on May 4, 2011 at 5:46am.
Planning Commission Meeting on September 12, 2005
Planning Commission Meeting
SEPTEMBER 12, 2005
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
CALL TO THE PUBLIC: (Note: The Board will not begin any new business after 10:00 p.m.)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of sketch plan and impact assessment for a proposed 1170 sq. ft. addition to Brighton Nazarene Church, located at 7679 Brighton Road, Sec. 25, petitioned by Brighton Nazarene Church. (05-25)
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding impact assessment. (dated 8-3-05)
B. Disposition regarding sketch plan. (dated 8-3-05)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 2…Review of site plan extension for a proposed 26,868 sq. ft. addition to existing Cleary University located at 3750 Cleary Drive, Sec. 5, petitioned by Cleary University. (04-19)
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding extension of impact assessment approval.
B. Disposition regarding extension of site plan approval.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #3…Review of an update to the Master Plan affecting the entire Township of Genoa.
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding update to master plan.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #4…Request for determination of similar use as authorized by 11-02-02 of the Genoa Township Zoning Ordinance. The request is petitioned by the Salvation Army for a community center and a transitional shelter facility.
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Disposition of determination of similar use.
Administrative Business:
-
Planners report presented by LSL Planners
-
Approval of August 8, 2005 Planning Commission meeting minutes
-
Member Discussion
Adjournment
MINUTES
The work session of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Don Pobuda at 6:30 p.m. The following commission members were present constituting a quorum for transaction of business: Don Pobuda, James Mortensen, Barbara Figurski, Curt Brown, Teri Olson, Dean Tengel, and Mark Snyder. Also present was Kelly Kolakowski, Township Planner; Jeff Purdy from Langworthy, Strader, LeBlanc & Associates, Inc. and Tesha Humphriss from Tetra Tech, MPS. By the end of the work session, there were approximately 60 persons in the audience.
Items scheduled for action during the regular session of the commission were discussed.
The regular session of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Don Pobuda at 7:00 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited and a moment of silence was observed.
Moved by Figurski, seconded by Mortensen, to approve the Agenda as written.
The Motion carried unanimously.
The call to the public was made to discuss items not on the agenda. There was no response and the call to the public was closed at 7:01 p.m. Chairman Pobuda noted that the Board will not begin any new business after 10:00 p.m.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC: (Note: The Board will not begin any new business after 10:00 p.m.)
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #1…Review of sketch plan and impact assessment for a proposed 1170 sq. ft. addition to Brighton Nazarene Church, located at 7679 Brighton Road, Sec. 25, petitioned by Brighton Nazarene Church. (05-25)
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding impact assessment. (dated 8-3-05)
B. Disposition regarding sketch plan. (dated 8/3/05)
Jim Vaughn with The Meier Group/Architects, PLC,1801 West US Highway 223, Suite 160, Adrian, MI and Dennis Dan of Brighton Nazarene Church were present to represent the petitioner.
Mr. Dan stated that the addition was needed due to the overcrowding of the Sunday school classrooms. They would like to expand the classrooms by 10 ft. The addition would be 1,160 sq. ft.
Mr. Purdy reviewed his letter dated August 15, 2005.
· The plan does not provide calculations for building and impervious surface
coverage. Mr. Vaughn indicated that they will submit that information.
· Planning Commission approval is required for the proposed architecture. Commissioner Mortensen asked if the addition would match the existing building and Mr. Vaughn stated that it would match the sanctuary exactly.
· The submittal did not include a landscape plan and there were a number of trees required around detention pond, etc that were not installed. Mr. Dan stated that they have a contract for completion of the sprinkler system and other landscaping. They have revised the landscape plan. Mr. Purdy suggested that staff review and approve the revisions to the landscape plan and that for tonight's meeting, the Commission could either require completion prior to approval or they could require completion as a condition of approval. The Commissioners agreed to direct the petitioner to work with staff and seek administrative approval of the revised plan.
· Mr. Purdy commented that there were no details with regard to signage and Jim Vaughn stated that nothing with signage will be done, just the existing signage. Chairman Pobuda stated that there are currently two signs and only one sign was approved and if the Vacation Bible School sign or any additional temporary signage is utilized, you will need to get approval. Mr. Dan agreed to work with Township staff on the temporary signage.
Ms. Humphriss reviewed her letter dated August 17, 2005.
· There needs to be general clean up and that the arrow was incorrectly orientated.
· The other issue was the dumpster, located between the main church building and garage, needs to be enclosed. The requirement would be a split phase-block enclosure that matches the existing building materials. Mr. Vaughn stated that he will work with the church to get this completed.
· Ms. Humphriss had another concern regarding the detention pond 3.8 expansion capacity and requested submittal of detention pond calculations.
The call to the public was made at 7:17 p.m. with no response.
Moved by Figurski, supported by Brown, to approve Impact Assessment dated August 3, 2005 for a proposed 1160 sq. ft. addition to Brighton Nazarene Church, located at 7679 Brighton Road, Sec. 25, petitioned by Brighton Nazarene Church with the following conditions: Dust control measures will be added.
The motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Mortensen, supported by Snyder, to approve the Sketch Plan dated August 3, 2005 for a proposed 1160 sq. ft. addition to Brighton Nazarene Church, located at 7679 Brighton Road, Sec. 25, petitioned by Brighton Nazarene Church with the following conditions:
1. Plan will be modified to include calculations for building addition and impervious surface.
2. The materials for proposed expansion will match the existing church recently expanded.
3. Landscaping will be installed as indicated in the original site plan for the church expansion with minor modifications which could be approved by the township staff. Landscaping will be completed prior to occupancy permit
4. Signs will be consistent with township ordinance.
5. The north arrow on site plan will be pointed correctly.
6. The dumpster will be located as approved in the original site plan for the church expansion with split face block to be used and should be complete prior to occupancy permit.
7. The drainage calculations will be submitted for review.
The motion carried unanimously.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #2…Review of site plan extension for a proposed 26,868 sq. ft. addition to existing Cleary University located at 3750 Cleary Drive, Sec. 5, petitioned by Cleary University. (04-19)
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding extension of impact assessment approval.
B. Disposition regarding extension of site plan approval.
There was no one present to represent Cleary University. Ms. Kolakowski gave a brief summary of the request. Cleary University is currently involved in fundraising and they hope to meet their goal and commence construction in the next year.
The call to the public was made at 7:24 p.m. with no response.
Moved by Mortensen, seconded by Figurski, to recommend to the Township Board a one year extension of the impact assessment for a proposed 26,868 sq. ft. addition to existing Cleary University located at 3750 Cleary Drive, Sec. 5, petitioned by Cleary University. (04-19)
The motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Mortensen, seconded by Figurski, to approve a one year extension of the site plan for a proposed 26,868 sq. ft. addition to existing Cleary University located at 3750 Cleary Drive, Sec. 5, petitioned by Cleary University. (04-19)
The motion carried unanimously.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #3…Review of an update to the Master Plan affecting the entire Township of Genoa.
Planning Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation regarding update to master plan.
Chairmain Pobuda stated that due to the number of people the Commission would use tonight's hearing to hear the public comment and stated that a motion would not be made on this item tonight. The Commission will receive comments tonight then review the plan prior to taking action.
Mr. Purdy gave a presentation regarding the Master Plan.
A call to the public was opened at 7:50 p.m.
Mr. Ron Rogers of 4750 Edinburgh asked what happened to the preservation of rural character? I thought we already had an identity, a rural paradise. Genoa Township has an established identity. Why do we need to change it? Who needs it? If you want a downtown experience there are two only a few minutes away. Currently we have a nice buffer zone between the two downtowns. Why do we want to lose our rural identity? Who wants it? Nobody wants more pollution, special assessments, tax increases to pay for sidewalks, street lights. I doubt many people want sidewalks and streetlights. The key question is does any person have a corporate interest in this development? I see a 4 X 6 sign that has Todd Smith's name on it. Is this the same Todd Smith who is a Trustee? I think there is a conflict of interest.
Larry Kretzschmer of 4301 Willow View Court stated that his issue is what he did not see in the Plan. Where is the "for the people" - I would like someone to explain to me what this plan does for the general population other than increase taxes. This township has overpopulated faster that the infrastructure can sustain it. It has increased so rapidly that the value of present homes are diminishing. The tax review board and a mortgage banker today states we will have a rude awakening if you try to sell and have a high mortgage. What is in this plan for the people of this township?
Don Green of 751 Pathway stated that As you can see there are not too many people supporting this master plan revision. Who did the revision on this? How many people were involved? It seems like this revision is for the developers. You took the recreation and made it 1 acre and you took MDR and made it downtown. It looks like you want to pack us in here like sardines. The revision has taken away the rights of the people. We don't get to vote on this. You are just going to listen to our concerns and shove it down our throats.
Jack Pike of 686 Pathway drive reviewed his concerns. Page 68 - who defines reasonability? If township has to maintain roads, who will pay? Page 70 - Can we get the cross streets of these developments? Page 78 - Sidewalks - Brighton to Howell - I say Ha, Ha, Ha. Page 4 - should be rewritten. I think we ought to know if Todd Smith has any personal interests in this broadening of the Master Plan.
Pete Black of 198 South Hughes Road indicated that his concern is infrastructure. We should do infrastructure first, then develop. We keep developing, for example, Latson Road and nothing has been done with the traffic this has created. I agree with Don - who is going to benefit from developing this corner? It will only create traffic, streetlights, etc. We are taking the rural ambiance of Genoa Township away.
Ed Altounian of 4736 Edinburgh: My biggest concern is the town center/ civic center. Who is going to pay for all of this? Do we get a vote on this master plan or is it just going to be shoved down our throat. Who will make the final decision on the special assessments? Why is transportation in goals, isn't that provided by the county? Why is the Campground listed as primary growth. There were people in Brighton forced to put sidewalks in without wanting them. This will happen to us. We don't want it.
Mr. Purdy clarified that it has been the Township's policy to require developers to install sidewalks or the Township has used grant money.
David Cary of 1813 Hughes Road is concerned with the growth along Hughes Road. It is very narrow and Hughes Road cannot be expanded on because the traffic is very bad. Wetlands are being filled. What happened to the previous plan to protect wetlands? Setbacks along Hughes Road have routinely been overturned by ZBA to build. Wetlands by my house have shrunk 10 percent. I don't know how this master plan is going to protect the area North of Grand River on Hughes Road. Speeds have gotten out of hand. I don't want sidewalks. I moved here a long time ago. I hope that this new plan will stop the growth. The road will not handle this growth. The old Master Plan did not protect any of this. What will the new one do?
Jerry Balzak of 144 South Hughes Road stated that he knows we don't want to hear about Faulkwood. Six months ago I bought my property because it was nice and quiet here. The Drain Commissioners office has come through and cleared the creek and the woods on my property. The wildlife doesn't come around any more. I bought the house for peace and quiet, not to have all the traffic and houses. I don't know what can be done but I don't think we need any more people. Right now we have to wait 20 minutes to get through a red light.
Fred Jones of 800 Pathway Drive: I see one thing that is missing - no development with the Latson Road and I-96 interchange is in the plan.
Commissioner Mortensen stated that there is a lot of effort underway to get funding for the Latson Road interchange. It is coming slow, real slow, but there are a lot of efforts going on in Washington D.C. and more in Lansing.
Mr. Purdy added that SEMCOG the Southeastern Michigan Council of Governments had this in their 20 year plan but because of the funding cuts they have it set out more than 20 years
Joann Kowalenok -Assistant Secretary, International Society, Lake Chemung
4925 E. Grand River stated that they are going from recreational to single family. We like it recreational and we don't have any plans to change it. We did not ask for this. . We have no intention of selling in the future. We are being forced down this road by the township and it has been chosen for us. We don't want the change.
Tara Black of 144 South Hughes Road stated that Land owners are not entitled to highest use of land. You are changing land to allow developers to make the most money off of it. The township has to show that they have the public's health, safety, and welfare in mind. Lands are owned by people who want to develop it. Why is the township going to hinder those who live here and let them make millions.
Vaughn Masropian of 3417 Lakewood Shores Drive: I am sort of new to this community. I came from Farmington Hills. I purchased a home on Crooked Lake in Northshore. My concern is that every passing year we always have issues regarding water levels and I am always adding another section to my dock. I see a lot of dark area around East crooked Lake and West Crooked Lake. I want to make sure that this Master plan is having the proper ramifications against our waterways. I want to make sure that Crooked Lake does not become Mini Crooked Lake. I respect development. I came out here to have nature at my feet. I pay a hefty tax and I enjoy the lifestyle. I think we need to make sure that this is a good master plan and not a disaster plan.
Steve March of 4747 Edinburgh: Tell the developer no, go to court, protect what we have and don't lose all the resources we have come to enjoy. Leave Faulkwood recreational. If it has to be residential go 5 acres. Go to court. It is our tax dollars.
Elizabeth Swift of 6530 Forest Beach: I weep for my lake. There are wells around me pumping. My lake is disappearing. I moved here in 1972. I have watched your development come. My lake is on the earliest maps. Why should it disappear? I cannot get out of the gate because of the traffic. I know development has to come. You absolutely ignored our special assessment district even though we had 98%. I will never let you forget my lake.
Kathleen Olgeshlager of 2964 Atwood: I have lived here since 1965 - I am an environmentalist. I watch television instead of reading the paper. A lady handed me a pamphlet about what is going on. My whole neighborhood is here and many are not aware of what is going on. I think you need to take a hard look at what you are doing.
Merice Blackburn of 1506 Oak Haven: I moved out here in 1980. I moved here from Dearborn. I can see in the future that we will need a new High School and we are going to get so big, like Novi and Livonia. Right now Hughes and Grand River is a disaster at high traffic period times and this plan will make it more so. Developers are going to come in and put in shops, restaurants. This is not what we moved out here for. We will be so overpopulated and our children will not be able to afford to buy here and will be forced to move elsewhere, for what - a sophisticated town center.
Dan Colaluca of 1562 South Hughes Road: I am certainly not qualified to address the master plan. Town Center - I am flat against it. I live across from Wilson Marina. They have expanded their business and flood lights come through my window. The point I am trying to make is that if you do this I think it is a huge mistake. I try to stay out of Brighton and Howell. It is life in the fast lane. I read an article that a couple of people on the board thought it would be a good idea. But I didn't see anything from the residents. I am afraid to get my mail because of the speeds. I think this will just encourage this. Brighton shops are struggling and closing. I am sure that we will need to develop but a town center would be a disaster for this area. No one wants it.
Tom McCarthy of 968 White Willow Court: I know you cannot talk about Faulkwood but I can. Keep it recreational. My opinion is that it is not my problem the owner wants to sell it. There is no guarantee in life that you can sell for a profit. Keep the Faulkwood Golf Course Recreational - that is my concern.
Dietlind Lawrence of 3553 Lakewood Shores stated I don't know if the township realizes all of the board members who have real estate positions and this appears to give them an inside edge. It feels like you are just telling us that it is too bad and this is how it is going to be. The community does not want all of this development.
Glenda Altounian of 4736 Edinburgh asked about protecting trees in Faulkwood Shores. She questioned why every tree in Faulkwood Shores is labeled with a tag?
Scott Wallace of 1451 S. Hughes Road: Who is going to protect this area from the traffic. The speed limit is a concern. Now there is a mall in Green Oak Township - why? Who wants to live in a condo? I don't. You cannot make it affordable for young people. I want to live in the country so please keep it the country.
Ken Tyler of 5200 Richardson Road stated I think part of the problem is you have too much diversification. I think if you survey the townships around you 2 acres is the general rule. Look at Crystal Valley and Novel Estates. If you zone everything 2 acres it would solve most of your problems. Crystal Valley is across the street. It is 2 acres and they are beautiful. I think you are it making it high density zoning. Just make it all 2 acres.
Larry Kretzschmer of 4301 Willlow View Court asked if there is anyone who has the vision to make this township a city? If they do I would like you to identify them so we can do our duty as citizens so that person does not have a say in the final master plan. I will do what it takes to make that person disappear.
Merice Blackburn of 1506 Oak Haven. We live on a very small street with 7 houses. One person is convinced that someone is wanting to make this a city. Leo's Coney Island lists "Leo's of Genoa Township - why does his address say Genoa Township?
Chairman Pobuda stated that I don't know of anyone who is planning a city. I think Jim and Barb are the only ones that have been here as long as I have. Most people will say Brighton or Howell. This is Genoa Township, 36 square miles. When I tell people where I live I say between Brighton and Howell in Genoa Township. I think that it is a pride thing. I understand what you are saying but there is also a sense of pride in saying that I live in Genoa Township
Jack Pike of 686 Pathway: I had hoped somehow that Don you would address this question. You said you were appointed but who appointed you?
Chairman Pobuda replied that there is a system according to State Government that sets up a hierarchy and in that hierarchy the process is exactly the same. The township supervisor recommends a person to be appointed to the Planning Commission and the board grants approval and this is the same for the ZBA.
Mr. Purdy confirms that the supervisor nominates and the township board approves.
Commissioner Mortensen stated that the Planning Commission has one member from the Township Board that is elected which is me. The Township Board also has an official that is on the planning commission and ZBA. I don't recall anyone being nominated and turned down. I have been on the Planning Commission for 10 years. We do not get involved in that.
Mr. Pike replied that none of us knew what the chain of command was. Are you a trustee? Commissioner Mortensen answered Yes, I am a trustee.
Lorraine Fabry of 4832 New Haven Drive: I have lived here for a long time and have seen a lot of change. When I first moved out pavement stopped at Lakewood Shores Drive. We have a lot of hills. When I pull out I almost get hit. How will you preserve the safety of streets when you are not doing it now?
Paul Dubuc of 3000 Atwood: When I bought my house 21 years ago I could turn out of my driveway. We got sewer but no water. I didn't see a gas station or Meijer. If you really look at where my house is now we have city sewer and this has increased our taxes. Tuffy and Pizza Hut must have been a part of the old master plan. The location for this new plan will be detrimental to everyone. We have 22 kids getting on the bus on Grand River. Our kids have to get on the bus by the dumpster behind LOC because of the bad traffic. Some of the stuff doesn't make sense to me and no one wants to deal with it.
Mike Wysocki of 5855 Maunee Drive: I am just taking this all in and the presentation of the master plan. I am hearing a lot about wanting to preserve the country setting and wildlife. That makes a lot of sense to me. They build some high density condos and this is how you preserve country. I moved here 4 years ago from the inner city so I was proud of Genoa Township before I knew of any of this.
Commissioner Tengel indicated that he wanted to address the public before too many people leave. He stated there seems to be an overwhelming perspective of them against us. We love this community and we respond to requests and make sure it is done right. We are here when someone presents these new plans, we are not the ones doing the building. We are here because we love it here. We are not the ones doing the developing. We all live in the same area and we are here representing you.
Joann Kowalenok -Assistant Secretary, International Society, Lake Chemung
4925 E. Grand River stated I don't understand why you would put this huge complex across from Lake Chemung. This will ruin the lake. More pavement is harmful to the lake.
David Cary of 1813 Hughes Road: Dean, I appreciate your comments. Vote against three stories and 8 per acre densities. Support the township with 2 acre zoning. We have enough stores, lets get some guy to farm the area instead.
Commissioner Mortensen stated that as a member of the board if I could wave a magic wand and make everything 2 acres I would. If you do not have a reasonable master plan some judge will make it for you. We try to manage the growth. We will have another hearing on this. We all live here and things are getting busier. I live behind Gordon Foods and traffic is getting worse. All we can do is try to manage it.
Fred Jones of 800 Pathway questioned Who is the present owner of that property and who is the real estate company? Why would we do what failed off of M-59.
Chairman Pobuda answered that we do not know the present owner of the property.
Karen Garcia of 2765 Russell Drive: Genoa Estates has less than 40 houses. No one has mentioned us yet. The corner where history town is - all of the buildings they tore down, etc. This is a historical place. They could make a quaint development with historical value. Our pond is down 6 feet. My fountain is sitting up 6 feet out of the water. With all of this building, something is being disrupted and changed. All of the canals and lakes are connected and something is being affected. We have not had any crime here but now our cars are getting broken into. Dig up the Master Plan from 20-30 years ago. I think if we look at it we will see that this is not what we want.
Bruce Hundley of 4400 Beck Road stated That was a beautiful presentation. We are going to preserve this land, wildlife, etc. I can't figure out what the township is for. We are building sidewalks. We want you to live by what you say. When you talk about you against us - All we ask is that you live by what you say.
Ed Altounian of 4736 Edinburgh asked will there be any changes before that next meeting due to the input we have given tonight?
Mr. Purdy replied that staff and administration will review and changes may or may not be made.Chairman Pobuda added that all of the comments will be reviewed but I cannot guarantee one way or the other what will happen. We will vote on this and we will have another public hearing on this.
Jim Seppala of 684 Olde Ivy Lane stated I did not like your answer. It is Us vs. Them. You just said that even though we are here tonight it does not matter. I don't feel that you are protecting us.
Commissioner Mortensen replied that we will review all of the comments and letters we receive. ChairmanPobuda stated that the general comments are listened to. There are many times that the Planning Commission has not approved things because of public comments.
Larry Kretzschmer of 4301 Willow View Court: I hope Dean that you don't think we are threatening you. We understand the process. We are the people who put you where you are. This Board is the Messenger. The final vote goes to those people we elected. I think the message you need to take to them is pay attention to us, hear us, because we are the people who put them where they are. When we get ready to sell we want to make money. The decisions that have been made in last few years have cost me $12,000.00. You have the documentation at your fingertips. Are you doing the right thing? Will this maintain or increase the value of our property. We look to them to add value to our property. Is Wal-Mart value added? Are we going to shop there? Yes, because we want every penny to go back into our community. 2 years ago in November is when our property values started dropping.
Don Green of 751 Pathway stated that the future Master Plan appears that it is just written for the developers. It has changed every classification and rezoned all the property. There are 6 elected or appointed people on various boards that are either real estate brokers, agents, or developers. This must be why we are the fastest growing township in Livingston County. Make the outdoor resorts and campgrounds 2 acre lots. You are jamming us in here. What is the traffic impact. The traffic is ridiculous now. Just because you have a green light does not mean that someone will not T bone you.
Kelly Chandler of 4664 Edinburgh: Why is it the assumption that if we go to litigation we will lose. What is next if we make all of our lots into little postage stamps. Everyone is talking about Faulkwood - medium density. Why can't we just say no and have it be a complete sentence. Can you generally talk about why we have to make changes? (Mr. Purdy stated, once every 5 years the Plan has to be redone).
Steve March of 4747 Edinburgh: I respect what you said but why would you compromise to one acre parcels with regard to Faulkwood Shores. You are misleading us by not listening to us by going to one-acre parcels. You are not listening to what we want. At the next Planning Commission meeting we expect to see that revised.
Vaughn Masropion of 3417 Lakewood Shores Drive states that If nothing changes to this master plan it is my understanding that the development is allowed to take place. Why would it need to be zoned to put something more beautiful, more unique, and of higher quality?
Jack Pike of 686 Pathway asked is there any reason why the corner on Dorr Road can't be preserved as historical?
Mr. Purdy replied that the only way would be to purchase the property.
Karen Garcia of 2765 Russell Drive stated that if you have to update every 5 years this doesn't mean you have to change it. If Mr. Herbst happens to die what will happen to this property? Will we have 500 homes? Will this be on the drawing board in 5 years? Faulkwood Shores is a tweaking and this could be another tweak in 5 years.
Mr. Purdy stated that the zoning board cannot change the plan but the Zoning Board can issue a variance.
Jim Seppala of 684 Olde Ivy Lane: You say you have to update the plan every 5 years it doesn't mean you have to change it.
Chairman Pobuda stated that all of the comments will be taken into consideration.
The public hearing was closed at 9:37 p.m.
Ms. Kolakowski read into the record resident letters that were received regarding the master plan.
Paul Lalewicz of 2929 E. Coon Lake Road (11-30-200-013) owns 5.49 acres which is currently designated as CE. He would like the Commission to consider a RR designation.
Kenneth Tyler & David Trombley own parcel 11-14-300-005 which is approximately 17 acres and is currently shown as RR. They would like the Commission to consider Commercial.
Luke Ostrowski owns parcel 11-06-200-100 which is 1.69 acres. He would like to change this property from OSD to GCD.
Amanda Mykolaitis, parcel 11-29-400-032 located north of Brighton Road, east of Richardson Road would like to see her property changed from CE to RR.
James Latson owns approximately 200 acres, parcels 11-08-400-001, 018 and 11-17-200-005, 004 south of the proposed interchange. He has concerns regarding the I-96 Latson Road SubArea Plan. His concerns are summarized as follows:
· CE designation is not reasonable
· Need for mixed use and reasonably priced homes on smaller lots
· Plan for PUD option and opportunity to mix compatible land uses.
· Job creation
· The plan must address the interchange
· Increased and diversified tax base
Carl Hauss regarding 120 acres at the northeast corner of Crooked Lake and Nixon Roads would like the Commission to consider the following:
· CE or AG designation is unreasonable
· The plan encourages urban sprawl and is inconsistent
· The South Latson and Nixon Road Corridor should be revised
Moved by Mortensen, supported by Figurski to table the recommendation regarding the update to the Master Plan to give the Commission time to review the public comment received at tonight's meeting.
The motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Pobuda requested a 5 minute recess at 9:40 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 9:47 p.m.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING #4…Request for determination of similar use as authorized by 11-02-02 of the Genoa Township Zoning Ordinance. The request is petitioned by the Salvation Army for a community center and a transitional shelter facility.
Captain Derek Rose, Livingston County Salvation Army Corps Officer, 1072 Heather Heath Drive, was present to represent the petitioner.
Captain Rose stated that he is here to see whether it is feasible to expand upon the services that the Salvation Army already provides. We currently have numerous social services. We are in a very small location. We have no room to expand. Within a 7 month period we have 15-20 people come to us for job training, etc. Every year more people need our services. Currently we are in back yards and we would like to take all of the individuals from all the different churches and put them into one location that is not in others backyards so we can properly manage and house these people. We are looking at a four acre lot. We would have a gym, offices, chapel area, and social services. Shelter would be connected.
Chairman Pobuda asked if that particular piece of property was zoned for that use or would there be a better piece of property to suit you. From what I understand we do not have specific zoning for what you want to do so therefore we need to determine what district it would best be suited for.
Ms.Kolakowski recited ordinance Article 11.02.02 regarding determination of similar use.
Chairman Pobuda stated that this does not fall under office so he recommends petitioning us to change this or you can find a location that would fit into the setting you need.
Commissioner Mortensen asked Ms. Kolakowski what she read to him this morning that said that the shelter is not listed. Ms. Kolakowski read the ordinance definitions for Adult Day Care and Adult Foster Care Facility. She stated that these definitions were closest but did not match the requested shelter use. She stated that it is her opinion that there is not a similar use listed in the existing ordinance.
Commissioner Tengel requested a description of how other communities have classified this use. He stated that the use for the LACASA Women's Shelter may be very similar and we may want to take a look at this. He asked Mr. Rose if he was aware of how the communities that have a Salvation Army shelter have listed it in their ordinance. Captain Rose stated that he will look into it and will forward the information to Ms. Kolakowski.
Commissioner Brown asked Ms. Kolakowski if we then need to create a use. Ms. Kolakowski stated that yes, a petition would need to be made to create this use in the ordinance.
Commissioner Mortensen stated that the petitioner will need to submit a letter to the Township requesting this item be considered during the next update to the Township Zoning Ordinance. That is the process we need to follow and Mr. Purdy and Ms. Kolakowski need to look into how other communities have classified this.
Moved by Mortensen, supported by Figurski, that as authorized by Article 11.02.02 of the Genoa Township Zoning Ordinance the Planning Commission finds no similar use in the ordinance for a shelter as described. The petitioner will need to request an ordinance amendment as authorized in Article 22.
The motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Olson, supported by Snyder, to approve the minutes of August 8, 2005. The motion carried with Commissioner Figurski abstaining from the vote because she did not attend that meeting.
Member Discussion
Ms. Kolakowski stated that there are four items for the September 26, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Olson stated that her name is spelled incorrectly in the draft master plan.
The meeting adjourned at 10:18 p.m.
Submitted by: Kelli Schwab, Recording Secretary