MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE MIDLAND CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY,
JULY 10, 2012, 7:00 P.M.,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, MIDLAND, MICHIGAN
1. Roll Call
PRESENT: Hanna, McLaughlin, Mead, Senesac, Stewart, Tanzini and Young
ABSENT: Heying and Pnacek
OTHERS PRESENT: Brad Kaye, Director of Planning and Community Development, Cheri King, Community Development Specialist, and 7 others.
2. Election of Officers
Motion by Ray Senesac, on behalf of the Nominating Committee, seconded by Gayle Hanna, to nominate Roger Mead as Chairman and Shawn Pnacek as Vice Chair. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Approval of Minutes
Moved by Hanna, seconded by Young, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of June 26, 2012. Motion passed unanimously.
4. Public Hearings
a. Zoning Petition No. 579 – initiated by Schauman Development, LLC to rezone property at 3535 East Ashman Street from Agricultural zoning to Residential B zoning.
Mr. Kaye stated the applicant is Schauman Development. The location is 3535 E. Ashman Street, 6.06 acres in size. It is on the north side of Ashman, east of Waldo Avenue. The zoning of the property is Agricultural. The area is surrounded by RA-1, RB, and a mix of Office Service and some Commercial property on the south side. The Master Plan designates this area as high density residential. The balance of the property surrounding it is designated for low-density residential.
The review criteria include is the proposed amendment consistent with the city’s Master Plan? Yes. The Master Plan shows high density residential. Will the amendment be in accordance with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance? Yes. Have conditions changed since the Zoning Ordinance was adopted that justifies the amendment? Yes. This property has been used as commercial property for quite a number of years. Will the amendment grant special privileges? No. This is a small isolated spot
Will the amendment result in unlawful exclusionary zoning? No. Will the amendment set an inappropriate precedent? No. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the zoning classification of surrounding land? Yes. The adjacent property east of this is zoned RB, which is what is being requested for this property.
Is the proposed zoning consistent with the future land use designation of the surrounding land in the city’s Master Plan? Yes. Could all requirements in the proposed zoning classification be complied with on the subject parcel? Yes. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the trends in land development in the general vicinity of the property in question? Yes. There are different zoning classifications in this area and they are all consistent with the Master Plan.
The opinion of staff is that this application does satisfy the criteria and it is recommended for approval. Planning Commission will make their recommendation on July 24, 2012. No public comments have been received to date.
Mrs. Hanna stated she has some strong reservations about this. There are a number of RA-1 residences that abut this property. She feels this will deteriorate the value of the land these people have established their homes on. She would like to consider something other than high density. Mr. Mead clarified that the opportunity to discuss and vote on the application would take place in two weeks.
Ron Schauman, Schauman Develoment, stated that, at the most, there would be 35 units built there. They do not intend to take the high density to the high density limit. They will be like condos. Everyone will have a 2-car garage. It will be less density per acre than what they built next door. There will be about 40 feet at the back of the property that they will not be touching. It is currently wooded and will remain wooded area.
Lynn Glen, Collingwood Court, stated she will be one of the units affected by the apartments. She has looked at the units now being built and there is only one small row of trees between those units and the homes on Fuller Drive. She currently has a beautiful area behind her house and is concerned that her property will depreciate if she ends up looking at the back of an apartment building. She has just put an addition on her house.
Mark Jones, 3308 Fuller Drive, stated his property abuts the back of that property. Mr. Kaye stated it is consistent with high density housing but it is currently zoned Agricultural. He does not think high density is appropriate in single family neighborhoods. The property values will deteriorate, as will the neighborhood. The entire slide presentation of Mr. Kaye seemed to be insistent that this property would be appropriately zoned high density.
Mr. Jones asked if the 40 foot of untouched land would extend around the entire development to create a boundary between what is there now and the new development? Mr. Mead stated that he will ask the petitioner when he comes back to the podium. Mr. Senesac commented that the Planning Commission can only consider the rezoning request before them.
Mr. Jones also stated that his property was dug up and a storm sewer put in to Collingwood Court. Mr. Kaye stated that, if there is a storm sewer there, there would be an easement in place and development would not be allowed within the easement area.
The public hearing was closed.
b. Zoning Petition No. 580 – initiated by The Dahlia Hill Society of Midland to rezone property at 2803 Orchard Drive from Residential B zoning to Community zoning.
Mr. Kaye stated the applicant is The Dahlia Hill Society of Midland, located at 2803 Orchard Drive. Dahlia Hill is at the intersection of Orchard Drive and Main Street. The property itself is kind of jagged and wraps around behind properties to the west. There is a little triangle of property that will be added to the proposed area but that area was not advertised for this public hearing. In the area are some RA-1 properties and some Community zoned property across Orchard Drive that goes to the north and the east.
The Master Plan intended Dahlia Hill to be parkland and recreation space. It does not extend fully over the parcel.
Is the proposed amendment consistent with the city’s Master Plan? Yes. The Master Plan shows public parks and recreation on part of the site. Will the amendment be in accordance with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance? Yes, in the opinion of staff. Have conditions changed since the Zoning Ordinance was adopted that justifies the amendment? Yes. Will the amendment grant special privileges? No it will not. The zoning will recognize what is already happening on the site. Will the amendment result in unlawful exclusionary zoning? No.
Will the amendment set an inappropriate precedent? No. The Master Plan recognizes this use for this parcel. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the zoning classification of surrounding land? Yes, when considered in the context of the broader surrounding area. There is quite an extent of Community Zoning District in this area.
Is the proposed zoning consistent with the future land use designation of the surrounding land in the city’s Master Plan? Yes. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the trends in land development in the general vicinity of the property in question? Yes.
The Planning Commission will make a recommendation on July 24, 2012. City Council will set a public hearing on August 13, 2012 and hold the public hearing on September 17, 2012. Staff recommends approval of this rezoning petition.
Charles Breed, stated the tiny triangular parcel has a garage on it, where they store their mowing equipment and all the other equipment for Dahlia Hill. He is giving that garage to Dahlia Hill. They have waited all this time to apply for rezoning so Dahlia Hill would become a valued part of the community. They have had a lot of people from all over the state come to visit Dahlia Hill. They feel the changing of the zoning from Residential B to Community is appropriate.
Jody Dudley spoke on behalf of the rezoning. They have people coming to the hill every day. She feels this is an appropriate use for the property. No one spoke in opposition to this petition.
The public hearing was closed.
5. Old Business
6. Public Comments (unrelated to items on the agenda)
7. New Business
9. Report of the Chairperson
Mr. Mead had one piece of mail advertising a course in Okemos.
10. Report of the Planning Director
Last evening, the Midland Power Station was approved by City Council.
11. Items for Next Agenda – July 24, 2012
a. Zoning Petition No. 579 action
b. Zoning Petition No. 580 action
c. Zoning Petition No. 580 (triangular piece) public hearing and action
d. Downtown Northside Overlay sign standards
Adjourned at 7:38 p.m.
C. Bradley Kaye, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Development
MINUTES ARE NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION