MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE MIDLAND CITY PLANNING
COMMISSION
WHICH TOOK PLACE ON TUESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 25, 2012, 7:00 P.M.,
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, MIDLAND, MICHIGAN
1. Roll Call
PRESENT: Hanna,
McLaughlin, Mead, Pnacek, and Senesac.
Commissioner Young arrived at 7:08 P.M.
ABSENT: Heying, Stewart and Tanzini
OTHERS PRESENT: Brad Kaye, Director
of Planning and Community Development, Cindy Winland, Contract Planner, Cheri
King, Community Development Specialist, and 24 others.
2. Approval
of Minutes
Moved by Senesac, seconded by Pnacek, to approve the minutes of the
regular meeting of September 11, 2012. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Public Hearings
a. Zoning Text Amendment No. 156 – initiated
by the City of Midland, to amend and add Section 8.07 E. to the Zoning
Ordinance to add sign regulations for the Downtown Northside Overlay district.
Ms. Winland presented the proposed changes to the Downtown Northside
Overlay District, noting that this is the fourth time we have looked at this
text. The DNO district recognizes the
unique nature of the area and proposed developments and has specific design
guidelines which have already been adopted.
Tonight we are considering sign regulations.
Ms. Winland reviewed the proposed standards, explaining that we are
proposing to permit signs on a per-tenant and per-façade
basis. Three modifications to the
language circulated in the agenda packet are proposed based on public
feedback. The first, on page 8.8, would
recognize the opportunity for signs to extend into the street right-of-way when
authorized by the City Engineer. This
would be consistent with approvals already granted throughout the downtown area
and envisioned in the DNO district. The
second would reduce the size permitted for a marquee sign from 80 ft to 70 sq
ft, with the sign face area measured around all letters and graphics. This change recognizes that projecting signs
in the DNO district may already be permitted up to 150 sq ft in size, that
architectural features would be permitted on the building without size
restrictions, and that our intent is to regulate the size of the commercial
sign, not the architectural feature. The
third modification proposed would restrict marquee signs to a maximum
projection of 6 ft at the base of the sign only, rather than the full sign
height, to allow for design flexibility and appropriate scaling relative to the
building form. In the course of making
these adjustments, staff has worked with the developer of the Stadium District
building.
A standard façade definition has also been added. It generally defines facades to recognize
changes in construction style or materials and horizontal relief in the street
facing wall of the structure.
Kevin McGraw, Midland Downtown Partners, stated they are very close to
making this development happen. They
have four tenants at this time, but all have a right to get out of the leases
if the developers cannot provide them decent signage. They have been working closely with city
staff as these standards have been developed.
Although their tenants preferred the original sign package proposed,
they are willing to accept the standards being recommended by city staff. They have gotten rid of the rooftop
signs. There is only one other property,
which is located just across the street, that could accommodate a development
of this scale and would utilize the sign standards being proposed. As the developer, he would hope that the
other property would match this signage when developed. Let’s encourage creativity. There are only two buildings in town that
would qualify for this type of signage.
You need people to be able to see the signs.
Scott Walker, Midland Tomorrow, commended city staff and the Planning
Commission for working through this project.
They are at the beginning of great development downtown and this is the
first part of it. Midland Tomorrow
supports the proposed changes.
There were no comments in opposition to the petition. The public hearing was closed.
4. Old Business
a. Conditional Use Permit No. 42 – the
request of North-Point Building and Remodeling, Inc. for a 14 unit residential
town house development, located at 2711, 2721, 2801, 2811 West Wackerly Street.
Mr. Kaye explained that the applicant is Midland Rental Properties, LLC. The property is located on West Wackerly and
Schade West at 2721/2801/2811 W. Wackerly on 1.69 acres of land. The property is zoned Office Service. Multiple-family residential is a conditional
use in the Office Service District.
Proposed are 14 three bedroom units.
The property now is currently vacant and wooded. There are some commercial uses to the east
and west and across the street from the property. Schade West condominiums are located behind
this property to the south and are zoned RB.
A revised proposal was presented and discussed at the public hearing held
two weeks ago. The revised plan shows a
reduction in hard surface area, an increased setback from the Schade West
development, and additional landscaping along the south side of the property. Both the Public Services Department and the
Fire Department have reviewed the revised plan and are satisfied that their
vehicles can maneuver in this proposed site with the revised plan.
The site plan facts do not change.
There are eight discretionary standards that need to be considered this
evening. The petitioner has reduced the
extent of on-site paving/concrete. There
was lack of on-site amenity area and this has not been addressed in the revised
plan. The Planning Commission held a
public hearing on September 11, 2012.
Several public comments, both verbally and in writing, and one petition
have been received to date. Two letters
have been received since the public hearing regarding this petition.
Motion
by Senesac, seconded by Pnacek, to recommend to City Council the approval of
Conditional Use Permit No. 42 the request of North-Point Building and
Remodeling, Inc. for a 14 unit residential town house development, located at
2711, 2721, 2801, 2811 West Wackerly Street.
Mr.
McLaughlin stated he does not think he can support this. The petitioner has made changes in the green space, however, it is not enough. There is no place for children to play in
this area. This type of use is not
compatible with the residential uses behind the development. If this was an office building, we would not
be discussing these issues at all.
Mr.
Senesac stated that every zoning district has things that are allowed by
right. Some other things are allowed by
a Conditional Use Permit and that allows some discretion about whether we allow
them or not. Residential use is allowed
in Office Service, but only as a conditional use. The first thing he sees is too much density
on this small piece of property and too little green space. There are so many units that there is little
room for anything else. This could
prevent finding people who want to rent these.
If that were to happen, it could cause a downward spiral. This would be detrimental to the
neighborhood.
Mr.
Pnacek stated he agrees with Ray. He has
had mixed emotions on this. There are
offices in this area. Looking at the
surrounding land and uses, he feels this is too high of a density. He also agrees that there is too little
proposed green space.
Mrs.
Hanna stated that one of the nicest things about Midland is that we have some
housing areas that are somewhat sheltered from the business but there is
development close by. The development of
Schade Drive was for a retirement community, with the understanding that this
would be a quiet place for them to live out their lives. This kind of busy development would do the
opposite. It will not enhance the people
who invested their money in the existing dwellings. Office type development would be most
appropriate for the property.
Mr.
Young commended the applicants for responding to the comments and concerns
expressed by neighbors. Although the
changes now proposed are good, they do not go far enough. He stated that too many units are proposed on
too small a piece of property.
Vote:
YEAS: None
NAYS: Hanna, McLaughlin, Mead, Pnacek,
Senesac and Young
ABSENT: Heying, Stewart and Tanzini
b. Zoning Petition No. 582 – initiated by
the Planning Department, to zone property at 9203 Eastman Avenue from Township
zoning to Residential B zoning.
This
property is located at the extreme north end of the city. The city forest surrounds it and there is a
small home to the south. There is a 250
foot strip to the east that will be left in township zoning and will be dealt
with at a later date. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing on September 11, 2012. The property owner supports the
rezoning. One public comment was received
to date. There has been no new
information since the public meeting was held.
Staff recommendation is for approval.
Motion
by McLaughlin, seconded by Senesac, to recommend to City Council the approval
of Zoning Petition No. 582 initiated by the Planning Department, to zone
property at 9203 Eastman Avenue from Township zoning to Residential B zoning.
Vote:
YEAS: Hanna, McLaughlin, Mead, Pnacek,
Senesac, and Young
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Heying, Stewart and Tanzini
c. Zoning Petition No. 583 – initiated by
the Planning Department, to zone property at 7730 West Wackerly Street from
Township zoning to Industrial A zoning.
Mr.
Kaye described the property at 7730 West Wackerly Street. The area is 14.75 acres. The location is on the very west end of the
property of Saginaw Road and Wackerly Street.
The present zoning in the township is Industrial. It is the city’s intent to continue the
Industrial zoning in this area. Three
public comments were received at the last meeting. A public hearing was held on September 11,
2012. The concerns expressed by the
neighboring property owners appear to have been fully answered. There has been no new information since the
public meeting was held. Staff
recommendation is for approval.
Motion
by Pnacek, seconded by Hanna to recommend to City Council the approval of
Zoning Petition No. 583 initiated by the Planning Department, to zone property
at 7730 West Wackerly Street from Township zoning to Industrial A zoning.
Vote:
YEAS: Hanna, McLaughlin, Mead, Pnacek,
Senesac, and Young
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Heying, Stewart and Tanzini
d.
Master Plan Update – A copy of
the full Master Plan was provided to Commissioners at the September 11, 2012
Planning Commission meeting. Chapter 4
has since been updated to reflect minor changes requested by the Planning
Commission and was provided for review.
Mr. Kaye explained that, procedurally, our next step is to request City
Council approval to circulate the draft plan for public review and begin the
public input process. This review and
the recommended plan changes are considered to be a technical update to the plan,
addressing matters such as census data and the economy. As such, Staff is suggesting that an
extensive public input process similar to the meeting in a box used when the
plan was originally prepared is not warranted.
Rather than merely meeting the statutory requirements of a single public
hearing, however, staff is recommending that we hold an open house to obtain
public input and to bring those suggestions to the Commission at a future
meeting. Ray Senesac likes the idea of
having the public meeting immediately before a Planning Commission meeting,
with the hope being that people will stay and attend the public hearing.
Motion by Pnacek, seconded by Young, to forward the Master Plan to
City Council for approval to circulate the draft plan for public review and move
forward with the public hearing.
Vote:
YEAS: Hanna, McLaughlin, Mead,
Pnacek, Senesac and Young
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Heying, Stewart and Tanzini
5. Public Comments
None
6. New Business
None
7. Communications
None
8. Report of the Chairperson
None
9. Report
of the Planning Director
Mr. Kaye advised that
Midland and the surrounding census area have qualified for Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) status, which will provide us with access to addition
federal transportation funding. An
organizational meeting will be held at 2:00 P.M. on Wednesday, September 26,
2012 at the County Road Commission office to discuss the establishment of an
MPO and determine local support for it.
This meeting will be an open public meeting.
10. Items for Next
Agenda – October 9, 2012
a. Zoning Text Amendment No. 156 – DNO Sign Standards – Action
Mr. Senesac requested
some input from the Non-Motorized Transportation Committee at the next meeting
as the agenda for that meeting appears to be light.
The 5:30 procedural
meeting previously discussed will be postponed to the second meeting in
October.
11. Adjourn
Adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
C. Bradley Kaye, AICP
Director of Planning and Community Development
MINUTES ARE NOT FINAL UNTIL APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION