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
None
6.
Public Comments (unrelated to
items on the agenda)
None
7. New
Business
None
8. Communications
None
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
11. Adjourn
Adjourned at 7:38 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
C. Bradley Kaye, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Development
MINUTES ARE NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION