MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2001, 7:00 P.M.,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, MIDLAND, MICHIGAN
1. Roll Call.
PRESENT: Commission members – Baker, Garner, Geisler, Kozakiewicz, Lind, Senesac, Rapanos, Slicker, Wieland
ABSENT: Slicker (excused)
OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Ostgarden, City Planner; Cheri Standfest, Administrative Assistant; and 12 others
2. Approval of the minutes of the meeting of February 27, 2001.
It was moved by Senesac, seconded by Baker, to approve the minutes of the meeting of February 27, 2001. The minutes were approved as presented.
3. Public hearings:
a. Site Plan No. 201 – the request of Fusco, Shaffer & Pappas, Inc. on behalf of the Affordable Housing Alliance, for review and approval of a site plan for Granite Club Acres, a residential development of 11 townhouses (one 5-unit building and one 6-unit building on .92 acres at the north end of Gerald Court extended.
b. Site plan 202 – the request of Chuck Wellman, on behalf of Bill Daily, for site plan review and approval of an eight unit residential building at 4912 Meyers Street (the east side of Meyers Street north of West Wheeler Street) [see transcript].
4. Public Comments.
Mark Andy, 3401 Mark Twain Drive, addressed the Planning Commission to wish Steve Rapanos a happy birthday.
5. Old Business.
There was no old business.
6. New Business.
Based on a request by the petitioner, a motion was made by Senesac and seconded by Rapanos to consider Site Plan 201. By voice vote the motion was approved.
Staff examined that the site plan was revised to comply with the side yard setback requirement of Condition #1. However, if the “bulb” (cul-de-sac) is not eliminated, there will be a front yard encroachment by the southerly building. The building will have to be repositioned, or a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals would be required. In response to an issue raised by the owner of the Anchor Downs Apartments during the public hearing about the proximity of the new buildings to his buildings, Ms. Garner inquired about the how far the south building was set back from the property line. It appeared that the building is approximately 30 feet from the side property line at the closet point.
The site plan was revised to include a dumpster pad at the east side of the property. The dumpster will be screened and privately serviced. Including a dumpster met Condition #4 of the staff report.
The petitioners do not desire to install the fence at the site at this time, raising a concern that when Phase Two is planned, the fence will be relocated. Condition #2 was modified to require the fence but allow the petitioner flexibility to relocate the fence without having to obtain Planning Commission and City Council approval, should Phase two be developed.
A final concern about the project was the extension of Gerald Court and the design of the north end of the street. It was also not clear how the sidewalk that is in the plan would be provided. There was some concern about approving the plan with an off-site improvement for which the design was not complete. The Commission agreed to modify Condition #3 to allow the construction of the street and the extension of utilities to occur to the satisfaction of City staff. There were no other objections or concerns about the elements of the site plan.
Ms. Garner expressed her desire and support for the project.
It was moved by Senesac, seconded by Garner, to approve Site Plan No. 201, with the following conditions:
1. An opaque fence shall be constructed along the east side of the property.
2. The “bulb” at the north end of Gerald Court shall be eliminated and the street and utilities extended of approximately 100 feet north. The street design and a required turnaround at the north end of the street shall meet City department approvals.
3. Sidewalk is to be provided along the Gerald Court extension.
4. Stormwater retention and/or detention shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineering Department.
Vote on the motion:
YEAS: Baker, Garner, Geisler, Kozakiewicz, Lind, Rapanos, Senesac, Wieland
There was no support for the consideration of Site Plan No. 202. Commissioner Lind requested staff verification that the fence along the north property line met the minimum requirements for screening.
Commissioner Senesac raised a question and concern about the current definition of a cul-de-sac. The recent interpretation by the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the definition was a concern to him. He requested that the Planning Commission ask staff to look into this issue and report back to the Commission. The Commission concurred that it should be reviewed and requested staff to research the matter.
There were no communications.
8. Report of the Chairman.
The Chairman had no information to report.
9. Report of the Planning Director.
Mark Ostgarden provided the Commission with an update of City Council activity. He also noted that three public hearings on site plans are anticipated to take place on March 27th. The projects include Somerset Pines, the Dow Employees’ Credit Union and Taco Bell.
Adjournment at approximately 9:25 p.m. was moved by Baker and seconded by Rapanos, and unanimously approved.