|
|||
|
|
MARION TOWNSHIP AGENDA and DRAFT MINUTES January 25, 2005 CALL
TO ORDER: MEMBERS
PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Agenda Items Only - 3 minute limit APPROVAL OF AGENDA: January 25, 2005 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR: December 20, 2004 Regular Meeting OLD BUSINESS: Comprehensive Plan - Review Changes & Adoption Plan Review, Inspection and Construction Standards Proposed Text Amendment Article XVII Site Plan Review Procedure Copperfield Villas - Site Plan Review
Woodland Ordinance
NEW BUSINESS: Pinebrook Meadow - Site Plan Review Marion Pines - Site Plan Review CALL
TO PUBLIC: ADJOURNMENT: DRAFT MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT:
JOHN LOWE, CHAIRPERSON
JEAN ROOT, SECRETARY
JIM ANDERSON
DAVE HAMANN
DEBRA WIEDMAN-CLAWSON ABSENT:
NONE OTHERS PRESENT:
ROBERT W. HANVEY,
SUPERVISOR
ANNETTE MCNAMARA, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
PHIL WESTMORELAND, ORCHARD,
HILTZ & MCCLIMENT
JOHN ENOS,
CARLISLE/WORTMAN CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called
to order at 9:20 p.m. APPROVAL OF
AGENDA Dave Hamann asked the agenda be amended to include the Comprehensive Plan under Old Business. Dave Hamann motioned to approve the January 25, 2005 regular meeting amended agenda. Jean Root seconded.
Motion carried 5-0. The Planning
Commission members introduced themselves at the public hearing. CALL TO THE
PUBLIC During the approval of the agenda, it was noted that Copperfield Villas had requested to be removed from tonight’s agenda. A resident had come to the meeting for that agenda item. The Planning Commission asked if he had any questions or comments. The resident asked the pricing of the homes in Copperfield Villas. The Planning Commission could not answer the question. The resident questioned the plans noting the current vegetation to be kept, how will that be done? John Enos answered his question
and clearing limits and buffering were discussed. usability of the park.
John Enos answered it is more of a natural area. APPROVAL OF
MINUTES Dave Hamann motioned to approve the December 20, 2004 regular minutes. Jim Anderson seconded.
Motion carried 4-0. Jean
Root abstained. OLD BUSINESS Comprehensive
Plan Review and Adoption John Lowe asked the
Planning Commission members if they had any comments.
Jean Root motioned to
approve Resolution No. PC 1-25-05 and read the following: WHEREAS, the Marion Township Planning Commission desires to adopt a comprehensive plan and has made the necessary inquiries, investigations and surveys of the appropriate resources of the township; and WHEREAS, the comprehensive plan will promote the public health, safety and general welfare; to encourage the use of resources in accordance with their character and adaptability; to avoid the overcrowding of land by buildings or people; to lessen congestion on public roads and streets; to facilitate provision for a system of transportation, sewage disposal, safe and adequate water supply, recreation and other public improvements; and consider the character of the township and its suitability for particular uses judged in terms of such factors as the trend in land and population development; and WHEREAS, the Marion Township Planning Commission has noticed and conducted a public hearing in accordance with the requirements of the Township Planning Act (Public Act 168 of 1959, as amended), said hearing
held on November 10, 2004; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Marion Township Planning Commission hereby adopts the 2005 Marion
Township Comprehensive Plan. Dave Hamann seconded the resolution and noted that page two of the comprehensive plan introduction needs the date inserted, the date should also be inserted in the footer, and 2004 should be changed to 2005 on the cover page. Roll call vote: Jim Anderson, Jean Root, John Lowe,
Dave Hamann, and Debra Wiedman- Plan Review,
Inspection and Construction Standards John Enos asked that this agenda item and the next agenda item be combined. John Enos updated the Planning
Commission on the progress and summarized. Chris Fleck, Advantage Civil Engineering, would like a checklist included in the protocols; too difficult to follow. A preliminary and final site plan review is a must. He feels construction issues are holding up site
plan review. and Phil Westmoreland request placement on an agenda. Dave Hamann seconded. Motion carried 5-0.
Proposed Text
Amendment Article XVIII Site Plan Review Procedure Dave Hamann motioned to table Proposed Text Amendment Article XVIII Site Plan Review Procedure until John Enos and Phil Westmoreland request placement on an agenda. Debra Wiedman-Clawson
seconded. Motion carried 5-0.
Copperfield
Villas Site Plan Review Dave Hamann motioned to table this item as requested by the applicant, and this item will not be placed on an agenda until requested by the applicant. Jim Anderson seconded. Motion carried 5-0. Woodland
Ordinance Phil Westmoreland asked for direction and suggested a performance ordinance instead of a regulatory -type thing. That way, tree identification/survey is eliminated. A certain percentage of vegetation is to remain 6 inches in
diameter or larger. know what is on site.
Phil Westmoreland said it is up to the developer to identify trees. Jean Root would like drip line language included. John Lowe would like to see language included that anything other than the building envelope is not to be disturbed. Maybe they can get credit for undistributed tree
stands. Space Development to give a credit for preservation and get more units for this. We have to provide incentive.
Incentive to developer was discussed. Cluster Housing
language. and Phil Westmoreland request placement on an agenda. Jean Root seconded. Motion carried 5-0. NEW BUSINESS Pinebrook
Meadows Site Plan Review Chris Fleck asked if
this was to be reviewed as a preliminary tonight. John Enos stated the Planning Commission is not comfortable with seeing a plan only once. This will be a preliminary
review tonight. being reviewed by Mike
Kehoe. be reviewed by Mike Kehoe. Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) requirements were discussed—street
lights, sidewalks and signage. John Enos summarized his review letter dated January 13, 2005, which explains how to handle outstanding issues and
gave preliminary approval. Phil Westmoreland summarized his review letter dated January 11, 2005. Mr. Westmoreland spoke about the outlet at the detention basin and thinks this can be accomplished without changing the site plan. He also spoke about the necessity of the easement agreement with the neighbor. Orchard, Hiltz & McCliment
is recommending preliminary approval. Jean Root questioned the lot frontage of lot 7. Chris Fleck explained there are two dimensions that equal 85 feet. John Lowe asked about
the water main from development. The fire hydrant that Phil Westmoreland referenced was too far off the road right-of- way. The water main is within the 25-foot greenbelt, there are large oaks on that lot line. Is there enough room to move that water line within the easement to avoid the trees. If there are no trees in the way, it is not a
problem. John Lowe would like
Chris Fleck to look. Chris Fleck will locate any existing oak trees and move the pipe around it. Phil Westmoreland does not think there are
any oaks within that area. Debra Wiedman-Clawson questioned street lighting and a general note with the easement issue. Planning Commission
recommendations were contingent. Phil Westmoreland stated he will not issue construction plan approval without the easement agreement. Jean Root motioned to recommend preliminary approval for Pinebrook Meadows, Tax #4710-03-200-005
located on Larry McCarthy gave a presentation and expressed his frustration with the site plan review process. John Enos summarized his review letter dated November 12, 2004. Mr. Enos has concerns that the building envelopes on lots 3, 13 & 14 are too small, the adjacent wetlands may need to be mitigated to build a
home. Another concern is lots 11
& 12: depending on how calculates the 4:1 ratio, these lots may not meet these requirements. If we can come to a conclusion on those
issues, he is comfortable granting preliminary approval. Phil Westmoreland summarized his review letter dated January 18, 2005. Mr. Westmoreland noted ongoing issues with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit. Yet this will have no impact on a preliminary site plan approval. There is a question of the 50-foot greenbelt and the point from where the measurement is taken. They are showing a proposed right-of-way and an existing right-of-way. The detention basin and the cul-de-sac encroach on the 50 feet if measured from the proposed 60-foot right-of-way. It does not encroach from the existing 33-foot right-of-way. This should be explored by the Planning Commission and will not require major changes for the final site plan, should the Planning Commission desire a change. Phil Westmoreland is recommending preliminary approval other than discussion on the 50-foot greenbelt issue. Discussion of the encroachment of the greenbelt ensued. The cul-de-sac is a minor issue as it is just within the greenbelt. The entire detention basin is placed within the 50-foot greenbelt. There are no existing trees within this area and disturbance within the greenbelt was discussed. Planting within the
easement without disturbance to underground utilities is possible. Debra Wiedman-Clawson noted they already have the 60-foot right-of-way plus the 50-foot greenbelt.
There will be 77 feet of buffer. John Enos said if the Planning Commission accepts this, the applicant will need to include significant
landscaping around the detention basin. John Lowe questioned where the mitigation area is for the 14,000 square feet of wetland. Larry McCarthy answered that to preserve the woodlands on the site, they applied to MDEQ without showing mitigation on the plan. The MDEQ review letter came back with no comment. MDEQ does not require mitigation under 1/3rd of an acre and this is ¼ acre. It is not worth it to cut the trees for the mitigation. John Enos asked Larry McCarthy to provide documentation of that. The 4:1 ratio requirement for lots 11 & 12 were discussed and reconfigurations of these lots to meet the zoning ordinance were reviewed. Larry McCarthy said the owner did not want to keep the property and this affords ownership of a large parcel for the proposed development. John Enos reiterated to the applicant the Planning Commission is concerned with the length-to-width ratio and the policy of averaging. allowing distorted lots. He does not see a demonstrated purpose, unless you have something that would benefit those
two lots as opposed to having the property go with the front house. John Enos suggested an Open Space Preservation project, due to the unbuildable land behind lots 11 & 12. He also suggested a variance. John Lowe answered that the Zoning Board of Appeals does not look at variances
that are economically driven. parcel be.
Larry McCarthy answered possibly 20 acres and would be 75% wetlands. answered yes. Jean Root motioned to recommend preliminary approval for Tax #4710-04-200-013, Marion Pines, on CALL TO THE
PUBLIC Jim Barnwell commented on preliminary versus final approval for site plan review. On the woodland ordinance, he hears the Planning Commission say the developer will pay for this. Keep in mind that the developer will pay for this and all the costs will be passed on to the consumer. ADJOURNMENT Dave Hamann motioned to adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m. Debra Wiedman-Clawson seconded. Motion carried 5-0.
|
||
