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
ABSENT: Plotzke
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)
None
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
None
7. Communications
None
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:
March 7th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
None
ACTION ITEMS
Preliminary Plat Extension – Tri
City Commerce Park, to
March 21st
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
None
ACTION ITEMS
None
March 22nd
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
None
ACTION ITEMS
§ 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
April 12th
PUBLIC
HEARINGS
Tires on stored recreational vehicles
Zoning
Petition
ACTION ITEMS
None
March 15th
None
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.
10. Adjourn
Adjournment at approximately 8:03 PM was moved by Baker, seconded by
Svenson and
unanimously approved.
Respectfully submitted,
Jon Lynch
Assistant City Manager
MINUTES ARE NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION