MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION,
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2005, 7:00 P.M.,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL,
1. Roll Call
PRESENT: Baker, Eyre, Kanuch, Kozakiewicz, Mead, Senesac, Svenson and Wieland
OTHERS PRESENT: Jon Lynch, Assistant City Manager; Cheri Standfest, Community Development Specialist and 3 others.
2. Approval of Minutes
Regular Meeting of February 8, 2005.
It was moved by Eyre and supported by Kanuch to approve the minutes of February 8th. The minutes were unanimously approved.
3. Public Hearings
A. Zoning Petition No. 514 –Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 3705 Letts Street, owned by Alpine Mobile Homes from Township zoning to Residential D. [See transcript.]
B. Zoning Petition No. 515 – Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 3721 Letts Street, owned by Alpine Mobile Homes from Township zoning to Residential D. [See transcript.]
C. Zoning Petition No. 516 – Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 6201 West Wackerly Street, owned by Emery and Dorthey Sova, from Township zoning to Residential A-1. [See transcript.]
D. Zoning Petition No. 517 – Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 4412 Waldo Avenue, owned by Tony Stevens, from Township zoning to Residential A-4. [See transcript.]
E. Zoning Petition No. 518 – Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 4705 Isabella Street, owned by Richard and Loretta Miller, from Township zoning to Regional Commercial. [See transcript.]
F. Zoning Petition No. 520 – Consideration of a petition initiated by the City of Midland Planning Commission to zone property at 6305 West Wackerly Street, owned by Emery and Dorthey Sova, from Township zoning to Residential A-1. [See transcript.]
4. Public Comments (not related to agenda items)
5. Old Business
Zoning of Recently Annexed Property – Preliminary Assessment 31 Cheryl Drive.
This property has not yet been posted for public hearing. The process usually includes considering the surrounding land uses, consulting with the owner of the property, etc.
In this case, we have a parcel that was annexed into the city in August 2004. When the Planning Commission considered this particular parcel, it could not come to consensus as to what the appropriate zoning classification would be. We invited the property owner to come and state what they seemed appropriate for the property. The petitioner petitioned for annexation because they wanted access to city water. The zoning application became a little difficult, because, when you look at the future land use plan for the area, it shows this should be commercial. When you visit the area, you find that it is a fairly well developed residential area. The Homer Township Plan calls for commercial land uses along the major corridor, but back away from the major corridor, it calls for residential land uses further back. Our land use designation goes approximately 400 feet to the south of Isabella Street. The subject property is an established residential dwelling. It is not temporary in nature. It is a detached single-family structure. There is also a single-family residential structure located to the south of this parcel. The dilemma is to determine how the Planning Commission should proceed with the zoning of this parcel. We believe the property owner would like to see a residential zoning classification applied to this property. They are interested in being able to rebuild their property in the event of a disaster.
Carey Ellis stated that they have lived there for about 13 years now. They are here to request a residential zoning. This would be best for then and consistent with the surrounding properties. They would not like to be a nonconforming use. Who would want to buy a home with nonconforming status? There is a lot of residential property in this area.
Commissioner Baker thinks it should be residential. Commissioner Wieland thinks their request is reasonable. He recalls a lot of discussion of the M-20 corridor when the land use plan was last updated. He does not recall a great deal of discussion on the depth.
Commissioner Svenson asked if it was residential, how that would affect the master plan.
Lynch stated there are two issues. If the future land use map is valid or very recent, then you certainly would want to take action in that direction. If you find the future land use map is not valid, or changes have occurred in the neighborhood since the plan was updated, you could zone this property and then change your master plan to reflect the zoning that is there.
Commissioner Mead stated that he understands that. These people need to understand that there is the potential of having commercial development right to the north of their property.
Jody Ellis asked if there are regulations that govern setbacks and screening on the adjacent properties?
Commissioner Eyre stated that earlier it was mentioned that the reason for annexation was so they could have city water. Is there a problem with their well now?
Lynch stated that they could wait to apply zoning to this property until they have the master plan updated and zone according to the revised master plan if they so choose.
Mr. Ellis asked if they wait, does that mean we are then considered nonconforming.
Lynch stated that no it doesn’t become nonconforming.
Commissioner Senesac stated that his recollection of the master plan is very similar to Rod’s. We did some driving around out there, but I don’t believe there was a lot of discussion as to the depth of the land use recommended.
Lynch stated that the earliest the public hearing could take place is the meeting of April 12th. We will schedule the public hearing for April 12th and post it as being recommended for the Residential A-1 zoning classification.
6. New Business
8. Report of the Chairman
Commissioner Kozakiewicz stated that the committee working on the subdivision ordinance has met twice. They are going through the draft put together by McKenna and looking at each section of the ordinance separately. They have gotten some excellent input from some of the committee members. Their input has been very good. They have gone through the procedure section, the design section, and part of the definition section. The next meeting is scheduled for March 16th. They meet from 1:00 p.m. to
There are three people up for renewal this year. Carol Svenson has applied for renewal. Russ Baker and Rod Wieland have opted not to renew. There are two openings and they would encourage anyone watching on MCTV, who would like to serve, to contact the Planning Department.
9. Report of the Planning Director
The Director reported on the following matters:
Preliminary Plat Extension – Tri
City Commerce Park, to
§ Zoning Petition No. 514 – 3705 Letts Road to Residential D
§ Zoning Petition No. 515 – 3721 Letts Street to Residential D
§ Zoning Petition No. 516 – 6201 W. Wackerly Street to Residential A-1
§ Zoning Petition No. 517 – 4412 Waldo Avenue to Residential A-4
§ Zoning Petition No. 518 – 4705 Isabella Street to Regional Commercial
§ Zoning Petition No. 520 – 6305 W. Wackerly Street Residential A-1
§ Set public hearing regarding tires on stored recreational vehicles
Tires on stored recreational vehicles
Multi-Tenant Retail – 7000 block of Eastman Avenue: Commercial Net Lease Realty Services, 6 spaces in a 9,523 square foot structure.
Boards training will take place on March 12th at the Ashman Court Hotel.
Adjournment at approximately 8:03 PM was moved by Baker, seconded by Svenson and
Assistant City Manager
MINUTES ARE NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION