochester Hills

Minutes

Planning Commission

7:00 PM

1000 Rochester Hills Drive

Tuesday, December 5, 1995

CALL TO ORDER

Chairperson Eric Kaiser called the Regular Meeting to order at ‎7‎:‎30 ‎p‎.‎m‎. ‎in ‎

the Auditorium‎.‎

ROLL CALL

Present PC‎: ‎Chairperson Eric Kaiser‎

William Boswell‎

‎

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

2000-1581

November ‎21‎, ‎1995 ‎Regular Meeting‎

MOTION‎ by Ruggiero, support by Nowicki, to ‎approve‎ the minutes of ‎

November ‎21‎, ‎1995 ‎as submitted‎.‎

Ayes‎:‎All‎

Nays‎:‎None‎

Absent‎:‎Funk, Rosen ‎MOTION CARRIED‎

Approved

COMMUNICATIONS

1‎)‎Addendum to Ms‎. ‎Goodwin's staff report dated ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎95 ‎pertaining to Item ‎

No‎. ‎4‎.‎a under ‎NEW BUSINESS‎.‎

2‎)‎Letter from Mayo Investment Company dated ‎12‎/‎1‎/‎95‎.‎

3‎)‎Letter dated ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎95 ‎regarding Item No‎. ‎4‎.‎b under ‎NEW BUSINESS‎.‎

NEW BUSINESS

2000-1582

Request for Rezoning Recommendation ‎- ‎File No‎. ‎95‎-‎040 ‎- ‎Rezone ‎.‎5 ‎acre ‎

from B‎-‎2‎, General Business, to B‎-‎5‎, Automotive Service Business, southeast ‎

corner of Crooks and Auburn ‎(‎1981 ‎Auburn Rd‎.)‎, Parcel No‎. ‎15‎-‎33‎-‎101‎-‎001‎, ‎

Farid Jindo, James Mitchell, ‎2945 ‎Crooks Rd‎.‎, Rochester Hills, MI ‎48309‎, ‎

Applicants‎

Ms‎. ‎Karen Siemen, Attorney for the applicant, Mr‎. ‎Jim Mitchell and Mr‎. ‎

Farid Jindo, the applicants, were present‎.‎

The Chair gave the applicants a copy of the addendum to Ms‎. ‎Goodwin's ‎

staff report dated ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎95 ‎with an attached letter dated ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎95 ‎from the ‎

MDNR addressed to Mr‎. ‎Jindo‎. ‎He said the letter is pertinent to the ‎

contamination status of the site‎. ‎He asked the applicant why, if he was ‎

aware of that letter, did he not include that in his application to rezone‎. ‎He ‎

then asked the applicant how they could proceed tonight with it in mind that ‎

the DNR seems to consider that site still contaminated‎. ‎

The applicants took a moment to review the letter‎.‎

Member Nowicki said that he called the MDNR this afternoon because he ‎

was not aware of what a Type B clean‎-‎up level was‎. ‎In talking with Mr‎. ‎

Owens, he found out that there's been an audit on the property and it ‎

doesn't comply with the applicant's clean‎-‎up report‎. ‎The applicant had ‎6 ‎

months to come back to the MDNR and either correct the situation or reply ‎

to them‎. ‎

MOTION‎ by Ruggiero, support by Somerville, to ‎table the request to ‎

rezone‎ Parcel No‎. ‎15‎-‎33‎-‎101‎-‎001 ‎from B‎-‎2 ‎to B‎-‎5 ‎pending the applicant's ‎

explanation to the letter of ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎95 ‎from the MDNR‎.‎

Ayes‎:‎All‎

Nays‎:‎None‎

Absent‎:‎Funk, Rosen ‎MOTION CARRIED‎

Ms‎. ‎Siemen asked if there were any other issues the Planning Commission ‎

is concerned about that they could address before coming back‎.‎

Member Somerville explained to the applicants that, somewhere between ‎

now and ‎1998‎, Crooks Rd‎. ‎is planned to be widened‎. ‎She felt that it was ‎

important for them to know this because they are dealing with such a small ‎

parcel that could be impacted by the proposed right‎-‎of‎-‎way‎. ‎

Member Somerville also mentioned that the city has passed a sign ‎

ordinance which requires monument signs instead of pole signs‎. ‎MDOT ‎

will require them to have their monument sign back far enough on the ‎

property that it does not block the view from cars‎.‎

Tabled

2000-1583

Request for a Tree Removal Permit ‎- ‎File No‎. ‎94‎-‎428 ‎- ‎Avon Woods ‎

Subdivision, located on the south side of Hamlin, west of Dequindre, Parcel No‎. ‎

15‎-‎25‎-‎201‎-‎001‎, Fraser Fieldstone Limited Partnership, ‎24055 ‎Jefferson Ave‎.‎, ‎

#‎102‎, St‎. ‎Clair Shores, MI ‎48084‎, Applicant‎

Messrs‎. ‎Raif Harik, representing the developer, and Jim Jones, MCS ‎

Assoc‎. ‎were present‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin gave a brief summary of the project, noting that the applicants ‎

propose a ‎79‎-‎lot subdivision on a ‎30‎.‎7‎-‎acre parcel‎. (‎Staff report dated ‎

11‎/‎30‎/‎95 ‎has been placed on file and by reference becomes part of the ‎

record hereof‎.)‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said, in her letters to the Planning Department, she has ‎

consistently asked the applicant for additional alternatives that save more ‎

of the higher quality woodlands on site‎. ‎They have reached this point where ‎

the applicants still do not meet the ‎37‎% ‎minimum preservation requirement‎. ‎

In addition, she does not believe they've met a design alternative that saves ‎

the most amount of high quality woodlands on site‎. ‎She believes it is ‎

possible to do‎. ‎

The Chair read a letter dated ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎95 ‎from Mr‎. ‎& Mrs‎. ‎A‎. ‎Michael Preuss, ‎

1897 ‎Willowood, who expressed concern about connecting Willowood Rd‎. ‎

to the new subdivision, noting that the proposed subdivision already has ‎

three other means of egress‎. ‎The existing Willowood is a dead end gravel ‎

road which requires regular grading and chloriding during the dry weather‎. ‎

Increased traffic on this road would make this continued maintenance a real ‎

problem and more costly to the city‎. ‎They also note that the intersection of ‎

Willowood and Dequindre is already the site of many auto accidents and ‎

increased traffic would add to the hazard‎. ‎They ask what would be gained ‎

by linking the two subdivisions‎. (‎Letter has been placed on file and by ‎

reference becomes part of the record hereof‎.)‎

Mr‎. ‎Jim Jones, MCS Assoc‎.‎ ‎responded to the tree removal permit issue‎. ‎

He said their original plan showed ‎45‎% ‎of the trees to be saved‎. ‎The ‎45‎% ‎

included trees outside the building envelope but were in the front and side ‎

yards‎. ‎After meeting with Ms‎. ‎Lemke and her staff, they decided they would ‎

qualify those trees for removal, even though there may be a chance the ‎

builders may be able to preserve some of them‎. ‎He said they have ‎

qualified ‎165 ‎trees for removal that may not all have to be removed, ‎

however, they would be posting a bond for the replacement of those trees ‎

whether they are removed or not‎. ‎He said the difference between their tree ‎

count and Ms‎. ‎Lemke's count is ‎14 ‎trees‎. ‎Using their calculations, the total ‎

percentage of trees being saved is ‎37‎.‎2‎%. ‎Ms‎. ‎Lemke's calculation of ‎14 ‎

less trees is only ‎36‎% ‎which does not meet the ordinance requirement‎. ‎

The Chair asked Mr‎. ‎Jones what resolution he has for the difference of ‎

opinion in the number of trees being removed‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said he feels their count is correct‎. ‎He said the question is, ‎

"‎where are those ‎14 ‎trees that make up the discrepancy and how can they ‎

assure Ms‎. ‎Lemke that they can save them to meet the ‎37‎%"‎?‎

The Chair asked Mr‎. ‎Jones if he wished to make any other presentation or ‎

comments, other than the tree issue, noting that they would get back to the ‎

trees momentarily‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said they had quite a few meetings with the city's Traffic ‎

Engineer, Steve Dearing, with regard to the road pattern‎. ‎Their plan ‎

originally showed a more curvilinear road pattern, but Mr‎. ‎Dearing felt there ‎

was more of a need for direct access to Hamlin Rd‎. ‎instead of diverting the ‎

traffic back and forth throughout the subdivision‎. ‎The pattern now shows ‎

two access points to Hamlin Rd‎.‎

The Chair asked Mr‎. ‎Jones what his position was on the connection of their ‎

roads to adjacent subdivisions‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said there is an existing home on the site which they will be ‎

preserving that accesses Willowood Rd‎. ‎They felt that the intent was there ‎

for the street to be extended and interconnected with the system‎. ‎From an ‎

engineering standpoint, they feel that the connection should be made for ‎

better circulation of traffic and also it provides a secondary access to ‎

Willowood Rd‎.‎

The Chair said he presumes that their construction could occur without ‎

needing to use that road during the process of development‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said that is correct‎.‎

The Chair recognized those in the audience who wished to comment ‎

regarding this particular agenda item‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Helene Billock, ‎1919 ‎Willowood‎, said she and her husband are not ‎

opposed to the development of this subdivision‎. ‎They are concerned with ‎

certain issues relating to its development‎. ‎They expressed concern that the ‎

amount of trees proposed for removal were excessive‎. ‎She said their lots ‎

are nicely wooded and would not be compatible with the new subdivision‎. ‎

Of major concern is the opening up of Willowood Rd‎. ‎into the new ‎

subdivision‎. ‎She said the average width of their lots is ‎100‎' and most are ‎

around ‎300‎' deep‎. ‎The proposed homes to be built have average lot ‎

widths of ‎90‎' and approximate depth of ‎120‎'‎. ‎She added that the residents ‎

of the MacKary Subdivision would like to maintain their road as a gravel ‎

road‎. ‎They are concerned that the additional traffic generated from this ‎

area will put more wear and tear on their road‎. ‎At this time, their street also ‎

aligns the only entrance and exit to the Dequindre Estates Mobile Home ‎

Park across the road in Shelby Twp‎. ‎Between the traffic on Dequindre and ‎

the traffic trying to exit the trailer park and the MacKary Subdivision ‎

residents trying to exit their subdivision, it creates great havoc‎. ‎If they ‎

connect Willowood Rd‎.‎, the increased traffic will only make the situation ‎

more hazardous‎. ‎There are no traffic controls in this area and there are ‎

many accidents at the corner of Willowood and Dequindre‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Michael Spicko, ‎1830 ‎Willowood‎, said that he provided signed ‎

petitions to the commissioners of everyone on his street along with a letter ‎

from himself‎. ‎He said the benefits of raising his family on a dead‎-‎end street ‎

are self evident‎. ‎He said it is the same reason city planners and ‎

developers now prefer cul‎-‎de‎-‎sacs and winding ‎"‎no through‎" ‎streets as ‎

opposed to old fashioned grid‎-‎type city design that lend themselves and ‎

are conducive to large volumes of cut‎-‎through traffic‎. ‎If the city eventually ‎

rejects their plea regarding Willowood, he would then expect the developer ‎

to bear the cost of paving Willowood since the gravel road would not ‎

accommodate the increased volume of traffic and the dust would be ‎

intolerable‎. ‎Regardless of the outcome, he wants to be assured that all ‎

construction traffic will use Hamlin Rd‎. ‎exclusively‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Spicko read into the record a letter dated ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎95 ‎from David and ‎

Deborah Van Maele who live at ‎1760 ‎Willowood‎. ‎They express opposition ‎

about the connection of Willowood Rd‎. ‎to the new subdivision because of ‎

the increased traffic that would result ‎(‎letter has been placed on file and by ‎

reference becomes part of the record hereof‎).‎

Mr‎. ‎Spicko also spoke on behalf of his neighbor ‎Mr‎. ‎Raymond Waroff‎ who ‎

expresses concern that the connection of Willowood to the proposed ‎

subdivision will severely compromise the integrity of their neighborhood for ‎

several reasons, which he notes‎:‎

1‎.‎No conformity or relationship between lot sizes or house designs ‎

between the Avon Woods Subdivision and his‎.‎

2‎.‎A Willowood Rd‎. ‎connection is not necessary since there will be three ‎

other means of egress to the subdivision‎. ‎Because Hamlin ‎

Rd‎. ‎is a mile road and is paved, it would be the logical road ‎

to bear the burden of an additional several hundred cars a ‎

day‎. ‎The dust created from the increased traffic will become ‎

unbearable in the summer and maintenance of the road will ‎

be required almost weekly with regard to grading‎. ‎

Mr‎. ‎Kenneth Abentrop, ‎1676 ‎Willowood‎, said that he and his neighbor ‎

across the street, Mr‎. ‎Murphy, will be the most impacted by this ‎

development because the length of their lots will be the backs of several ‎

small lots with new homes‎. ‎They're not against the new development; they ‎

just don't want to bear the burden of their traffic‎. ‎

Mr‎. ‎Don DeLater, ‎1480 ‎E‎. ‎Hamlin‎, owns the lot just west of the subject ‎

parcel‎. ‎He recalled about five or six years ago that Mrs‎. ‎Stramaglia was ‎

stopped by the MDNR from logging that parcel‎. ‎He wondered how the ‎

developer could get a permit to take trees down when the MDNR stopped ‎

the previous owner from removing trees because they classified it as a ‎

wetland‎. ‎He said he didn't believe that all of that land was wetland‎.‎

The Chair asked Ms‎. ‎Goodwin if she would explain the wetland status of the ‎

area that's being developed and it's relationship to the tree removal‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin said the wetlands on the property total ‎1‎.‎9 ‎acres and are ‎

regulated by the city and could possibly be regulated by the MDNR‎. ‎

However, the developer is not proposing any activity within the boundaries ‎

of the wetland as it has been delineated by the city's wetland consultant‎. ‎

The proposed tree removal is outside the limits of the wetland boundary as ‎

well as the ‎25‎' wetland buffer‎.‎

The Chair said he would assume that, if there was a complaint years ago ‎

concerning removal of trees from the wetland area, it was because of tree, ‎

wood or lumber removal having nothing to do with this project‎. ‎He said the ‎

MDNR is aware of the project and they have posed no complaints about it‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin said that is correct‎.‎

The Chair asked Ms‎. ‎Goodwin if she would address Ms‎. ‎Billock's concern ‎

for the large number of trees being removed from projects like this and ‎

never replaced‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin explained that the city's Tree Preservation Ordinance will ‎

allow tree removal up to ‎37‎% ‎of the regulated trees on site‎. ‎What they're ‎

trying to determine with the developer tonight is whether the ‎37‎% ‎

preservation has been met given the current layout of the subdivision plat‎. ‎

As part of the tree removal permit, the ordinance requires a ‎1‎:‎1 ‎

replacement of the trees that are ‎6‎" ‎diameter breast height and above‎. ‎The ‎

replacement is ‎1 ‎tree of ‎2‎½‎" ‎caliper‎. ‎If the replacement tree is greater than ‎

2‎½‎" ‎caliper, then they get credit for ‎1‎½ ‎trees‎. ‎The applicant has included a ‎

tree replacement plan that reflects that formula‎. ‎Further, the ordinance ‎

requires that all feasible and prudent alternatives have been explored to ‎

save as many of the native trees on the property as possible‎. ‎It sets forth ‎

the species that are acceptable to the city for replacement as well‎.‎

The Chair added that the applicant has to provide a bond or some type of ‎

guarantee that the replacement trees will survive‎. ‎If they don't, then the ‎

bond is used to guarantee replacement‎.‎

The Chair asked Ms‎. ‎Goodwin to explain what the policy is regarding the ‎

continuation of streets and why that's part of the ordinance and why it's a ‎

goal that is striven for in such projects‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin responded that, in the City of Rochester Hills, the safety ‎

aspect of subdivision design is paramount‎. ‎The design standards that are ‎

set forth in its local ordinance state that stub streets have to continued so ‎

that there is a continuous road network system that allows for circulation ‎

between subdivisions‎. ‎The idea is that, over time, there will be ‎

neighborhoods and not just subdivisions and that, from a fire, safety, and ‎

emergency standpoint, it allows the fire department and other emergency ‎

vehicles to have more than one way to get in and out when there is an ‎

emergency‎. ‎Staff can only review plans based on those standards‎. ‎The ‎

Planning Commission and City Council have discretion to waive or modify ‎

those standards‎.‎

Council representative Somerville agreed that the existing Willowood, as a ‎

gravel road, could not handle the increased traffic that would result from ‎

connecting it through to the new subdivision‎. ‎She said she would like to ‎

see a berm with trees to close Willowood off‎. ‎In addition, she said she ‎

would like to see Lot ‎10 ‎eliminated and a cul‎-‎de‎-‎sac installed‎. ‎She felt it ‎

would be to the developer's benefit as well as to the residents who live on ‎

Willowood‎. ‎

Member Boswell said he agrees with Member Somerville‎. ‎He said it ‎

makes more sense to have the connection of the Avon Lakes Village and ‎

Avon Woods Subdivisions because the homes and lot sizes are relatively ‎

similar‎. ‎He felt they should be discussing the tree removal permit first, ‎

because it they don't approve that, there wouldn't be any need for a ‎

connection to Willowood anyway‎.‎

The Chair asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke if she would respond to the disagreement ‎

between herself and the applicant in terms of the number of trees to be ‎

removed‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said, first of all, that ‎37‎% ‎is a minimum percentage‎. ‎In most of ‎

the subdivisions in Rochester Hills, that is an easy number to come up with ‎

because there aren't a lot of high quality woodlands left‎. ‎This site happens ‎

to be a high quality woodland‎. ‎In her letter of ‎2‎/‎22‎/‎95‎, she notes that the ‎

caliper of the trees often exceed ‎20‎" ‎in diameter at breast height ‎(‎4‎½ ‎feet ‎

from the ground‎)‎, with some trees reaching ‎40‎". ‎The overstory is ‎

comprised of oak, maple, elm with tulip tree and cherry‎. ‎That is rather rare ‎

in the city right now to find that mixture‎. ‎Observed wildlife in the area ‎

included deer‎. ‎She said they are still trying to preserve large areas of the ‎

woodland or larger areas or connected areas‎.‎

She said there are a lot of trees on the survey that are off site which is why ‎

there is a discrepancy in the number of trees‎. ‎There are some trees that ‎

were surveyed by a basil area method that are not in the wooded wetlands‎. ‎

The petitioner is saving the trees in the wooded wetland area‎. ‎The majority ‎

of the trees in the upland areas of the woodland are being removed‎. ‎

Continuing, she said they've asked for additional grading information, which ‎

is sometimes hard to get at a conceptual level‎. ‎She is basing her review of ‎

the trees to be removed on their past experience, which is that trees inside ‎

side lot lines or front yards generally will be damaged by the installation of ‎

utilities‎. ‎They're trying to get the grading to work between the two side lot ‎

lines‎. ‎That's why they are required to be bonded‎. ‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said that, along the eastern property line, there are a lot of large ‎

trees that are neighboring property outside the proposed subdivision that ‎

probably would be impacted, either by a proposed utility or by grading‎. ‎

She said they have concerns about that also‎. ‎

Mr‎. ‎Raif Harik, developer‎, said he believes the ordinance allows you to ‎

count those trees on the side lot lines and front lot lines as being preserved‎. ‎

He said they have counted those trees as being removed, even though ‎

they're fairly sure that some of them will be preserved‎. ‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones responded to Ms‎. ‎Lemke's request for grading information by ‎

stating that it's difficult to prepare a detailed grading plan with a preliminary ‎

plat because you're talking about concept as far as road patterns‎. ‎So far, ‎

they have set what they feel are the pavement elevations and they've ‎

indicated that all of the house grades will be set within the parameters of ‎2‎' ‎

to ‎3‎' above the top of curb‎. ‎When they met with Ms‎. ‎Lemke's associate, he ‎

indicated that, at this stage, without having a detailed engineering drawing ‎

of the grading plan showing all four corners of the house grades, location of ‎

the house, etc‎.‎, they can't really determine whether or not those trees can ‎

be saved‎. ‎That's when they agreed they would qualify those trees as being ‎

removed‎. ‎They feel, from a preliminary plat standpoint, they've given ‎

enough detail grades that they can‎. ‎They will be providing a more detailed ‎

grading plan with their engineering drawings‎.‎

The Chair asked Mr‎. ‎Jones, for the sake of discussion, to convince Ms‎. ‎

Lemke that they've met the ‎37‎% ‎minimum tree preservation‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said he would need to see, on each lot, what trees are qualifying ‎

as being removed and compare them with his count and address each tree ‎

individually‎. ‎He said when they see a tree that's at the front or side property ‎

line, it's a discretionary call as to whether it's going to be counted as ‎

removed or saved‎. ‎Typically, they try to be conservative; if it's right on the ‎

line, they qualify it to be removed and if it's out of the building envelope in ‎

the rear yard, then they feel it should be saved‎. ‎He believes this is where ‎

the discrepancies are‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said if the applicants reached the minimum of ‎37‎%‎, they still ‎

would have probably recommended denial of the tree removal permit ‎

because they are only saving the minimum of ‎37‎% ‎and this is still a high ‎

quality woodland and that they would recommend the applicant try and ‎

preserve other alternatives that save the high quality woodland, which would ‎

mean reconfiguring some lots or reducing lots‎. ‎This ordinance does allow ‎

them to do that through the alternative clause if there are high quality ‎

standards‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke if there's a particular recommendation she is ‎

looking for as far as which areas she would like them to try and preserve‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said they have recommended preserving the central area ‎

above the wetlands or the area contiguous to the wooded wetland area ‎

(‎Lots ‎30‎-‎35 ‎and Lots ‎53‎-‎49‎). ‎All of the high quality woodlands are to the ‎

west end of the site and go all the way across north and south‎. ‎They prefer ‎

to preserve contiguous woodlands rather than an isolated pocket here and ‎

there‎. ‎It would be preferable to save something closer to the wetlands so ‎

that it would expand the wooded wetland area‎.‎

Member Ferrera asked what the record has been of subdivisions ‎

developed in the city where trees falling within the side or front yard lot lines ‎

were counted as being removed but were in fact, able to be saved‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said, based on the subdivisions she has inspected for release ‎

of final bond, usually the number of trees to be removed exceeded those ‎

that were counted for removal‎. ‎That, primarily, is because they have not ‎

been involved in reviewing final engineering plans‎. ‎

Member Ferrera asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke more specifically, if she is saying there ‎

are more trees removed from the number that were identified as being ‎

removed or there are more trees removed from those that were identified to ‎

be removed plus those that were not likely to survive? He said it's hard to ‎

believe that every tree within the building envelope would be removed and ‎

yet we're counting them as if they will all be removed‎.‎

Member Nowicki asked, when they are talking about the building envelope, ‎

are they taking into consideration the drip line of the trees that are out of the ‎

envelope‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said it depends on the method of construction and how badly ‎

the roots are impacted and the species of the trees‎. ‎She said they look at ‎

all of that when they're trying to decide whether the trees will survive or not‎. ‎

Responding to Mr‎. ‎Ferrera's question, she said they usually don't divide the ‎

trees up into a category of trees that might not make it; they usually look at a ‎

whole count, but they consider very carefully the trees in the side yards and ‎

front yards as not surviving‎. ‎Although everyone wants to save the trees in ‎

the building envelope, by the time you run the water and sewer lines and ‎

telephone lines, and do the final grading, usually those trees in the building ‎

envelope will not make it, no matter how hard you try‎. ‎That's what they have ‎

consistently found‎. ‎One of the biggest reasons for that is that the protective ‎

fencing is not maintained properly‎. ‎The city is taking steps to rectify some ‎

of those situations‎. ‎They have generally found that more trees are removed ‎

totally than what they estimated‎. ‎That's not to say that they're not meeting ‎

the ‎37‎% ‎by removing them because she believes that probably ‎99‎% ‎of the ‎

subdivisions saved more than ‎37‎%‎, which is what she strives for, especially ‎

where there are high quality woodlands involved‎. ‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin agreed with Ms‎. ‎Lemke and asked the commissioners to ‎

keep in mind that the Planning Commission reviews the tree removal ‎

permit at this conceptual level and then there is typically two years that goes ‎

by before there is actual land improvement on the property‎. ‎By the time ‎

they get final construction plan approval to do grading, utility work and land ‎

balancing, it can become an enforcement nightmare and very costly for the ‎

city to try and regulate tree removal when they're preserving the bare ‎

minimum‎. ‎They end up reviewing every single tree on that property‎. ‎By this ‎

time, the developer is gone and those individual lots are sold to builders ‎

and then the city forester has to review tree permits for individual lots and ‎

then he's in a quandary about who's responsible for a certain tree that ‎

should have been saved that has been removed‎. ‎When the proposed ‎

layout of the plat is this close to the minimum tree preservation, it is setting ‎

creating a setting for a major enforcement headache‎.‎

Member Ruggiero asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke what she thought would be a ‎

reasonable percentage of tree preservation to start at given all these ‎

variables that have been discussed on this particular project‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said it's very difficult to deal in percentages‎. ‎She prefers to ‎

look at it as a total design and base it on where the areas of high quality ‎

woodlands exist, as well as encouraging the petitioner to look at what they ‎

can do to reconfigure the lots such that the wooded areas can be ‎

preserved‎. ‎

Member Boswell said he doesn't believe the applicant has looked at all the ‎

alternatives of preserving more trees‎.‎

Member Somerville asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke where most of the older trees are ‎

located‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke said they tend to be right above the wetland in the center of the ‎

property and they spread out and get smaller as they get closer to the edge ‎

of the site‎.‎

Member Somerville asked Ms‎. ‎Lemke if she felt that a realistic tree ‎

preservation starting figure would be ‎45‎%. ‎

Ms‎. ‎Lemke replied ‎"‎yes‎."‎

Member Nowicki asked the applicant if the tree survey was done after they ‎

laid out the subdivision‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said it was done prior to laying out the subdivision‎.‎

Member Nowicki asked why they are removing ‎26‎" ‎oak trees and ‎48‎" ‎

maple trees‎. ‎He said it doesn't appear that they made an effort to avoid ‎

removing these large trees‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Harik said this is the ‎4‎th plan they've submitted‎. ‎He said the typical ‎

building envelope is ‎3‎,‎300 ‎sq‎. ‎ft‎. ‎The homes are mostly ‎1‎,‎500 ‎sq‎. ‎ft‎. ‎

colonials, leaving an extra ‎1‎,‎500 ‎sq‎. ‎ft‎. ‎where a lot of trees will be saved‎. ‎

Typically, the homeowner would like to preserve the trees‎.‎

The Chair asked, ‎"‎if Willowood were determined to not become a ‎

connector, then the only way to save trees doesn't occur because now there ‎

isn't a street there when there aren't that many trees there‎. ‎Now they can ‎

reconfigure much of the plan, perhaps, by moving the lots and opening up ‎

the area more, preserving more of the high quality woodlands as suggested ‎

by Ms‎. ‎Lemke‎." ‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said the major control in the layout was more or less a ‎

north‎/‎south direction and the two access points out to Hamlin Rd‎. ‎Whether ‎

they connect to Willowood or eliminate the connection, that really would not ‎

affect the traffic pattern that much‎.‎

The Chair asked if they came up with this concept based on Mr‎. ‎Dearing's ‎

recommendation or theirs‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said it was between Mr‎. ‎Dearing and the Planning Consultant, ‎

Gary Wilson‎.‎

The Chair called for a recess to give the applicants and Ms‎. ‎Lemke a ‎

chance to discuss some alternatives‎.‎

RECESS ‎- ‎8:57‎ p‎.‎m‎. - ‎9:10‎ p‎.‎m‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said they talked about the possibility of losing some lots in the ‎

vicinity east of the wetlands, just outside the boundary‎. ‎They would have to ‎

look at the tree count to see where the larger stands of trees are and the ‎

larger diameter and possibly lose a few lots in that area and either create ‎

open spaces or go with wider lots to allow for the preservation of more ‎

trees adjacent to the wetlands‎. ‎They will look at the species on each lot and ‎

see which lots make the most sense to eliminate‎.‎

The Chair asked Mr‎. ‎Jones to explain how they might propose Willowood if ‎

it's not a connected street, in order not to lose more lots‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Jones said the difficulty is that they would have to create a cul‎-‎de‎-‎sac ‎

with a ‎120‎' wide right‎-‎of‎-‎way instead of ‎60‎'‎. ‎If they wanted a landscaped ‎

island in the cul‎-‎de‎-‎sac, they would have to go with a ‎140‎' wide right‎-‎of‎-‎way‎. ‎

Therefore, the cul‎-‎de‎-‎sac would have to either go onto Lot ‎10 ‎or ‎11 ‎and ‎

also encroach part of lots ‎9 ‎and ‎12‎. ‎He would like some idea from the ‎

Planning Commission if that is definitely the direction they would like them ‎

to investigate‎. ‎He said they would have to meet with the Engineering ‎

Department and go over the geometrics of what cul‎-‎de‎-‎sac they would like ‎

there and make sure it could work‎.‎

Member Ferrera said he agrees that there is no compelling reason to ‎

connect Willowood if this was the only secondary access into the new ‎

subdivision‎. ‎The MacKary Subdivision already has several access points ‎

and the new subdivision, even with the elimination of Willowood, will still ‎

have three access points‎. ‎

With regard to the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Member Ferrera said his ‎

great concern has always been that the percentage of trees preserved is ‎

not the issue, but rather the quality of trees‎. ‎He hoped that the applicant ‎

would not use the area between lots ‎8‎-‎12 ‎to compensate for the additional ‎

14 ‎trees, but rather save the high quality trees near the wetland area as ‎

suggested by Ms‎. ‎Lemke‎.‎

Mr‎. ‎Harik said they propose looking at the ‎10 ‎lots that back up to the ‎

wetland and saving three lots in that area‎. ‎

MOTION‎ by Somerville, support by Nowicki, that the Planning Commission ‎

approve with conditions‎ the Tree Removal Permit for the proposed Avon ‎

Woods Subdivision, File No‎. ‎94‎-‎428‎, referencing correspondence from ‎

Linda Lemke dated ‎10‎/‎30‎/‎95‎, ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎95‎, ‎2‎/‎22‎/‎95 ‎and ‎8‎/‎3‎/‎94 ‎as well as the ‎

staff report dated ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎95‎, based on the following findings and providing ‎

the following conditions are met‎:‎

CONDITIONS‎:‎

1‎.‎That a bond, surety or letter of credit be established once the final count ‎

of trees is determined after the applicant's reconfiguration of the ‎

site‎.‎

2‎.‎That an absolute minimum of the tree conservation ordinance standards ‎

of ‎37‎% ‎be saved to the satisfaction of the Planning staff and Ms‎. ‎

Lemke, encouraging the applicant to save more than that, and that ‎

the ‎37‎% ‎incorporate the larger and high quality trees that have been ‎

referenced‎.‎

Ayes‎:‎Boswell, Ferrera, Nowicki, Somerville, Kaiser‎

Nays‎:‎Ruggiero‎

Absent‎:‎Funk, Rosen ‎MOTION CARRIED‎

Approved

2000-1584

Request for Tentative Approval of the Preliminary Plat Recommendation ‎- ‎File ‎

No‎. ‎94‎-‎428 ‎- ‎Avon Woods Subdivision‎

MOTION‎ by Somerville, support by Nowicki, to ‎recommend conditional ‎

approval‎ of the Tentative Preliminary Plat dated Received ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎95 ‎for the ‎

proposed Avon Woods Subdivision, File No‎. ‎94‎-‎428‎, referencing the staff ‎

report dated ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎95‎, letter from Dr‎. ‎Jaworski dated ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎93‎, further ‎

based upon this evening's discussion with the inclusion of the following ‎

findings and conditions‎:‎

FINDINGS‎:‎

1‎.‎Applicable Ordinance Code provisions and regulations can be met‎.‎

2‎.‎Adequate public utilities are available to service the proposed ‎

development‎.‎

3‎.‎A reasonable street and lot layout and orientation can be achieved with ‎

the elimination of the Willowood Rd‎. ‎connection for the following ‎

reasons‎:‎

a‎)‎That the neighbors represented are opposed to the connection of ‎

Willowood Rd‎.‎

b‎)‎That the applicant, while it doesn't resist making the connection, is not ‎

insisting on it‎.‎

c‎)‎That there would be a difference in the quality of the roadways between ‎

the two subdivisions and that the existing subdivision is ‎

concerned that there would be an attraction for the new ‎

subdivision to use their existing road for cut‎-‎through traffic ‎

and increase the traffic on their road‎.‎

d‎)‎That the front yard setbacks for the existing subdivision would not, in any ‎

way, be equal to the new setbacks for the planned ‎

subdivision‎.‎

e‎)‎That fire and safety concerns are able to be adequately addressed by ‎

other alternative means of access, specifically Gerald Ave‎. ‎

and Hamlin Rd‎. ‎

f‎)‎That the existing MacKary Subdivision, the proposed subdivision and the ‎

surrounding subdivisions have multiple access points, even ‎

without the Willowood connection‎.‎

4‎.‎The Environmental Plan, showing no substantially harmful effects, can be ‎

achieved subject to the conditions listed below‎:‎

CONDITIONS‎:‎

1‎.‎That the site not be connected to the existing Willowood Rd‎. ‎at all‎.‎

2‎.‎That at least three lots be eliminated in the area between Lots ‎29 ‎and ‎38 ‎

and that that area, whether it's Open Space or otherwise, thereby ‎

accommodate the Tree Removal Permit and the other concerns ‎

previously identified by Ms‎. ‎Lemke‎.‎

Member Nowicki suggested that they change the name ‎"‎Willowood Rd‎." ‎in ‎

the new subdivision to ‎"‎Peterwood Ct‎." ‎because there's only going to be ‎3 ‎

or ‎4 ‎lots on that road‎.‎

Ayes‎:‎Boswell, Ferrera, Nowicki, Somerville, Kaiser‎

Nays‎:‎Ruggiero‎

Absent‎:‎Funk, Rosen ‎MOTION CARRIED‎

Member Ruggiero clarified her ‎"‎no‎" ‎votes by stating that she is not ‎

opposed to this development‎. ‎She would like to see more trees saved and ‎

she is opposed to the connection of Willowood Rd‎. ‎She voted ‎"‎no‎" ‎

because she believes that it's appropriate for the Planning Commission to ‎

have seen a clean site plan‎. ‎While the conditions covered all of the ‎

concerns, she said she doesn't feel comfortable sending this forward to ‎

City Council with a recommendation of approval without seeing a ‎"‎clean‎" ‎

plan‎.‎

Recommended for Approval to the City Council Regular Meeting

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

The Chair said he would be interested in seeing a concept plan for the ‎

Auburn rezoning when it comes back to the table‎.‎

Ms‎. ‎Goodwin reported on the special City Council meeting held last ‎

Saturday‎. ‎The main topic of discussion was signs‎. ‎Ultimately, the sign ‎

ordinance is likely to be removed from the Zoning Ordinance all together ‎

and put into the regulatory ordinance along side the sign regulations that ‎

call for the permits‎.‎

NEXT MEETING DATE

The Chair announced that the next Planning Commission meeting is ‎

scheduled for December ‎19‎, ‎1995‎.‎

ADJOURNMENT

Hearing no further business to come before the Planning Commission, ‎

Chairperson Kaiser adjourned the regular meeting at ‎10‎:‎05 ‎p‎.‎m‎.‎