MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE MIDLAND CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY,
OCTOBER 28, 2008, 7:00 P.M.,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, MIDLAND, MICHIGAN
1.
Roll Call
PRESENT: Brown,
Eyre, Gaynor, Hanna, King, Kozakiewicz, Mead, and Svenson
ABSENT: Senesac
OTHERS PRESENT: Keith Baker,
Planning Director, Daryl Poprave, Deputy Planning
Director; Cheri King, Community Development Specialist and ten others.
2. Approval of
Minutes
Moved by Eyre, seconded by Hanna,
to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of October 14, 2008 as written. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Public Hearing
a. Conditional
Use Permit No. 33, the request of Midland County Habitat for Humanity
for the construction of a single family home located at 309
E. Grove Street. This property
is located in a Residential B zoning district.
Mr.
Baker showed an aerial photograph of the subject property. It is located mid-block
between Townsend and Rodd Streets. The existing land use map shows existing
single family uses in the entire block.
The parcel in question was acquired by the city. It is currently zoned RB residential. There is RB zoning to the south, east and
north. Parcels to the west are Office Service. The future land use map shows this area designated
as high density residential. Further
north on Rodd Street there are some commercial uses. The city purchased the property. Single family is a conditional use in the RB
District. Habitat for Humanity is
seeking a Conditional Use Permit for a single-family dwelling. The property was sold for $1 by the City to
Habitat for Humanity. The city issued a
building permit to begin construction.
Discretionary
standards for Conditional Use Permits include:
1) Protection
of public health, safety and general welfare.
2) Compatibility
with surrounding land uses.
3) Detrimental
effects.
4) Impact
of traffic.
5) Adequacy
of public services.
6) Protection
of site characteristics.
7) Compatibility
with natural environment.
8) Compatibility
with Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The site itself is 4400 sq. ft. The lot itself is approximately 55 feet by 80
feet. The house itself is 26 feet by 38
feet. Staff recommendation is for
approval of this conditional use permit as it meets all the criteria for
development in this area. Habitat is
continuing to build the house while the Conditional Use process is taking
place.
Gary
Jones, Habitat for Humanity, 712 Heathermoor Drive. They would like to urge approval of the
Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Eyre asked
if timing is a factor for Habitat. Mr.
Jones stated the roof is now on so the house is fairly well enclosed. Weather should not affect the house at this
time.
Brian
Sutherland stated he lives in the house with the white car on Townsend
Street. He can see the back of this house
from his home. He received a letter on
about October 12th so he started taking pictures of the house at
this time. He has been taking pictures
of this wondering if the city could stop construction during this conditional
use permit process. His concern is that,
if there should be severe oppositions to this, the house is already up. If the people who eventually own this house
have two pick-up trucks, he cannot see how they will not obstruct the driveway
and the sidewalk. This lot was platted
in the 1930’s and this size lot was legal at that time for single family
dwellings. Mr. Sutherland asked about
the family who will be getting this house.
How many vehicles will they have?
Gary
Jones, from Habitat for Humanity, stated they will not ultimately be the owner
of this house. The concept for the house
is a combination of the Affordable Housing Alliance, Habitat for Humanity, and
Midland Area Homes. The Affordable Housing
Alliance will be the landlord and Midland Area Homes will manage the family who
will move into it. This is a 5-bedroom
house, with three of the bedrooms in the basement.
The
public hearing was closed.
b. Zoning
Petition No. 555 initiated by Soil Tech, Inc., for
property located at 4501 Bay
City
Road from Residential B zoning to Regional Commercial.
Mr.
Poprave stated that the subject property is located north of Bay City Road and
east of Fast Ice Drive. The existing
land use map shows there is single family residential mixed in with heavy
industrial. The north end is not
developed. The future land use map shows
this property as high density residential.
It is on the border of high density residential to the west and
commercial to the east and the south.
The zoning map shows this area as RB residential. It does not take up the part to the
east. There was a great deal of
discussion at the time the Future Land Use map was designed.
This
property was part of another rather large rezoning proposed in 1989 by National
Amusements. They were looking to rezone
the old drive-in movie theater. It was
rezoned but nothing was ever built there.
The existing houses were already there in 1989.
The
proposed amendment is consistent with the goals of the city’s master plan. There is already existing infrastructure in
this area. Water and sewer are already
available here. Conditions have remained
unchanged since the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance in 2005. The rezoning would give special preference to
a single property owner. We would have
to take account of the surrounding residential properties in this area. A commercial use on this property could have
a detrimental affect on the surrounding residential properties. Regional Commercial zoning does not present a
spot zone in this area because it is adjacent to Regional Commercial to the
north. Valley Plaza is to the east and
across the street is developing rapidly as commercial and industrial. The proposed amendment is consistent with the
commercial zoning to the north and south, and less compatible with the residential
properties to the east and west. This
parcel certainly has enough size to meet development standards. It is a large parcel of land. Zoning districts in this area have changed
over time to more intensive uses. Staff
recommends denial as it is inconsistent with the goals of the Master Plan.
Mrs.
Hanna asked if any communications had been received from surrounding
residents. Mr. Poprave stated none had
been received.
Heather Arnold, on behalf of Soil Tech, Inc. Soil Tech purchased the property because it
had the potential of being rezoned to commercial. Soil Tech is a company that was formed to
purchase homes and rent them to people in need.
No
one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this rezoning request.
4. Public Comments
None
5. New Business
None
6.
Old
Business
a. Conditional
Use Permit No. 32, the request of Brittany Real Estate Company, LLC for a
16,983 square foot building addition to an existing 52,078 square foot nursing
home located at 3615 East Ashman Street.
Mr.
Baker showed that this property is located on East Ashman, just east of Waldo
Avenue. The property is also located due
west of the US-10 corridor. It adjoins
Collingwood Court on the west side of the property. There is a park to the east and a mixture of
uses across the street. The property is
zoned RB residential. The property
itself is zoned all the way back to Kilmer Drive. The future land use map shows the front
portion of the property in question be zoned RB residential and the north part
of the property be used for low density residential.
At
the last meeting we talked about a 14 foot clearance to the overhang in the
front of the facility. That change has
been made. At the request of staff and
required by ordinance, the petitioner included a 5 foot sidewalk adjacent to
East Ashman Avenue. They have also moved
the shed to the west and provided additional screening in that area. They have also provided a photometric plan
showing the five light fixtures and their location on the site. These meet the current zoning code of less
than one foot candle at the property line.
Discretionary
criteria include:
1) Protection
of public health, safety and general welfare.
2) Compatibility
with surrounding land uses.
3) Detrimental
effects.
4) Impact
of Traffic.
5) Adequacy
of public services.
6) Protection
of site characteristics.
7) Compatibility
with natural environment.
8) Compatibility
with the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
The
requirement for a 5 foot sidewalk is asked to be waived by the adjoining
property owner. This was brought up at
the last Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Baker stated this needed to be included in any motion made regarding
this property if the Planning Commission chose not to require sidewalks at this
location.
Al
Paas represented the petitioner. He did
receive a phone call from the Glynn residence, which is the closest residence
to Brittany Manor. They have a swimming
pool up next to the proposed fence line.
The fence line at Brittany Manor was going to intersect their fence line
at approximately the same place as their swimming pool exists now. Brittany Manor has opted to curve their fence
line around in the back so they will leave the existing trees in this area and
privacy for the rear of the adjacent property.
The parking is on the east side of the building and not anywhere near
the Collingwood properties. Mr. Paas
stated at the last meeting that there were no wetlands on this property. This was an error. He stated he should have said there was no
flood plain on this property.
Dan
Moore, 3418 Collingwood, stated the effective line of sight from his house that
includes a downhill view from his house, will eliminate the sound and light
buffer provided by the existing trees.
He does like the existing proposal moving the fence line and leaving
some of the mature trees. He is still
concerned about the light penetration through the trees and the noise that will
come through to his property will affect his property values. Mowers will move up to the fence line and
will be a detriment to his property value.
Lynn
Glynn stated Mr. Baker came out and showed the neighbors where the fence line
is going to go. Mrs. Glynn showed where
her swimming pool is located. If you
were to get out of the swimming pool you would get out right onto the
fence. The retention basin is located
immediately over the fence. Will there
be standing water in this area? They
have maintained this property for the past 17 years. They have mowed the grass and maintained the
trees on the back of this property for a number of years.
Mr.
Paas stated that the retention area is designed to receive the water during a
heavy storm and it has an outlet which intends to slow down the water over the
period of a couple hours. Eventually
this will be dry grass again once the water flows through the pipe drainage
system into the storm sewer. There will
not be long periods of standing water in this area.
It
was moved by Kozakiewicz, and seconded by Gaynor, to recommend to City Council
approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 32 with the following contingencies:
1. The stormwater detention system is
designed and constructed in accordance with
the City of Midland Engineering Department
specifications.
2.
All landscaping shall comply with Article 6 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3.
All exterior lighting shall comply with Section 3.12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4.
All exterior signage shall comply with Section 8 of the Zoning Ordinance.
5.
All parking spaces shall comply with Section 5.01D of the Zoning Ordinance and
be
delineated by the
“box” style striping.
6.
The location, access and flow of the proposed fire hydrants and water service
shall
be in accordance
with the City of Midland Fire Department and City of Midland
Utility Department
specifications.
7.
A five (5) foot wide public sidewalk shall be provided along East Ashman
Street.
8.
The under clearance for the canopy shall be a minimum 14’ high.
9. Additional screening and fence line
shown at tonight’s meeting and the additional
Vegetation.
Mr.
Eyre feels they should not have to put sidewalk in until it goes
somewhere. There is no reason to put
sidewalk in this area. There is no
justification for it at this time. Ms.
Brown agreed, as did Mr. Mead. Mr. Eyre
wanted to amend Mr. Kozakiewicz’s motion to eliminate the requirement for the
sidewalk. The amended motion was
seconded by Ms. Hanna. Mr. Kozakiewicz
also agreed. Mr. Gaynor stated that, if
we are going to have sidewalks, we need to have sidewalks built at the time of
development. We should not wait until
everything is developed and then require property owners to install sidewalk.
He does not understand waiting until this property is all built out and then
require sidewalks in this area. Mr. King
stated that, on one hand, installing a sidewalk right now would go
nowhere. However, he is not sure that,
just because a sidewalk has not been in place for the past 17 years,
non-motorized transportation is a goal of the Planning Commission for the
future and sidewalks in this area would be a first step. He thinks we are not setting the best
precedent by not requiring sidewalks in this area. Mrs. Svenson stated she also feels that not
requiring sidewalks in this area is precedent setting and we are trying to encourage
sidewalks throughout the city. Mrs.
Hanna stated that across the street there is a sidewalk. If someone would like to walk or ride a
non-motorized vehicle, they can go across the street. There is a traffic light at the corner that
would enable people to cross the street.
Motion by Eyre seconded by Hanna to amend
the original motion by recommending that the City Council waive the requirement
for a five foot public sidewalk for this project:
Yeas: Eyre, King, Kozakiewicz, Brown,
Hanna and Mead
Nays: Gaynor and Svenson
Absent: Senesac
Motion approved 6-2. Original motion is amended to exclude
sidewalks as part of the conditional use permit recommendation.
Vote on the original motion with the
following contingencies:
YEAS: Brown, Eyre, Gaynor, Hanna, King,
Kozakiewicz and Mead
NAYS: Svenson
ABSENT: Senesac
Motion
approved 7-1.
7. Communications
Commissioners
received the latest Planning and Zoning
News and a letter from the Spicer Group regarding an audio conference on
Wednesday, November 5th.
8. Report of the Chairperson
None
9. Report of the
Planning Director
November 17th
Set
Public Hearings
a)
Conditional Use Permit No. 32, the
request of Brittany Real Estate Company, LLC for a 16,983 square foot building addition to an
existing 52,078 square foot nursing home located at 3615 East Ashman
Street.
b)
Conditional Use Permit No. 33, the
request of Midland County Habitat for Humanity for the construction of a single
family home located at 309 E. Grove Street.
This property is located in a Residential B zoning district.
c)
Zoning Petition No. 555 initiated by
Soil Tech, Inc. for
property located at 4501 Bay City Road from Residential B zoning to Regional
Commercial.
November
11th
PUBLIC HEARINGS
a)
Zoning Petition No. 556 initiated by
Cal Ieuter for
property located at 404, 408 and 414 Townsend Street from Office Service zoning
to Downtown.
ACTION ITEMS
a)
Conditional Use Permit No. 33, the
request of Midland County Habitat for Humanity for the construction of a single
family home located at 309 E. Grove Street.
This property is located in a Residential B zoning district.
b)
Zoning Petition No. 555 initiated by
Soil Tech, Inc. for
property located at 4501 Bay City Road from Residential B zoning to Regional
Commercial.
October 21st Meeting – Four variance petitions
acted upon
None