|
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
|