|
|||
|
|
MARION TOWNSHIP AGENDA & DRAFT MINUTES PC Public Hearing 03-22-2005 @ 7:15 pm CALL
TO ORDER: MEMBERS
PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Agenda Items Only – 3 minute limit APPROVAL OF AGENDA: March 22, 2005 Public Hearings APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR: None OLD BUSINESS: Proposed Text Amendment 6.19 B – Lots to have access
Proposed Text Amendment
3.02 – Definition of Landscape Buffer
NEW BUSINESS: CALL
TO PUBLIC: ADJOURNMENT: MEMBERS PRESENT:
JOHN LOWE, CHAIRPERSON
JEAN ROOT, SECRETARY
JIM ANDERSON
DAVE HAMANN ABSENT:
DEBRA WIEDMAN-CLAWSON OTHERS PRESENT:
ROBERT W. HANVEY,
SUPERVISOR
ANNETTE MCNAMARA, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
PHIL WESTMORELAND, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT
ANGELA CAMPBELL, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT
JOHN ENOS, CARLISLE/WORTMAN ****************************************************************** CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called
to order at 7:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF
AGENDA Dave Hamann motioned to approved the agenda for March 22, 2005 public hearings. Jim Anderson seconded.
Motion Carried 4-0. INTRODUCTION OF
MEMBERS The Planning Commission members introduced themselves to the audience. Debra Wiedman- Clawson is absent. APPROVAL OF
MINUTES No minutes to approve. OLD BUSINESS Proposed Text
Amendment 6.19 B—Lots to Have Access Jack Lowe read the
proposed text to the audience and opened the call to the public. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC No response.
Jack Lowe closed the call to the public. Proposed Text
Amendment 3.02—Definitions of Landscape Buffer Jack Lowe noted the
text is straightforward and opened the call to the public. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC No response.
Jack Lowe closed the call to the public. Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission members if they had any comment. There was no response. and McCliment and Carlisle/Wortman resident landscape architect narrowed it down to indigenous to the
mid-west and non invasive. NEW BUSINESS No new business. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC No response. ADJOURNMENT Dave Hamann motioned to adjourn the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Jim Anderson seconded. Motion Carried 4-0.
Regular Meeting Agenda & Draft Minutes 7:30 pm CALL
TO ORDER: MEMBERS
PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Agenda Items Only – 3 minute limit APPROVAL OF AGENDA: March 22, 2005 Regular Meeting APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR: February 22, 2005 Regular Meeting OLD BUSINESS:
Copperfield Villas – Final Site Plan Review
Proposed Text
Amendment Article XVIII Site Plan Review Procedure Proposed Text Amendment 8.01 F 6 & 7 Rural Residential Site Development Requirement
Proposed Text Amendment 8.02
F 6 & 7 Suburban Residential Site Development Requirements
Proposed Text Amendment 6.18 F & G - Condominium Projects
Proposed Text Amendment 6.24 – Landscape Buffer
Proposed Text Amendment 8.01 E 6
& 7 Rural Residential Uses Permitted by Special Use Permit
NEW BUSINESS: CALL
TO PUBLIC: ADJOURNMENT: MEMBERS PRESENT:
JOHN LOWE, CHAIRPERSON
JEAN ROOT, SECRETARY
JIM ANDERSON
DAVE HAMANN ABSENT:
DEBRA WIEDMAN-CLAWSON OTHERS PRESENT:
ROBERT W. HANVEY,
SUPERVISOR
ANNETTE MCNAMARA, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
PHIL WESTMORELAND, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT
ANGELA CAMPBELL, ORCHARD, HILTZ & MCCLIMENT
JOHN ENOS, CARLISLE/WORTMAN CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called
to order at 7:34 p.m. APPROVAL OF
AGENDA Jean Root asked that under Old Business, Section 6.20 E be added as part of the discussion along with agenda items Section 8.01 F 6 & 7 and 8.02 F 6 & 7. Jean Root also said that under New Business, she has suggestions for the private roads proposed text. Dave Hamann motioned to approve the amended agenda for March 22, 2005 regular meeting. Jean Root seconded.
Motion Carried 4-0. INTRODUCTION OF
MEMBERS The Planning Commission members introduced themselves to the audience. Debra Wiedman Clawson was absent. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC No response.
Jack Lowe closed the first call to the public. APPROVAL OF
MINUTES Dave Hamann noted on page 6 of 12 a correction to Article VXIII; it should be XVIII. Dave Hamann motioned to approve the February 22, 2005 regular meeting minutes as amended. Jim Anderson seconded.
Motion Carried 4-0. OLD BUSINESS Copperfield
Villas Final Site Plan Review Tom Dumond of Boss Engineering gave a brief overview of the project and the corrections to the site plan requested by the Planning Commission members at the January 25, 2005 meeting. Tom Dumond also noted that Mike Kehoe, Township Attorney, has reviewed the Master Deed, Bylaws and Exhibit B and has asked for revisions to the documents. These revisions will be made and reviewed by
Mike Kehoe prior to the Board of Trustees meeting. Jack Lowe asked John
Enos for comments. John Enos summarized Carlisle/Wortman review letter dated March 9, 2005. The final site plan submitted addressed all of the concerns Carlisle/Wortman had, the gated gravel entrance and the cul-de-sac. Again, the Master Deed and Bylaws will have to be revised per Mike Kehoe’s comments, especially the comments on tree preservation. However, he is happy with the final site plan. recommending final
site plan approval. Phil Westmoreland noted the utility lines crossing the first few lots and then the roadway. This does not impact the plan, it does mean the road cannot be dedicated to the public and turned over to the Livingston County Road Commission (LCRC). This was pointed out in a previous Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment review letter because this was an issue on a different site plan. During the preliminary
review, the developer discussed contacting DTE to have the lines moved.
Phil Westmoreland assumes this is not going to happen at this point
based on the plans he has seen. Jack Lowe asked if there is a difference between high power lines and electric lines when it comes to the LCRC
accepting a road. Phil Westmoreland stated it is an easement and it comes down to which takes precedence, the roadway or the utility
lines. It usually goes by who is
there first. Discussion ensued on
easements and the LCRC. Jack Lowe read Mike Kehoe review letter dated March 14, 2005. A list of revisions was included in the letter and Mike Kehoe did not see a problem with these being addressed. A copy of the private road ordinance will be sent to the applicant’s attorney for a reference. Mike Kehoe also noted tree preservation not covered in the documents. This should be addressed more clearly by the Planning Commission and then provisions included in the documents. Same comment holds true for open space, that it be maintained in perpetuity by the association. Mike Kehoe would also want included “no amendment can occur that affects the township’s right without the township’s
approval.” Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission members to clarify their preference on the tree removal. John Enos interjected; the applicant agreed that each individual unit would submit a site plan to the township
indicating tree preservation. Tom Dumond said this
would be incorporated into the Master Deed. Jack Lowe asked if
Phil Westmoreland has received a grading plan showing the clearing limits. review and the grading
limits are consistent with what the applicant is showing tonight. Jack Lowe asked the
Planning Commission members if they had any questions. Jim Anderson had questions about the gravel road going to the west. On the adjacent parcel, is that a road bed
also? Tom Dumond answered the road ends several hundred feet to the west of the applicant’s property line. Jim Anderson noted during the preliminary review there was discussion on bringing that section of land up to the requirements necessary to accommodate emergency vehicles. That was the reason for the access, not necessary for future development, but for emergency vehicles in case the main entrance was
blocked. The Planning Commission noted to Tom Dumond that the site plan shows an easement from the end of the cul-de-sac
to the existing the existing road
rather than stubbing it at the end of the applicant’s property. Tom Dumond said that would be something they would have to work out with the adjacent property owners as
they would need their approval for the connection. Jim Anderson was under
the impression that had already been worked out. Tom Dumond said the
use was worked out but upgrades were not discussed with the owners. Jim Anderson wants
that addressed; otherwise, it is useless under poor conditions. John Enos told the
Planning Commission this can be made a condition of final approval. Jean Root asked about outstanding items in a review letter from the Livingston County Drain Commission (LCDC) that are referenced in an Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment review letter. She wants to know if these
items have been addressed. Phil Westmoreland said the changes are reflected on the site plan and he is comfortable with the changes. Jean Root asked for clarification on when the condominium documents would reflect the changes discussed earlier.
Would this be completed prior to going to the Board of Trustees? Tom Dumond answered
yes. Discussion ensued on tree preservation shown on plot plans submitted with land use permits and how this will be
addressed in motions for enforcements. Jean Root motioned to recommend final site plan approval for Copperfield Villas, Tax ID #4710-01-300-030, 031 & 032 with the following conditions to be met and sent to the Board of Trustees for their
review and approval. 1. All concerns addressed in township attorney Mike Kehoe review letter dated March 14, 2005. 2.
Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment
review letter dated March 10, 2005. 3. The final site plan should reflect and instruct each individual lot owner to submit with each land use application to the township for their review and approval indicating tree preservation for
each lot. 4.
The connection to by
Howell Area Fire Authority. Jim Anderson seconded. Roll call vote: Dave Hamann, John Lowe, Jean Root, Jim Anderson— all yes.
Motion carried 4-0. Proposed Text
Amendment Article XVIII Site Plan Review Procedure Jack Lowe asked John
Enos to give an update. John Enos informed the Planning Commission that they have been working on the proposed text with Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment. They received comments from Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment this week and they intend to incorporate these into the draft Site Plan Review Procedure and have that available at the next Planning Commission meeting. John Enos is requesting this item be tabled to the April
26, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Dave Hamann clarified with John Enos that the site plan checklist will need to be updated to reflect any changes to
Article XVIII and included with the submittal. John Enos said the site plan checklist will be incorporated into the text and he will review for changes. Jack Lowe asked if Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment had any comments. None heard. Jack Lowe asked the Planning
Commission members if they had further comments.
None heard. Dave Hamann motioned to table proposed text amendment to Article XVIII Site Plan Review Procedure.
Jean Root seconded. Motion
Carried 4-0. Sections 8.01 F 6 & 7, 8.02 F 6 & 7, Section 6.20 E and Section 6.18 F & G - Condominium
Projects These four proposed
text amendments were part of this discussion. Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission if item #7 implied to them this could apply with individual lot splits, could this be interpreted to do so, because that was not the intent. He thinks it could be
interpreted that way as written. Dave Hamann said item #7 should only apply to site condominium and asked John Enos if he knew where the
Planning Commission was going. John Enos said maybe this should be taken out of 8.01 F #7 Rural Residential (RR) and 8.02 F #7 Suburban Residential (SR). It is covered in the site condominium section and that section requires
subdivisions follow the same standards. Dave Hamann feels the text should clarify interior road of a private road, site condominium or subdivision. John Enos agreed if text is kept in RR & SR, then site condominium or subdivision should be added.
or subdivision. Discussion ensued on the text “no lots or units will be accessed other than roads interior to the development.” The Planning Commission would like to see this in the three Sections 8.01 F, 8.02 F and 6.18. The definition of a development was discussed and Dave Hamann read to the Planning Commission and it was determined this may not work. The text plat, site condominium unit or development
was settled upon. Jack Lowe asked if
this justified another public hearing. John Enos thought the removal of one word would not constitute another public hearing, he will check with Mike Kehoe. Discussion ensued on
the various scenarios that could arise and how these would be resolved. Jack Lowe asked John
Enos to read the proposed text. John Enos read “no lots or units will be permitted driveway access from a road that is not an interior road of a
plat or condominium or development.” Jean Root asked if the same text could be added to 6.20 E and if this would help clarify the intent? John Enos said the text along with a graphic would help. This will also take care of the earlier concern if someone has a large parcel and the ability to land divide without going through a site plan review, this
would still have to meet this requirement. John Enos
recommendation to include proposed text in 8.01 F 7, 8.02 F 7, 6.18 F and
6.20 E. Jean Root asked that 8.01 F 7, 8.02 F 7 and 6.20 E to be brought to the April 26, 2005 meeting for the Planning Commission to review. Then send the two text amendments off to Livingston County
Department of Planning (LCDP) along with 6.20 E. Jean Root asked if a
diagram is added to the definition section would this require a public
hearing. John Enos does not
think so, yet will ask Mike Kehoe to be certain. Dave Hamann suggested John Enos bounce this off of Robert Stanford of the LCDP to see if this clarifies the intent. Proposed Text
Amendment 6.24—Landscape Buffer Jack Lowe asked the Planning Commission members if they have any comments on the proposed text.
None heard. Jean Root motioned to send Section 6.24 Landscape Buffers to LCDP for its review and comment, and then send to the Board of Trustees for its review and approval. Dave Hamann seconded. Motion Carried 4-0. Proposed Text Amendment 8.01 E 6 & 7 Rural Residential Uses Permitted by Right Subject to
Special Conditions Jack Lowe opened
discussion. John Enos noted this
is the removal of crematorium from item #6 and deleting item #7 Child Care. Dave Hamann asked if
crematorium and child care would be removed in the SR district. John Enos thinks these are better in a commercial or industrial district. In a residential district it could be an accessory
use to a funeral home instead of a listed use. Discussion ensued on removing gun ranges and John Enos will discuss this with Mike Kehoe to make sure it is not
exclusionary. the township. John Enos reiterated the Planning Commission is requesting removal of Child Care from RR and Crematorium from RR
& SR. tightened up and the definitions could be clarified. Limits and regulations are placed by the State of NEW BUSINESS Private Road
Discussion Jean Root wants discussion on boulevards and single point of entry. The LCRC starts the count again when there is a
road crossing. Dave Hamann thought that situation is managed by the International Fire Code limiting the amount to 30 with a single
point of access. Charles Musson, lock property by
limiting the amount with one point of access.
Discussion ensued on paved vs. gravel roads and the number that will be allowed with one point of access.
It is not unusual to limit the amount with a linear distance or
number of units. Jean Root wants to avoid this situation and emphasize to the consultants the maximum number of 25 units on a gravel
road. She would like further
discussion at the April 11, 2004 Special Meeting. John Enos has some examples and will review these with Mike Kehoe for the April 11, 2005 meeting. Proposed
In-House Workshop John Enos is teaching a citizen planner class for the Livingston County Extension office. He would like to offer a 1 hour presentation/overview of this class to the township. He would like to have the Planning Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals and Board of Trustees attend. Can this be added to the Planning
Commission May Special meeting agenda or set a separate date. Dave Hamann would like to see all outstanding zoning ordinance text amendments placed on Special Meeting agendas. He is concerned there are outstanding amendments that are getting strung out.
Annette McNamara to provide the Planning Commission with a list of the proposed text amendments. Annette McNamara will work with John Enos to set a date and pass that on to the Board of Trustees and Zoning Board of
Appeals. At the April 11, 2005
special meeting the date can be set. Jack Lowe would like
Mike Kehoe to attend. Dave Hamann summarized the agenda for the May meeting. John Enos presentation on private roads and discussion with
the Zoning Board of Appeals on the proposed text amendments. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC No response.
Jack Lowe closed the call to the public. ADJOURNMENT Dave Hamann motioned to adjourn the meeting at 9:34 p.m. Jim Anderson seconded. Motion Carried 4-0.
|
||
