Bulletin Board

Business Directory


Clerk's Corner

Community Events

Contact Information


Development Documents


Financial information

Heritage Days


Meeting Calendar






PropertyTax/Assessing Data

Township Agreements

Rental Policy

Treasurer's Report



                                 MARION TOWNSHIP

                  AGENDA and DRAFT MINUTES

                         MARCH 14,  2005  





CALL TO THE PUBLIC:    Agenda Items Only – 3 minute limit

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:     March 14, 2005 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR:  February 15, 2005 Special Meeting

OLD BUSINESS:              Section 6.20 A - Intent

                                                  Section 6.20 - P Pre-existing Non Conforming Private Roads

                                                 Section 6.20 B - Construction Standards and Road Geometrics

                                                   Section 6.20 J 3 – Application Review & Approval or Rejection

                                                  Section 6.20 C – Right-of-Way Width





                                     DRAFT MINUTES                                   


                                     JEAN ROOT, SECRETARY

                                     JIM ANDERSON

                                     DAVE HAMANN

                                     DEBRA WIEDMAN-CLAWSON

ABSENT:                       NONE


                                    ANNETTE MCNAMARA, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR

                                    PHIL WESTMORELAND, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT

                                    ANGELA CAMPBELL, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT

                                    PAUL SIERSMA, CARLISLE/WORTMAN

                                    MIKE KEHOE, MILLER, KEHOE & ASSOCIATES



The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m.


Dave Hamann noted the date for the next special meeting is April 11, 2005 and asked the

agenda be amended.  Dave Hamann motioned to approve the agenda as amended.

 Jean Root seconded.  Motion Carried 5-0.


The Planning Commission members introduced themselves to the audience.


No response.  Jack Lowe closed the first call to the public.


Jean Root noted on page six the motion to tentatively set the April 11, 2005 special

meeting read April 11, 2004 and asked the minutes be amended.  Dave Hamann motioned

to approve the February 15, 2004 Special Meeting minutes as amended.  Jean Root

seconded.  Motion Carried 5-0.


Section 6.20 A - Intent

Jack Lowe opened the discussion stating the text is sentence added to the intent directing

the applicant to the Pre-existing Non-conforming Private Roads Section.  Jack Lowe asked

the Planning Commission members if they had any comment.

Jean Root noted that nothing can be done with Section 6.20 A until 6.20 P is acted upon.

It was agreed to set this aside.

Section 6.20 P - Pre-existing Non Conforming Private Roads

Jack Lowe opened the discussion. Mike Kehoe told the Planning Commission the text they

had before them includes the revisions requested at the last meeting. This makes reference

to the American Association of Street, Highway and Traffic Officials (AASHTO), which I

know you don’t want yet you can put something else in it’s place when the Planning

Commission decides what they want. The Planning Commission agreed the text reflects

their input with the exception of the AASHTO standards. The private road maintenance

agreement has been incorporated into the text.

Jean Root asked if the Planning Commission would like to see the word private added to

the phrase new road maintenance agreement to be consistent throughout the text?

The Planning Commission agreed.

Jean Root noted on item number two ‘shall provide documentation’ the Planning

Commission had wanted documentation to include registered mail.

Debra Wiedman-Clawson thought a certificate of mailing may be better, showing an

attempt to mail it.

Discussion ensued on personal attempts to get neighbors to sign the private road

maintenance agreement and how much effort should be put into it.

Mike Kehoe will add to the text certified mailing is required.  Mike Kehoe will submit the

proposed text for the April 11, 2005 special meeting.  Mike Kehoe also noted references in

paragraph two and paragraph one where the work divided was used.  This will run afoul

of the Land Division Act if they say a parcel cannot be divided, he will change the text to

read there will be no land use permits issued.  They have a right to have their lot divided;

they do not have a right to get a land use permit under the zoning ordinance.

Jack Lowe opened the floor to Angela Campbell of Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment. 

Angela Campbell summarized the ordinance as a guideline for anyone initiating a private

road or further developing on a non-conforming existing private road.  Some of the

standards are taken from the county some are taken from AASHTO giving the township an

opportunity to have their own set of guidelines for private roads.

Jack Lowe though these guidelines should only be used on pre-existing non-conforming

private roads, not new developments.

Phil Westmoreland stated one of the benefits of having your own is you approve a private

road under a standard, that standard changes and you have no control over it. If they

change something it can put every private road you have in a non-conforming status. This

gives you more flexibility and control over your private roads.  Some of the requirements

of the county and AASHTO may not be necessary to have safe conditions on those roads.

Discussion ensued and the Planning Commission agreed to go with two separate sections.

Jean Root asked if they can limit the language to pre-existing non-conforming private

gravel roads, the design requirements and if is a new development build to county

standards or a set of our own.

Debra Wiedman-Clawson questioned why paved roads wouldn’t require upgrades also.

Jack Lowe noted in item ten they require more than six acres for a drainage district, in

Rural Residential District that would create a problem because the roads all have ditches

and it would be more than six acres.  The roadway length requirement should be changed

from 750’ to 2,000’.

Phil Westmoreland stated changes can be made to the submittal. This is to give you an idea

of what township standards can look like if you don’t want to follow county standards.

Jack Lowe asked how to handle the condition of existing sub-grades, add extra gravel? 

How can this be done with an even hand.

Dave Hamann stated most of the roads could never be brought up to standards. Sort out the roads

that have the width, cul-de-sac and set standards for those.

Phil Westmoreland said it is subject to site conditions and they are given a choice they can work

from a set of standards or they can have a geo-technical engineer look at it and Orchard, Hiltz and

McCliment would look at their review and make a determination what is the best application for

that road. Jean Root asked if everyone would have to meet the same standards.

Phil Westmoreland answered yes.

Debra Wiedman-Clawson asked for clarification of the number of Sections.

The Planning Commission agreed there will be two Sections, one for new private road

developments and another for pre-existing non-conforming private roads.

Phil Westmoreland will revise the text submitted and send to Mike Kehoe and John Enos for review

and comment.  Once the Planning Commission agrees the set of standards they would like this

will be placed in Section 6.20 P.  The revised text to be submitted for the April 11, 2005 special


Section 6.20 B - Construction Standards and Road Geometrics

Jack Lowe asked if the previous discussion covered this agenda item.

The Planning Commission agreed to move on to Section 6.20 J 3.

Section 6.20 J 3 - Application Review & Approval or Rejection

Mike Kehoe told the Planning Commission this text applies when a private road development site

 plan has been approved and at a later date someone wants to divide their property.  Mike Kehoe

added text ‘no new developable lots or units may be created for which a land use permit’ 

withholding a land use permit not a land division.  The text in italics is what was discussed at the

last Planning Commission meeting.

Debra Wiedman-Clawson said this text is assuming there was a site plan for the private road.

Dave Hamann read ‘approved amendment to the site plan and road application’ and thought it

should read ‘amendment to a previous approved private road.’

Mike Kehoe will make the change ‘approved amendment to the site plan or road application, as


Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission if there was anything else. No response.

Mike Kehoe will make appropriate changes to the text and submit to Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment

and John Enos for their review and comment.  Revised text to be submitted for the April 11, 2005

special meeting.

Section 6.20 C - Right-of-Way Width

Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission if they had any comments.

Jean Root and Dave Hamann thought they were not going to make reference to Livingston County

Road Commission (LCRC) standards. Jean Root suggested replacing it with Marion Township

private road development standard if we decided to do this later on.

Dave Hamann asked if 6.20 C is part of the new pre-existing non-conforming private road

ordinance, the existing private road ordinance or both.

The Planning Commission agreed it would be the new.

Dave Hamann stated the only agenda item for the pre-existing private roads tonight is 6.20 P. Is

Angela Campbell going to come up with specifications for pre-existing also?

Jean Root said when Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment looks at potential Marion Township private road

standards we would want to have that text added in there that Mike Kehoe is suggesting. 

Mike Kehoe noted that paragraph will be more relevant for Phil Westmoreland and Angela

Campbell to keep in mind when developing those standards, the Planning Commission will want

it included in the new private road developments.

Jack Lowe asked if the Planning Commission if they wanted to discuss using LCRC standards for

the new private road developments and asked if our new private road standards would essentially

be LCRC standards?

Phil Westmoreland answered it can be anything the township wants and will make recommendations.

Discussion ensued on Howell Area Fire Authority requirements and parking on one side of the road

The width of roads and emergency vehicle access was discussed.  Thirty two foot, back-to-back

with a mountable curb was looked at.  Specifications for minimum widths for parking on one side

of the road.

Mike Kehoe suggested taking the LCRC standards and putting them into the ordinance, yet not

making reference to the LCRC specifically.

Dave Hamann clarified they would have standards that reference the county for paved private roads,

standards that Phil Westmoreland will put together for gravel private roads and standards that

Angela Campbell will put together for pre-existing, non-conforming private roads.

Jack Lowe said that’s right.

Angela Campbell asked if the gravel option pertains to single-family developments only?

Debra Wiedman-Clawson answered yes.

Jack Lowe would like to see a maximum number on gravel roads and over that the road has to be

paved. Discussion ensued on this topic.


Ken Tyler, 5200 Richardson - he thinks the township should stick to one set of standards.

Discussion ensued on standards for length of road and number of homes.  Is it better to limit by

length or limit by number of homes, the burden this puts on the road. Can this be tied into Section

6.20 H. of new private roads?  The Planning Commission agreed on 25 units for a single point of


Dan Murdock - Berry Manor, he asked the definition of a pre-existing, non-conforming private road.

Dan Murdock explained his situation to the Planning Commission, part of his road is pre-existing

and part will be new.  Where does he stand?

Phil Westmoreland answered his question and discussed the variables.

William Beyers 401 S. Truhn Road - he explained an easement situation to the Planning Commission

and asked for their help. Discussion ensued and it was decided Mr. Beyers should come to the

township hall during regular business hours to look into this further.

Jack Lowe closed the call to the public at 9:05 p.m.

Other Discussion

The Planning Commission confirmed the April 11, 2005 Special Meeting.

Jean Root asked the private road maintenance agreement submitted by Mike Kehoe to be placed

on the April 11, 2005 agenda. 

Jack Lowe would like the Planning Commission to review the master deed and by-laws to make

certain the requirements set forth are in the documents.

Mike Kehoe gave suggestions for reviewing the documents.

Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission to make sure they make the requirements for a

development part of the minutes.

Jean Root asked if the Rural Residential - Uses Permitted with a Special Use Permit handout at

from February 22, 2005 meeting can be placed on the March 22, 2005 regular meeting agenda.

Annette McNamara answered yes.

Jack Lowe would like discussion on the Gun Range at that meeting also.

Mike Kehoe noted the private road maintenance agreement has a provision that dispute would be

resolved by the Board of Trustees.  This is just a suggestion and depends on how the Board of

Trustees feels about it.  There needs to be some sort of dispute resolution spelled out.

Jack Lowe told the Planning Commission the Livingston County Health Department (LCHD) has

developed criteria for private sewage/waste water treatment plants.  There is now a dispute

between the LCHD and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).  Jack Lowe has

given a copy of the LCHD criteria and would like to know what could apply to the township. 

The isolation distances are different from what the township zoning ordinance calls out.  He would

like to discuss this at the next meeting.


No new business.


Dave Hamann motioned to adjourn the meeting at 9:24 p.m.  Debra Wiedman-Clawson seconded.

Motion Carried 5-0.