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- Public Hearing - Minutes

                  October 26, 2004  @ 7:00 pm




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

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:  October 26, 2004 Public Hearing   


OLD BUSINESS:   Proposed Text Amendment – Section 6.07 – Accessory Structures                     




MEMBERS PRESENT:  Jean Root, Jim Anderson, Dave Hamann, and

                                    Debra Wiedman-Clawson

OTHERS PRESENT:        Annette McNamara, Zoning Administrator



The public hearing was called to order at 7:00 p.m.


Jean Root motioned to approve the agenda as presented.  Debra Wiedman-Clawson seconded.  

Motion carried 4-0.


John Lowe absent


None heard


Proposed Text Amendment Section 6.07—Accessory Structures

Dave Hamann read the proposed language.




None heard


Jean Root motioned to close the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.  Jim Anderson seconded.  

Motion carried 4-0.


                         Public Hearing Minutes

                       October 26, 2004  @ 7:15 pm




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

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:  October 26, 2004 Public Hearing     


OLD BUSINESS:  Crossroad Apostolic Church – Special Use Permit – Day Care Center                    




MEMBERS PRESENT:  John Lowe, Jean Root, Jim Anderson, Dave Hamann, and 

                                    Debra Wiedman-Clawson

OTHERS PRESENT:        Annette McNamara, Zoning Administrator



The public hearing was called to order at 7:15 p.m.


Jean Root motioned to approve the agenda as presented.  Jim Anderson seconded. 

Motion carried 4-0.


John Lowe came in at 7:30 p.m.


None heard


Crossroad Apostolic Church Special Use Permit

Keith Richards introduced himself as the Director and Trustee for the Crossroad Apostolic Church . 

The day care is currently in operation. The church is concerned with the lack of day care in the 

county.They are also concerned with affordable day care, special needs children served and odd

 hours. John Lowe asked how the children are transported to the church.

Jo Ann Cook, Supervisor for the day care answered that four of the children arrive by bus.

Jean Root asked how many children attend and are they licensed by the state?

Jo Ann Cook responded currently 19 and the state has certified a maximum of 35, yes they are 

licensed. John Lowe asked if they increase the number from 35 do they have to apply to the state?

Keith Richards responded yes. John Lowe noted if there is an increase the township must be 

notified for the Planning Commission to review again. John Lowe asked Phil Westmoreland to 

comment on ingress/egress. Phil Westmoreland responded signage, arrows and double yellow

lines to direct traffic flow would work. Jim Anderson asked if there was a play area with fencing?

Jo Ann Cook responded there is no permanent play equipment and no intention of adding play 

equipment.  Now they have portable little tikes’ equipment. John Lowe read letters Keith Richards 

gave to the Planning Commission members at the beginning of the meeting.  Work Skills letter 

dated October 22, 2004 supporting the day care.  Livingston County (4C) Council letter dated 

October 22, 2004 supporting the day care. Livingston Service Center letter dated October 22, 2004

supporting the day care. John Lowe stated the church is allowed to continue under current 

licensing by the State of Michigan .  He asked Keith Richards to submit a revised plan showing 

ingress/egress and the play area on the site. Jean Root reiterated the process the church will go

through from this point on. Jean Root motioned to send the October 25, 2004 transmittal from

Crossroads Apostolic Church and the revised drawing to Mike Kehoe, Township Attorney for

review and comment on traffic circulation and playground issues.  Also send the minutes from

the meeting.  Jim Anderson seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.




Charles Musson Triangle Lake Road .  He sat on the Planning Commission when the Crossroads  

Apostolic Church requested a Special Use Permit for the Church.  At that time the day care center 

was discussed.  He strongly recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval. 


Jean Root motioned to close the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.  Jim Anderson seconded.  

Motion carried 5-0.


                         AGENDA- MINUTES

                      Planning- Regular Meeting

                       October 26, 2004  @ 7:30 pm

CALL TO ORDER:                                  


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

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:    October 26, 2004   


                        September 28, 2004 Regular Meeting

                        September 28, 2004 Public Hearings 

OLD BUSINESS:         

                               Proposed Text Amendment – Section 7.10 – Gross Lot Area

                        Comprehensive Plan – Review of Cover Page                


                    Plan Review, Inspection and Construction Standards



                              PLANNING COMMISSION

                                   REGULAR MEETING

MEMBERS PRESENT:    John Lowe, Dave Hamann , Jean Root, Jim Anderson,

                                               Debra Wiedman-Clawson (part of meeting)


OTHERS PRESENT:        Phil Westmoreland, OHM

                                               Annette McNamara , Zoning Administrator

                                               Bob Hanvey, Township Supervisor



John Lowe called the meeting to order at 7:55 p.m.


Jean Root motioned to approve the agenda as amended.  Dave Hamann seconded.

Motion carried 5-0.


The members of the Planning Commission (PC) introduced themselves.




September 28, 2004 Public Hearings

Dave Hamann motioned to approve the September 28, 2004 Public Hearing

minutes.  Jean Root seconded.  Motion carried 5-0.


Proposed Text Amendment:  Section 7.10—Gross Lot Area

Jean Root motioned to send the text amendment for Section 7.10—Gross Lot Area

to the Livingston County Planning Commission (LCPC) for its recommendation and

review to be forwarded to the township board.  The language shall read as follows:

minimum lot area shall be the gross lot area as that term is defined in Article III—

Definitions of this zoning ordinance. Jim Anderson seconded. Motion carried 5-0.

Comprehensive Plan—Review of Cover Page and Map

The Planning Commission reviewed three options and additional photos for the cover page.

The PC agreed to remove the photo of the door and replace it with the steer house. Annette

McNamara updated the PC on the display for the November 10 Comprehensive Plan Public

Hearing. The PC also discussed the color changes for the map. The colors in the updated

map more clearly define the districts. 

ERS Discussion

Jean Root said she reviewed the difference between Rural Residential (RR) and Existing

Residential Subdivision (ERS) 2, and the only difference is that the minimum frontage is 100’

versus 120’ in RR for anything developed as a subdivision.  The ERS-2 front yard setback is

100’, which is more restrictive than RR.  Dave Hamann asked if there were any problems with

the uses permitted by right in RR versus ERS-2.  Ms. Root said no. Charlie Musson said that

the houses in Davis Road Estates are back so far because there’s a 50’ right-of-way.  It’s the

same for Pinckney Road . Any subdivision on a main road should have a 50’ setback from the

centerline of the road. On the south side of Davis Road , it’s 50’.  On the north side, because

it’s metes and bounds, it’s 33’. Ms. Wiedman-Clawson said Burkhart Road is the same way. 

Ms. Wiedman-Clawson said the zoning needs to be changed, and new construction would have

to comply with the new zoning or specific lots will have to be grandfathered in. Mr. Lowe asked

if the attorney had reviewed this issue. Mr. Hamann said no, the attorney only looked at Section

19.02.  Mr. Lowe said he didn’t believe there were any buildable lots left in ERS-2.

Ms. Wiedman-Clawson said there would be an issue with rebuilding. Bob Hanvey said the

township only has one ERS district now.  Mr. Hamann said not in the zoning ordinances. 

Mr. Hanvey said his understanding was that when the last zoning map was published, it was the

wrong map.  It didn’t show the manufactured home park or the ERS-2 districts. Because that

was the map that was published, it became effective.  You can’t bring back ERS-2 without

having rezoning.  Ms. Root said this needs to be resolved prior to approving the comprehensive

plan because the master plan map would need to be changed.  Ms. Wiedman-Clawson asked if

the master plan map currently does not have ERS-2.  Ms. Root said that is correct. 

Ms. Wiedman-Clawson said her recommendation would be to make the zoning ordinance

correct.  Mr. Lowe suggested that this information be submitted to the township attorney for

his review and recommendation prior to the November 10 public hearing.  Jim Anderson asked

if the map could be published, then amended.  Mr. Lowe said that is what would have to be

done.  Mr. Lowe also suggested that the attorney discuss this with John Enos. 


Plan Review, Inspection and Construction Standards

Mr. Lowe asked if the question of whether or not the township can decline to accept plans for

an agenda if there are obvious issues had been answered.  Ms. McNamara said no.  If an

applicant wants to submit plans that don’t meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance, it

should go to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) prior to the PC.  Phil Westmoreland from

OHM has been very helpful by providing timely reviews to the township and the applicant. If

there are too many outstanding issues, the applicant is told they can’t be placed on the agenda

until corrections are made.  Charlie Musson said it should go to the PC first.  The PC would

make a recommendation to the ZBA.  Ms. Wiedman-Clawson said she agrees. 

Mr. Westmoreland said the way the ordinance is currently written, it goes to the ZBA first,

then the PC, and that is normally how most communities operate.  The ZBA has to be its own

body, and they don’t want the PC or others putting pressure on the ZBA.  Mr. Westmoreland

said the only thing written differently is road geometrics.  That would be the only time it would

go to the PC with a recommendation back to the ZBA.   Discussion ensued regarding Section

8.01 D 1 a.  This language should also apply to Section 8.02 for SR zoning and Section 8.03

for UR zoning. Phil Westmoreland suggested it could possibly be part of the general provisions

of the zoning ordinance so that it applies to all zoning districts. 

Discussion was held on the Private Sewage Wastewater Treatment ordinance. Ms. Wiedman-

Clawson suggested that Mr. Lowe discuss this issue with John Enos, who is well-versed in this

area.  Ms. Wiedman-Clawson also said the suggestion was made to limit treatment plants to

areas with proposed sewer and water, but the capacity is not available.  A developer could put

a treatment plant on the property and the master deed would specifically state that when

municipal water and sewer is available, the treatment plant hook up and abandon the treatment

plant.  This would take care of the liability the township is concerned about. 

The PC asked to have a special meeting scheduled on Monday, November 15, for an

ordinance workshop, specifically the Private Sewage Wastewater Treatment Plant ordinance. 

Ms. McNamara will invite the planner and the attorney. 

(Debra Wiedman-Clawson left the meeting at 9:00 p.m. )

Mr. Lowe asked Ms. McNamara to ask John Enos the best way to incorporate the access of lots that

we have in RR to bring it forward throughout the township, and what is the best way to do that. 

Mr. Enos can submit the proposed language to Mr. Kehoe for his review.  The consensus can be

brought back to the PC.  Ms. McNamara said that would be done for possibly the November 15

meeting, but no later than the November 23 meeting. Mr. Hamann said that whatever is decided,

reference needs to be in the new procedures that the zoning administrator or assistant zoning

administrator should be able to review all submittal information to determine if it is administratively

complete.  There are a couple of changes for the site plan review checklist.  Mr. Westmoreland said

he hasn’t gone through the procedures in depth.  He was looking at past site plans, what the township

has done with them, what is the next step?  Right now, some people are submitting constructions

plans; some are not, its hit and miss.  There is no process set in place for inspection on all of these

sites, and he’s trying to come up with some things that can be added in so that once the PC has

approved the site plan, they know they have to submit detailed engineering, and these types of things

 would be inspected, etc.  They would know what is required post-construction, like as-builts, etc. 

Mr. Hanvey added that the county is working on a standardized way to submit machine-readable

drawings in GIS.  The standards aren’t done yet.  The Drain Commission has taken a lead right now,

and they have a proposed set of standards, but they’re not done yet.  It would be better for the

 township if the developer got the drawings to GIS.  Mr. Westmoreland agreed that it where that type

of information should be added.  Ultimately, it should be incorporated somewhere either referenced

by the ordinance or in the ordinance.  Mr. Hamann said the PC was having a lot of cases come before

it with incomplete packages.  Based on some references that were made about other townships

using a checklist process, the PC put together the site plan checklist.  At that time, the intent was to

create a document for the zoning administrator to use in checking that packages are complete.

 What the PC is finding is whether or not things meet the items on the checklist, so what we’re saying

is the process is not working with this checklist and we need to figure out how to fix it.  We don’t want

to go back to not having anything.  Mr. Westmoreland said one of the things the township wants done

is inspection of private roads.  Developers need to know up front what the process is.  Ms. Root said

the PC is finding that the developer knows the packages are incomplete.  Does the PC still have to

review them even though they have five lots on a cul-de-sac, etc.  There are cut-and-dried things that

aren’t being followed.  Also, the township has completed site plans that have been approved, but they

aren’t being followed, trees are being taken down, etc.  Is there some sort of financial penalty; how

does the township hold the line on what’s been approved and what they do.  Mr. Westmoreland said

those are the kinds of things you would get performance bonds for.  Ms. McNamara said that with

some of the townships, applications can only be accepted during certain times.  Mr. Westmoreland

said in his opinion, plans shouldn’t have to be submitted to the PC if they are incomplete. Realistically,

however, the township probably can’t keep someone from being placed on the agenda if it’s requested

.  If that happens, most times the planner will tell the applicant they can be on the agenda, but the

planner’s review letter will probably state “not approved” and no discussion is held.  Ms. Root said

that’s what needs to be done.  Mr. Anderson said that in the past, site plans have been approved with

contingencies, and then no one followed up.  Mr. Anderson asked if pre-application meetings would

be held before or after site plans are submitted to the clerk’s office.  Mr. Westmoreland said that’s the

township’s decision.  Mr. Hamann if a submittal is that bad, the PC can recommend a pre-application

meeting as an option. Otherwise, it keeps getting tabled each month.  Mr. Anderson said one of the

 things the township is trying to avoid is having the zoning administrator argue with the applicant at the

counter.  Mr. Lowe said the first question the applicant usually asks is “do I have everything I need,

I want to be on the next agenda, if I’m missing something, let me know.”  That situation will happen

regardless of who accepts the application.  Ms. McNamara said that the administration section of the

ordinance states that the application is submitted to the clerk and then a response is sent within five

days about whether the submission is complete.  Mr. Westmoreland said usually when a developer

submits an application, it isn’t with the intention of getting on the next agenda.  It’s to get it into the

review queue, and it will be placed on the agenda when the planner has it in the right format.

Mr. Lowe said applicants are coming in the last day and wanting to be on the next meeting agenda.

It may be necessary to change the ordinance and remove the deadline of 14 days prior to the meeting,

and state the item will be placed on the agenda when it’s ready.  Mr. Westmoreland said in many

communities, the engineer does the review for the site plan (step 1), the PC approves the site plan,

the board approves the site plan, then detailed engineering plans are submitted.  Mr. Lowe said that

might not give the PC enough details.  Mr. Musson offered to bring a package of information to

Ms. McNamara for distribution to the PC.  This item will be placed on the November 23 agenda.


Steve Majors, Pheasant Run:  Mr. Majors asked for information on private roads.  He stated he

can’t get land use permits for splits because he’s not on an approved private road.  Mr. Lowe said

discussion has been held on this item, but not completed.  Mr. Hanvey said the problem when dealing

with residents at the counter is that there is no list that says what is and isn’t approved.  Mr. Majors

said there is a road maintenance agreement recorded with Livingston County .  Mr. Lowe said this has

been discussed with the township attorney, although no conclusions were reached.  Mr. Lowe said this

item is a priority and will be added to an upcoming agenda, possibly December. 


Dave Hamann motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.   Jean Root seconded. 

Motion carried 4-0.