|
Planning Commission Meeting November
13, 2006 6:30
p.m. Agenda Worksession
CALL TO ORDER:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
DISCUSSION: of Agenda items of the regular meeting of the
Planning Commission
DISCUSSION: of general items
ADJOURNMENT:
Public
Hearing
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 rezoning application and impact assessment to rezone
60.16 acres located north of Crooked Lake Road between Springhill Drive
and Fishbeck Road. The rezoning consists of the following 20 parcels:
11-16-400-006, 008, 010, 014, 015, 018, 019, 020, 022, 023, 024, 025,
026, 030, 031, 032, 033, 034, 038 and 039. The request is to rezone from
Country Estates (CE) to Rural Residential (RR) and is petitioned by
David and Elizabeth Bonten, Cheryl Reed and Genoa Charter Township.
(06-22)
Planning
Commission disposition of petition
A.
Recommendation regarding rezoning application.
B.
Recommendation regarding impact assessment.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING # 2…
Review of rezoning application and impact assessment to rezone
126.92 acres centered on Westgate Drive, south of Beck Road and
extending west along Chilson Road. The rezoning consists of the
following 29 parcels: 11-07-400-001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 010, 011, 024,
025, 026; 11-08-300-001, 006, 009, 023, 025, 026, 027, 028, 029, 030,
031, 032, 033, 037, 038, 039, 040, 041 and 042. The request is to rezone
from County Estates (CE) to Rural Residential (RR) and is petitioned by
Leonard Wilks and Genoa Charter Township. (06-23)
Planning
Commission disposition of petition
A.
Recommendation regarding rezoning application.
B.
Recommendation impact assessment.
Administrative
Business:
-
Planners
report presented by LSL Planners
-
Approval
of October 30, 2006 Planning Commission meeting minutes
-
Member
Discussion
Adjournment
WORK SESSION MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at
6:33 p.m.
Present constituting a quorum for conducting business were:
Chairman Pobuda, Barbara Figurski, James Mortensen, Teri Olson, Curt Brown
and Dean Tengle. Also present
were Kelly VanMarter, Township Planner, Brian Borden from LSL and Tesha
Humphriss.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Moved
by Barbara Figurski and support by James Mortensen, the agenda was
approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION:
of Agenda items of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION: of
general items.
ADJOURNMENT:
The work session of the Genoa Planning Commission was adjourned at
6:54
p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order at
7:05 p.m.
Present constituting a quorum for conducting business were:
Chairman Pobuda, Barbara Figurski, James Mortensen, Teri Olson, Curt Brown
and Dean Tengle. Also present
were Kelly VanMarter, Township Planner, Brian Borden from LSL and Tesha
Humphriss.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited followed by a brief moment of
silence.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Moved by Barbara
Figurski and support by James Mortensen, the agenda was approved as
submitted. Motion carried
unanimously.
CALL TO THE
PUBLIC:
(Note:
The Board will not begin any new business after
10:00 p.m.
)
OPEN
PUBLIC HEARING # 1… Review of rezoning application and impact assessment to rezone 60.16
acres located north of
Crooked Lake Road
between
Springhill
Drive
and
Fishbeck
Road
. The rezoning consists of the following
20 parcels: 11-16-400-006, 008, 010, 014, 015, 018, 019, 020, 022, 023,
024, 025, 026, 030, 031, 032, 033, 034, 038 and 039. The request is to
rezone from Country Estates (CE) to Rural Residential (RR) and is
petitioned by David and Elizabeth Bonten, Cheryl Reed and
Genoa
Charter
Township
.
(06-22)
Petitioner,
Dave Bonten,
4859
Crooked Lake Road
is
present and is speaking on behalf of the other petitioners.
He requests the rezoning outlined above.
There
is a pond located partially on petitioner’s property and the property to
the east, but he doesn’t believe it contains wetlands.
The property does perk and is buildable.
He believes it’s an acre and a half.
He has discussed his petition with some of his neighbors.
Brian
Borden indicates the master plan reflects some areas within that site that
are classified as wetlands.
Petitioner
indicates that a private road may be required to split up Cheryl Reed’s
parcel.
Brian
Borden indicates that while the request is consistent with the master
plan, it would by definition be a spot zone.
This is how the recommendation resulted in broadening the subject
area. He reviews the
designations that are in the nearby area to the subject site.
The request is consistent with the Township’s future land use
plan. This site is also
located within the rural reserve area and is compliant with the goals and
policies of the master plan.
The
potential uses for a CE district are very similar to a RR district.
The primary difference is density, i.e., lot size and also certain
agricultural uses under CE that would not be permitted under RR.
James
Mortensen clarifies whether use changes with the current owner or upon
sale of the property. The use
for the existing owner does, in fact, remain and is grandfathered until a
change of ownership or a division of the lot.
Brian Borden indicates that we are not creating any non-conformity
issue. Kelly VanMarter
indicates that is correct, including duplex properties continuing until a
change.
Brian Borden indicates no extension of public utilities would be required.
The lots could accommodate well and septic.
There is a potential for gravel roads.
The proposed rezoning could maintain and preserve the basic
character of the area. Brian
Borden believes the proposal is consistent with environmental issues.
Brian
Borden notes that 7 of the 16 proposed lots would become conforming lots
as a result of the project.
Brian
Borden reviewed the apparent demand for the types of RR uses, such as
residential growth, both experienced and projected.
He sees the request as a way to balance the demand for residential
properties and lack of necessity to install more public utilities.
Kelly
VanMarter indicates the master plan designates this area for two acres.
Brian
Borden reiterates that based upon the master plan, capacity for
infrastructure and environmental necessities, this plan does accommodate
the intent of the master plan.
Tesha
Humphriss addresses her October 18th and October 26th
letters regarding this petition. Public
utilities would not be necessary. Private
septic and wells would accommodate the plan.
Traffic patterns were identified and there would be little effect
on traffic. Private roads
would be necessary.
Mark Hunkel,
2100 Fishbeck, addressed the Commission.
He indicates that many have moved into the area to get elbow room.
He is on a 4.5 acre parcel. They
moved out here thinking there wouldn’t be dividing of lots.
He understands some would like to subdivide to make extra money and
he says they knew when they bought the land they couldn’t do it and
shouldn’t be allowed to subdivide now.
He believes tax revenue for the Township is probably coming into
play, too.
Mike Adkins, 5448
Crooked
Lake
addressed the Commission. He
is on five acres. His home is
in the center of his lot. The
back portion of his property is wetlands.
It’s a foot to foot and a half deep.
He asks who will benefit from the subdividing of the lots.
He moved here in 2001. In
April of 2001, he was told that his property was zoned CE.
In his opinion, petitioner’s request is self serving because his
intent is to sell his property and move away.
Petitioner’s home sits close to the road and the remaining
acreage butts up to Mr. Adkins’ property.
He opposes the petition.
He also asks about any private road and where it would be located.
He indicates he has paid for all maintenance on the private drive
that is his easement, despite the deed indicating these expenses are to be
shared between he and the petitioner.
Kim Mays,
2745
Spring Hill Drive
addressed the Commission.
She is property number 36. She
butts up against the 15 acres in question.
She asks why the 5 acres at the end of Spring Hill were excluded.
She inquires about rezoning her property as well as that of her
neighbor.
Brent Euler,
2926
Fishbeck Road
addressed the Commission.
He inquires as to the septic limitations because more septics will
be necessary if the land is split.
Mrs. Brubeck, 4660
Crooked
Lake
spoke to the Commission. She
has no opposition to splitting 10 acres into 5 acre parcels.
The sand hill cranes would be displaced.
Mark Hunkel
addressed the Commission again and indicates that there would be a loss of
value in the property due to the change in permitted land uses.
Beverly New,
2786 Fishbeck spoke to the Commission.
She has no opposition to 10 acre parcels being split into 5 acre
parcels.
Brian Borden
addresses the Commission and
speaks about the demand for residential land in this township.
Population trends and projections make that clear.
He feels this request helps with that demand, while preserving the
rural character and not requiring an extension of public utilities and
infrastructure.
Brian Borden
addresses concerns regarding non-conforming parcels.
Currently, 16 of the parcels do not conform.
If this plan is adopted, 7 of those will become conforming parcels.
Tesha Humphriss
addresses maintenance of the existing shared driveway and the easement
discussed. Any split would be
extended to all potential splits.
Kelly VanMarter
indicates another benefit for the nonconforming lots is that the setbacks
are less. So, there is an
increase in buildable area for the nonconforming smaller parcels.
If a private road is required, the Livingston County Road
Commission would determine its location.
Paving of that road is not required if it services 18 or fewer
lots. Shared driveways can
service four or fewer lots. There
is at least one road, possibly two that would be required under the plan.
Tesha Humphriss
indicates that in general, any parcel will require soil borings to
determine if a septic is feasible. There
is a possibility for engineered fields on parcels that don’t perk.
This is not required for rezoning.
Brian Borden
suggests that by rezoning, they are not subdividing or splitting the
parcels. This merely opens up
the potential for that. There
is a review process and requirements that must be met before any split is
possible.
James Mortensen
indicates that this doesn’t amount to much for tax revenue.
Kelly VanMarter reiterates there is no change unless the property
is actually split. James
Mortensen outlines the process of rezoning briefly.
Kelly VanMarter
indicates if Ms. Mays would like to join in the petition, the Board could
table this. This action would
save Ms. Mays the expense of petitioning the Board.
Kelly has received no formal requests to be included, but feels
that there is at least one more parcel that may be interested in joining.
Brian Borden
indicates that the property to the north side of Spring Hill was not
included because the master plan designation was different.
If this is being opened up to additional properties, this must be
kept in mind.
James Mortensen
asks if this can be verified this evening.
Kelly VanMarter shows that the area north is master planned for
agricultural country estate. The
properties north on Spring Hill is master planned for 5 acres.
If an extension is granted for the north, the master plan would
need to be amended.
Dean Tengle is
opposed to the rezoning. Curt
Brown feels the same. If the
residents were for this, he would support it.
There did not appear to be much support from the public for this
petition. The majority of the
residents seem to be against it. Kelly
VanMarter indicates there were no letters from the general public
regarding this issue. James
Mortensen is in favor of the petition since the master plan would reflect
this change. Barbara Figurski
is opposed to the petition. Teri
Olson is also opposed. Chairman
Pobuda would oppose it, as well.
Brian Borden
reminds the Commission a formal action is a recommendation.
The Township Board would be responsible for any changes.
Chairman Pobuda
calls to the public if anyone supports this petition and lives in the area
of petitioner. No one
responds.
Planning
Commission disposition of petition
A. Recommendation
regarding rezoning application.
B.
Recommendation regarding impact assessment.
Motion
by Curt Brown to recommend to the Township Board that the petition for
rezoning be denied. Support by
Teri Olson. Motion opposed by
James
Mortensen.
Roll call made. Dean
Tengle,
Curt
Brown
, Barbara
Figurski, Chairman Pobuda, and
Teri
Olson
all support the motion to deny the rezoning application.
James Mortensen opposes the motion. Motion carried 5-1.
Motion
by
Curt Brown
to recommend to the Township Board that the impact assessment not be
approved. Support by Barbara
Figurski. Motion opposed by
James Mortensen. Roll call
made. Dean Tengle,
Curt
Brown
, Barbara
Figurski, Chairman Pobuda and
Teri
Olson
all support the motion to recommend to the Township Board that the impact
assessment not be adopted. James
Mortensen opposes the motion.
Motion carried 5-1.
OPEN
PUBLIC HEARING # 2… Review of rezoning application
and impact assessment to rezone 126.92 acres centered on
Westgate Drive, south
of
Beck Road
and extending west along
Chilson Road
. The rezoning consists of the
following 29 parcels: 11-07-400-001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 010, 011, 024,
025, 026; 11-08-300-001, 006, 009, 023, 025, 026, 027, 028, 029, 030, 031,
032, 033, 037, 038, 039, 040, 041 and 042. The request is to rezone from
Country Estates (CE) to Rural Residential (RR) and is petitioned by
Leonard Wilks and
Genoa
Charter
Township
. (06-23)
Chuck
Wilks
4366
Beck Road
appeared before the Commission. Petitioner
is his father. He requests
rezoning as outlined above.
Brian
Borden discusses the environmental factors involving the petition.
Surrounding designations are discussed.
The area is primarily zoned for, planned for and used for
residential of varying densities. The
master plan identifies the area as rural reserve.
The uses for CE and RR are very similar and the differences are
primarily agricultural. A two
acre minimum lot size would allow for the preservation of the natural
environment. This lot size
could accommodate septic and well. No
extension of utilities is required.
The existing roadway would service this area.
This
plan would serve the demand for more residential area as seen in the
projections. He believes this
plan balances this need with the environmental concerns of the public.
Petitioner
indicates the wetlands are one to two acres, at most.
Tesha
Humphriss addresses her letter of October 18th and October 26th.
There is no municipal water and sewer and private wells and septic
would be required.
There
would be an additional 38 trips in the a.m. peak hour and 41 trips in the
p.m. peak hour and therefore, would meet the Township’s requirements.
Petitioner
indicates the property did perk.
Petitioner
indicates shared driveway situations would exist.
He would have to come back to the Township regarding private roads.
Joseph
Miller,
3432 Beck
Road
addressed the Commission. He
discussed the poor roads and busing situations.
He worries about the infrastructure problems caused by traffic.
He opposes rezoning. He
fears that the
Latson
Road
interchange
will cause additional problems with low income housing, strips malls,
etcetera. His parcel is 4.99
acres. He has access to a
private road with five homes on it. He
has a maintenance agreement with the people on that road.
There are 4 homeowners that participate in the maintenance
agreement. Eventually, he’d
like that paved.
Greg
LeBlanc,
3444
Beck Road
addressed the Commission. He
opposes rezoning. He indicates
he spent a long time seeking a parcel that was this size and in this area
to accommodate his hobbies. Rezoning
would affect his life if he wished to add-on.
Additionally, he built his house in the center of the property with
the assumption that no re-zoning would take place. His parcel is 5.06
acres. He suggests that when
he lived in
Novi
,
he was told usage would be grandfathered in and although it was true, he
ended up fighting in Court to preserve that right.
Cheryl
Barnes,
1677
Chilson Road
addressed the Commission. Her
parcel is 2 acres. She
doesn’t wish to see a subdivision. She
moved here to be in the country, not in a subdivision.
She opposes the petition.
Debbie
Allen,
1881
Chilson Road
addressed the Commission. Her
parcel is 7.5 acres. She
opposes the petition. She
wants to maintain her wildlife environment.
Mrs.
Rose,
1784
Westgate Drive
addressed the Commission. She
supports the petition. She
feels that everyone can have what they want.
Their land can remain seven acres or two acres.
They determine their own situation and everybody wins.
Most of her neighbors on Westgate do support this petition.
Madonna
Bork,
3398
Beck Road
addressed the Commission. Her
parcel is 5.07 acres. She
supports approval of the petition. She
thinks there is plenty of room for splitting.
She reiterates that property need not be sold, but the opportunity
to split it would be welcomed.
Larry
Stevens,
3356 Beck
Road
addressed the Commission. He
supports the petition. He
purchased his property, envisioning a future split.
Theresa
Sincog, 1822 Westgate addressed the Commission.
She opposes the petition. The
roads are not maintained well in the winter and more users would result in
worse roads. Her parcel is 7.5
acres.
Martha
Well,
1689
Chilson Road
addressed the Commission. She
opposes the petition. She
feels the petition would change the integrity of the environment and
neighborhood. She feels that
the needs of those who already live in the community should override the
need for growth/expansion of the community.
Rick
Barnes,
1677
Chilson Road
addressed the Commission. He
opposes the petition and believes it would be a major impact to the area.
There are already problems with keeping up with the growth in
schools and municipalities. Perhaps
this should be rethought and larger splits be permitted.
Larry
Stewart,1749 Westgate addressed the Commission and is in favor of the
petition.
Mike
Beelers of
1711
Chilson Road
opposes the petition. He feels
that doubling the residences in the area could cause problems with traffic
and wildlife.
Dorothy
Beelers of
1711
Chilson Road
opposes the
petition. She indicates that
Chilson and
Beck Road
is a high traffic area with many major accidents.
Adding another thirty homes into the area would be a major problem.
If you consider the railroad crossing, it would be even more
dangerous. They spent years
searching for their property and were married on it.
The wildlife would be endangered.
Ms.
Rose discussed a letter sent to the Township by Mr. Engle.
Kelly VanMarter indicates almost all letters were in favor of the
petition and only one letter opposed it.
Chairman
Pobuda asks for a show of hands for those in favor and those opposed to
the petition. Chairman Pobuda
then requests that only one hand per household be shown.
Chairman
Pobuda asks Kelly VanMarter how this petition would work with the proposed
Latson
Road
interchange. The property is
master planned for 2 acres, even assuming the interchange.
Petitioner
reminds the Commission that granting this petition would be a safety plan
for many of these property owners, should they need to subdivide in the
future.
Brian Borden indicates this area is planned for a higher density than
it’s actually zoned for.
James
Mortensen asks Brian Borden about the balancing act of unreasonable plans
and how that affects lawsuits by developers against municipalities.
If the interchange goes through, the developers will bring a lot of
pressure against the Township for larger developments.
Planning
Commission disposition of petition
A.
Recommendation regarding rezoning application.
B.
Recommendation impact assessment.
Motion
by James Mortensen to recommend the Township Board approve the rezoning
application. Support by
Chairman Pobuda. Roll call
made. The motion was approved
by Dean Tengle, James Mortensen, and Chairman Pobuda.
The motion was opposed by
Curt
Brown
,
Barbara Figurski, and
Teri
Olson
.
Motion fails, 3-3.
Motion
by James Mortensen to recommend to the Township Board approval of impact
assessment dated October 26th.
Support by Chairman Pobuda. Roll
call made. The motion was
approved by Dean Tengle, James Mortensen and Chairman Pobuda.
The motion was opposed by
Curt
Brown
, Barbara
Figurski, and
Teri Olson
.
Motion fails, 3-3.
Administrative Business:
·
Planners
report presented by LSL Planners
·
Approval
of
October 30, 2006
Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Motion by Barbara Figurski to approve the minutes of the October 30th
meeting. Support by James
Mortensen.Motion carried unanimously.
·
Member
Discussion
Meeting
adjourned at
8:50 a.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Kristi Cox
Recording
Secretary
|
