Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables Chick‑fil‑A windscreen proposal after commissioners raise aesthetic and durability concerns
Summary
Chipman Design’s request for retractable vinyl windscreens at the Chick‑fil‑A drive‑thru at 11700 Middle Belt Road was tabled so the petitioner can return within roughly two months with alternative designs addressing aesthetic, durability and maintenance concerns raised by multiple commissioners.
The Planning Commission on a motion voted to table a proposal by Chipman Design Architecture on behalf of Chick‑fil‑A to install retractable vinyl windscreens at the drive‑thru canopy at 11700 Middle Belt Road.
Krista Brazeau, the petitioner’s representative, presented wind‑study data and operational details. She said local wind records and airport weather data show site‑specific conditions that exceed 35 mph on roughly 30–45 days a year (primarily in colder months) and that a retractable system would protect team members taking orders in the drive‑thru. "The retractable windscreen is designed to protect the team members during these high periods of wind and cold weather," Brazeau said, describing a clamp‑on attachment that she said requires no drilling of existing columns and includes pressure‑relief gaps and manufacturer maintenance recommendations.
Commissioners responded with sustained critique on multiple grounds: aesthetics on a high‑visibility corridor, the tarp‑like appearance and likely weathering, the two‑year warranty and replacement frequency, the practicality of daily deployment/retraction in variable Michigan weather, and ordinance compatibility given the temporary‑fence feel of the proposal. Several members asked why a more permanent or enclosed solution (motorized roll‑up shades housed in a cassette, storm shutters on a track, vertical louvers or other systems that store out of sight) was not proposed. Commissioners urged a color and material consistent with the building’s finishes and asked for alternatives that would not present a long‑term visual detriment to Middle Belt Road.
Given the concerns and petitioner willingness to develop alternatives, the Commission voted to table the petition and invited the petitioner to return with revised design options within a reasonable period (staff suggested up to two months) rather than approve the presented vinyl panel system. The tabling motion was made and supported by commissioners, and staff will work with the petitioner on timing for return to the Commission.
