EMMET COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, MAY 5, 2005 - 7:30 P.M. COMMISSIONERS BOARD ROOM EMMET COUNTY COURTHOUSE 200 DIVISION STREET PETOSKEY, MI 49770
MINUTES (Revised)
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. EBY, Chairman, K. DERROHN, A. BEHAN, J. JONES, R. LETZMANN, K. ALEXANDER
ABSENT: J. SCOTT, D. LAUGHBAUM, R. SUMMERS
STAFF: M. PUTTERS, T. DOERNENBURG, M. GRAWEY, BRENTT MICHALEK, ANAMIKA LAAD
VISITORS: ALYCE CONRAD, NEIL MARZELLA, DONNA MAGILL, BILL SUTTON, JAMES NEFF, SHAWN NEFF, BRIAN FULLFORD, RON KRAUSE, JOHN ERNST, M. BUDAY, DON MCCORMACK, MARY MCCORMACK, KATE SUNDAY, CHRISTY CAMERON, KIRK LAUDIA, GARY LITZNER, MARK SMITH, CARRIE MAY, STEVE WITTE, TOM FETTIG, TOM WALLER, SUE ANDERSON, BOB CARDINAL, DARIN PHILPORT, JERE JOHNSTON, KATHY BRICKER, KEVIN CRONK, CARRA SCHOENE, GEORGE SCHOENE, DEAN MORFORD, BEN AND JOAN KLEINSTIVER, JACKIE PIEFFER, DEBRA HALL AND OTHERS
I Call to Order and Attendance Eby called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
II Minutes of April 7, 2005
Letzmann made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 7, 2005 meeting. Derrohn supported the motion which passed by unanimous voice vote.
III Cases
1. Case # 8-05 Blue Moon L.L.C., SUP - Land Development Standards, River Road, Section 28, Bear Creek Township A request by Blue Moon, LLC for a Special Use Permit to create up to a 64 site unit condominium project on a 93.6 acre property located in the N ½ of Section 28, T34N-R5W, Bear Creek Township. The property encompasses tax parcel numbers 24-01-19-28-100-003 and 200-015, and is zoned FF-1 Farm Forest.
Michalek presented the case using a site plan. There are 62 lots on approximately 95 acres. It is
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 1 zoned FF-1 which allows 44,000 square foot lots. The applicant is working with the Fire Department for approval. The entrance has approval from the Emmet County Road Commission. There are citizen concerns with 1) traffic, 2) drainage, 3) hunting resources and 4) school children safety. One power line is to be placed underground. There was a question on who would pay for the current users to connect to the underground power source. The second power line setbacks are as shown on the plan. The Township recommended approval on the following conditions: 1) the building envelopes will be followed, 2) the fire department needs to approve and 3) the developer will pay for any costs that result from putting underground services to the poles of the neighboring homes.
Eby asked for comments from the applicant. Neil Marzella discussed issues with the electrical poles. There are three homes whose power runs from an underground wire, nothing will change with those homes, the existing poles will stay. Electrical wire will run down the existing pole. They (Blue Moon), will be responsible for any costs incurred, they have no problems with the other conditions set by the Township.
Eby asked for comments or questions from the Board.
Letzmann asked if the school bus would be pulling into the development? Marzella explained, they will be pulling over to the side of the road but not entering. There are plans for a cement pad for the kids to stand and wait. Ttaffic will slow down in that area and it will be much safer. He also stated that they went to the Road Commission and showed them their plan. The Road Commission stated that the plan meets their standards.
Derrohn asked if the bus would travel both ways? Smith answered that currently there were plans for right hand pickup and drop off only.
Derrohn wanted clarification on the fire hydrants. Are they dry? Marzella answered no, there would be a 10,000 gallon underground tank which the Fire Department would fill. It would not just be for this Development’s use.
Eby asked for public comments.
Kathy Bricker asked about screening. Michalek answered that it was not required, just suggested by the Township. There was discussion on what type of screening and the size. Marzella stated that they had planned on cedars and evergreens, 4' tall and spaced. Bricker stated that she would like to see the Board make sure this screening is made a condition of approval, she would also like a fence for the safety of children because the road is in her backyard.
Jones asked for clarification on the conditions set by the Township. Michalek explained the 3 conditions.
Jones made a motion to approve Case #8-05, Blue Moon, L.L.C, a request for Residential Site Condiminiums, River Road because the case meets all conditions of the Ordinance, and subject to the following conditions: 1) The building envelopes will be met, 2. The Fire Department approves, 3. The Developer is to cover any costs incurred for hooking up electrical power to adjacent homes, and 4. Screening with cedars and evergreens. Letzmann supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote, Yes; Behan, Derrohn, Alexander, Letzmann, Jones, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 2
2. Case #10-05 Tom Walker for Hubert & Sally Hayes, SUP - Land Development Standards, Boyer & Country Club Roads, Section 34, Bear Creek Township A request by Thomas Walker for Hubert and Sally Hayes for a Special Use Permit to establish a 14 Site Unit Condominium Project on a 15.3 acre property at the SE Intersection of Boyer Road and Country Club Road in Section 34, T35N-R5W, Bear Creek Township. The property tax parcel numbers are: 24-01-16-34-400-007 and 400-006. The property is zoned R-1B One Family Residential. The request is per Ordinance Section 2102-14.
Michalek presented the case. The request is for a 14 units on approximately 15 acres. The lot sizes are larger than required. There are two shared driveways off Boyer road each serving 2 lots. There are drainage concerns from the Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council. It meets the Emmet county Storm Water and Soil Erosion Ordinance. The proposed driveway on Country Club Road meets the site distance requirements for 35-40 mph for the Emmet County Road Commission. The Township recommended approval on the following conditions, Health Dept approval, Michigan DEQ approval, the change in speed limit and some screening recommended on the north (headlights).
Eby asked for comments from the applicant.
Tom Walker stated that they have talked to the DEQ and they are prepared to issue a permit, but are waiting for payment. After the Bear Creek meeting (April 27th), Denny Keiser, Chet Jessick (neighbor), and Carrie May (Developer), went to site after dark to test headlight impacts on adjacent properties. When the basic grading is done, they will revisit to see where the screening for head lights should go. There will be cedars or pines placed on the site where needed, either by relocating existing trees or purchasing additional ones.
There was discussion on the retention/detention storm water system and the 100 year flood plain.
Eby asked for comments from the public.
Don McCormack stated that he lives on Woodridge Road and fronts on Tannery Creek. He is concerned with the steep slopes and the potential erosion that could impact the Creek. There was discussion on the grades, especially on lot #6 where the grade is 9%, which is not an acceptable grade. He stated that he talked to the Health Department and they do not agree with the grades being acceptable.
Kate Sunday stated that she owns 15 acres on Boyer Road adjacent to and south of the development site. She would like to see the requirements of the Health Department met.
Kevin Cronk stated that he has concerns with the storm water system. There was discussion on the thermal impact of the stream, including check dams and storm water alternatives to reduce impact.
Carrie May, referred to the steep slope of Lot #6, she stated that if it is steeper than 12 %, they will re-grade parts of it to meet health code standards.
There was general discussion on the need for DEQ and sanitary permits. Carrie May stated that she is opposed to retention ponds because of maintenance, pollution and warming of the pond water. She proposes a trough type system where storm water runs, as if in a stream, with a special filtration bottom to avoid erosion.
Walker referred to the 25 year retention ponds. If constructed, one would be 5 feet deep and one 12 feet deep. The water just stands, and when a storm comes through, it washes that water out. He is concerned about that water polluting Tannery Creek. It is his opinion that Carrie May’s idea is better.
Eby asked for questions from the Board.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 3
Derrohn asked if Bear Creek approved this plan? Putters, yes, Bear Creek approved subject to Health Department approval.
Jones made a motion to approve Case #10-05, a request for a Special Use Permit - Land Development Standards, Boyer & Country Club Roads, Section 34, Bear Creek Township because it meets the conditions of Ordinance, but conditioned on Health Department and DEQ approval, the speed limit lowered on Country Club Road per Road Commission statements, the screening is to be determined at a later date and Planning & Zoning is to work with Tom Walker to meet requirements. Alexander supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote: Yes; Letzmann, Behan, Derrohn, Alexander, Jones, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
3. Case #13-05 Darin Cameron, SUP - Resource Mining and Processing, 6506 US-31 North, Section 34, Carp Lake Township A request by Darrin Cameron for Gary Litzner for a Special Use Permit for a Level III Resource Mining and Extraction operation to be located on the east side of US-31, Section 34, T38N-R4W, Carp Lake Township. The property is zoned SR-1 Scenic Resource along US-31 to a depth of 400' and the remainder is zoned FF-2 Farm Forest. The use is proposed on approximately five acres of tax parcel number 24-03-06-34-200-012. The review is per Section 2102-10 of the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance.
Laad presented using a site plan and tax parcel map. The request is for an expansion of existing mining operations to exceed the 3.0 acre limit of a Level II permit. The mining will not exceed 5 acres in surface area and is to be completed in 24 months. Mining will occur in the FF-2 zoning portion of the property with access through SR-1. A pond which will remain after the mining is complete. There is currently no MDOT approval and such may not be needed. The Township recommended approval on March 2, 2005. A neighbor, Mr. Blair, has concerns for: (1) Property values, (2) it being an eyesore to travelers on US - 31, (3) the original mining operation was to be completed 2 years ago and no reclamation work has been completed, (4) safety issues due to the gravel trucks entering and exiting the property onto US - 31, and (5) dust and noise.
Eby asked for comments from the applicant.
Cameron stated that he will meet the list of proposed permit conditions. He discussed the cleanup of the property and stated that the pond will not be seen from US - 31. Truck crossing signs are there, and as far as the dust and noise is concerned, he will do whatever needs to be done.
Alexander wanted clarification on the operating time. There was discussion on restricting the operating time. “Daylight hours” is too long. The Board suggested Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. until 6 p.m. and no weekends.
There was discussion on the existing permit and the fact that no reclamation has been done. Putters explained that the applicant is intending to reclaim the site at this time and wishes to start immediately upon approval.
There was further discussion on the reclamation process.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 4 Letzmann suggested that a letter of credit or a cash deposit be used as a means of recourse if the applicant does not follow the plan for reclamation. Putters stated that the Board would be in the position to force zoning compliance if there are permit violations. Also, a lean could be but on the property if the plan is not followed.
Letzmann supported the idea of permitting for two years and then coming back to the Planning Commission for review and permit renewal if necessary.
Eby wondered if the Board should see another site plan. He pointed out that a lot of the things which are being discussed are not on the site plan, such as the pond and the reclamation. He stated that he could agree to the site plan if it were reviewed in one year.
Letzmann asked if the applicant would agree to a dry hydrant. Applicant, yes.
There was discussion on the one year process. The Board agreed that the Planning Commission would not see the case at one year unless the applicant was not in compliance. Otherwise the applicant would only have to meet with the Planning and Zoning Department.
Letzmann made a motion to approve Case #13-05, a request by Darin Cameron for a Special Use Permit for Resource mining and processing at 6506 US-31 North, Section 34, Carp Lake Township, with the permit request remaining as previously established except for item number 6 of the permit which will be changed and number 13 will be omitted. There will be no Saturday or Sunday operation. The permit will be for 12 months, with an automatic extension to 24 months with a report back to the Planning Commission to prove that they are in compliance. Behan supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote, Yes; Jones, Derrohn, Alexander, Behan, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott.
4. Case #12-05 GHF Properties, LLC for James Newf. and William Sutton, Preliminary & Final PUD-1, Mixed Use, 7943 W. Robinson Road, Section 32, Readmond Township (Applicant and Township requested postponement) A request by GHF Properties, LLC for James Neff and William Sutton for a Preliminary and Final Non-Mixed Use PUD-1 overlay. The property includes portions of tax parcels numbered 24-12-08-32-100-003 & 004, located at 7943 W. Robinson Road, Section 32, T37N-R6W, Readmond Township and is zoned FF-2 Farm Forest. The purpose of the PUD is to allow boat and RV storage, and a contractor's use and single family residences per Article XVIII.
Michalek presented the case using a site plan and tax parcel map and formerly was an active commercial farm. The request is for a landscape and nursery business. The property is currently zoned FF-2. The existing building is 42,000 square feet. There is a letter from the Little Traverse Conservancy with no objections. A conservation easement is being negotiated with the Little Traverse Conservancy. Three residences are proposed on the 47.8 acre property. There are two letters in favor of the PUD. The Township voted to table until the April meeting for two reasons: (1) waiting to hear from the neighbors within 300 feet and (2) the Township wishes to review the proposed Conservation easements with the restrictions on permitted uses.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 5 Eby asked for comments from the applicant. Bill Sutton stated that there had been one letter of opposition. That neighbor was not present.
Bob Cardinal wished to have more review of the property and uses subject to the proposed Conservation Easement. He would like to see how they would be enforced.
Flemming stated that there is a conservation easement which is not in final draft form. He discussed signage, employees, allowed farm uses and that the barn cannot be expanded.
Derrohn wondered if and easement could be attached as a condition? Putters did not feel that the easement could be enforced by Emmet County. The zoning obligations would be subject to PUD enforcement (uses, open spaces, density).
Sutton stated that a conservation easement will be filed in the next couple of days. Taking existing structures into consideration, it is his opinion that the most effective process would be the PUD.
There was discussion on overnight storage and the buildings being completely screened. Sutton added that everything would be inside the building at night.
Letzmann asked how they would limit how many people could access the storage uses and how frequently? Sutton stated that it would be for seasonal storage, people would mainly be picking up in the spring and dropping off in the fall.
There was discussion on the intent of the storage.
Letzmann made a motion to approve Case #12-05, a request by GHF Properties, LLC for James Neff and William Sutton, 7943 W. Robinson Road, Section 32, Readmond Township, Preliminary & Final PUD-1, Mixed Use, as advertised in the published legal notice, is subject to the following stipulations: 1. It is understood that the subject property will be or is in a conservation easement, but such status is not a zoning or PUD requirement for this case.
2. Except for a modest identification sign (no larger than the current one), anyone passing by the subject property would be unaware that the use exists or operates on the site.
3. There shall be no visible outdoor storage or display other than that stipulated for the Landscaping contractor. Any other incidental outdoor use shall be kept to a minimum, screened from view, and not exceed a land area of 10,000 square feet.
4. All employee parking shall be out of the PUD setback areas and screened so as to avoid the appearance of a commercial parking lot.
5. There shall be no retail use of the property that would attract passers by to the site.
6. Up to thirty (30) percent of the ground floor area of the existing barn may be used to house an approved landscaping business, with the remainder of the floor area available for the seasonal
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 6 storage of wheeled vehicles that include recreation vehicles, automobiles, trailers, and also, water craft. Daily storage uses with frequent in/out traffic shall be prohibited, except for traffic associated with the landscaping contractor.
7. There shall be no maintenance or service of any of the seasonally stored vehicles or equipment.
8. The landscaping tenant shall be restricted to the terms of the following conditions:
a) Not more than eight (8) employees working from or parking on the site.
b) Operating hours shall be from 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with no use activity on Sundays or National Holidays.
c) The use is seasonal, operating no longer than the time frame of April 15th through November 15th, with reasonable allowance for pre-season and post- season start-up and shut down.
d) Up to two (2) acres of land area behind or screened by the subject barn and/or otherwise screened from view for landscaping stock as trees and live nursery products.
e) Overnight vehicle storage shall be within the barn or otherwise in a completely screened area as permitted herein.
f) Any on-site servicing of contractors vehicles and/or equipment shall be by outside contract service only, and all oils, greases, lubricants, coolants and similar hazardous materials shall be disposed of off-site in accordance with applicable DEQ, EPA and/or County regulations.
g) Any change in the occupancy of the property by another contractor shall only be as a replacement or successor occupant who shall be subject to complying with all the terms and conditions of this Planned Unit Development/permit.
h) The owner of the landscaping business is not required to have a residence on the subject property.
9. This motion and the PUD Master Plan, as submitted, shall constitute the allowable uses of the property per the PUD-1 District. 10. Approval from Readmond Township. Derrohn supported the motion which passed on the following roll call vote, Yes; Jones, Behan, Alexander, Derrohn, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers Scott, Laughbaum.
5. Case #203B-98 Fullword Surveying and Mapping for Sid Baker, Three-Part Special Use Permit: Remove Contractor's Use, Accessory Building
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 7 as a Main Use, Land Development Standards, 8140 Miller Road, Section 13, Littlefield Township A three-part request by Fullford Surveying & Mapping for Sid Baker on property located at 8140 Miller Road, Section 13, T35N-R4W, Littlefield Township. The request includes: 1. Termination of a Special Use Permit for a contractor’s use per Section 2101-1.c). of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Special Use Permit to allow an Accessory Building as a Main Use and an Exception to the size standards of Section 2201 to allow an existing accessory building on a single lot. The accessory building is proposed to be used in conjunction with a residence located across Miller Road in Cheboygan County. 3. Special Use Permit per Land Development Standards, Section 2102-14 of the Zoning Ordinance, to create a 19-unit Site Condo development in addition to a three parcel land split. The property is approximately 38 acres, zoned FF-1 Farm Forest and is tax parcel number 24-07-17-13-200-011.
Michalek presented the case. The request includes parcels A, B and C, separated from proposed Site Condominium. Parcel C doesn’t meet FF-1 standards, parcel B is requested to have an Accessory building as a main use. The residence is in Cheboygan county side of Miller road, opposite from the pole building. All 19 units fit the FF-1 minimum lost size. There is no sealed drainage plan. The existing natural features are not marked. The Emmet County Road commission has approved access from Miller road, however, they will address the culvert size at the time of permitting. Thee is no Fire Department approval. The Township recommends tabling.
Fullford stated that there is support from the Township. There are concerns about headlights toward neighbors, there is screening by cedars and spruce. Mr. Baker agreed to add more screening if needed. All storage will be moved to their other location by October 31st. The Township would like an affidavit for access as a main use, which Bakers will do. If the parcel is ever sold, the buyer would need to put a residence on the parcel within 12 months. The new intersection will need paving and after 12 units are sold, the entire road will be paved.
Derrohn stated that there should be a notarized affidavit to deed, in case the property is sold. The buyer must commit to a house in 12 months and that Mr. Baker commit to personal storage use only.
Donna McGill, a neighbor, had concerns with the increase in traffic, lights, noise, and construction. She wondered who would pay for the deterioration of the road.
Derrohn made a motion to approve Case #203B-98, a three (3) part request for a Special Use Permit to remove a Contractor's Use, retain an Accessory Building as a Main Use and create a 19 parcel Site Unit Condominium per the Land Development Standards, all at 8140 Miller Road, Section 13, Littlefield Township, on condition that an affidavit stipulating an accessory building without a main use, an affidavit showing the parcel as a zoning lot with the residence across Miller Road and if and when it is sold, the buyer be required to begin constructing a home within 12 months, an affidavit that use of the building is for personal storage only, that material around the building is to be removed by10/31/05, that the access to the accessory building come off Robin Lane, that there is to be screening to the north of Robin Lane with 4 foot trees, that the road is to be paved to the Y, and after 12 lots are sold, the rest of the roads are to be paved, and further, this approval will require review and approval of the zoning lot by civil council on the matter of the zoning lot being partly in
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 8 Cheboygan County. Jones supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote, Yes; Jones, Behan, Alexander, Derrohn, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers Scott, Laughbaum.
6. Case # 175A-77 Dan Pieffer, PUD-1 Mixed Use - Preliminary and Final Master Plan, E. Mitchell Road, Section 4, Bear Creek Township A request by Dan Pieffer for Preliminary and Final PUD-1 Mixed use Master Plan and Site Plan Review to allow all B-2 uses on the entire parcel at 2430 E. Mitchell Road. The underlying zoning is B-2 General Business and R-1B One Family Residential with a Mixed Use PUD-1 overlay. The property is tax parcel number 24-01-19-04-200-012 and is located south of E. Mitchell Road and East of Old School Ridge, Section 4, T34N-R4W, Bear Creek Township. The request is specifically for a Gas Station, a drive through Convenience Store, and other uses such as offices, contractors uses and mini type storage. The review is per Article XVIII, PUD-1 Planned Unit Development of the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance.
Putters presented the case. The request is for a Preliminary and Final PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan which requires a 50 foot perimeter setback. The proposed PUD-1 is for a convenience store with a drive up window and gasoline dispensing services. There are possible wetland issues. The Township recommended approval with the following conditions: (1) deny the gas dispensing use and (2) permit B-2 principal uses through the PUD. The Bear Creek Township Board requested the case be returned to their Planning Commission for further review.
Letzmann asked if there was going to be a fast food window? Malowitz answered no, there will be a drive up window for the convenience store only.
Malowitz stated that the site plan has changed since the last meeting. He addressed some of the issues that came up and how they changed the site plan to accommodate those concerns.
Eby asked if there were any public comments. There were none.
The case was referred back to Bear Creek Township.
7. Case #22-05 Gary Litzner, Special Use Permit, US-31, Section 34, Carp Lake Township A request by Gary Litzner for a Special Use Permit for three (3) existing accessory buildings to be a main use. The buildings are on the southerly side of US-31, in Section 34, T38N-R4W, Carp Lake Township. The request is per Zoning Ordinance Section 2201, subparagraphs 2 and 8. The property is zoned SR-1 to a depth of 400 feet from US-31 and the remainder is FF-2 Farm Forest. The tax parcel number is 24-03-06-34-200-012. The purpose of the request is to permit a property split that separates the existing home from existing farm buildings.
Laad presented using a site plan and tax parcel map. The property is zoned SR-1 along US-31 and the rest is zoned FF-2. The property is 68.5 acres. The proposed land division has a parallel request to allow the existing buildings as a main use. Along with the 10 acres, the parcel could allow for a future contractors use and with a residence on site, could use the existing barns, all by SUP.
Eby asked for comments from the applicant. Gary Litzner discussed the issue of the ten (10) acres for a future contractors use, to make the parcel saleable.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 9
There was discussion on the barns and the square footage which totals 26,000 square feet.
Letzmann stated that, if granted, they are allowing a much larger accessory building than usual? Putters answered yes.
A new use of the barns/property must come back to PC for review, e.g. contractors use. They need to apply for reviews in the future.
Letzmann asked about a review within a limited time to show what it is being used for, residential or contractors use. Litzner stated that it is presently being used for hay storage. It is up for sale and the new owner would need to come to the Planning Commission for other uses.
Letzmann stated that the Planning Commission would be creating a non conforming use? That is a real problem. Eby answered that it is out of compliance as a farm use.
There was discussion on ownership of the buildings and the acreage. Would the Planning Commission like to see this come back with a site plan?
Letzmann referred to page 22-3, exemptions 7.b. of the Ordinance. Eby stated that using the building for farm use would require more acreage. There was discussion on the farm use.
Jones made a motion to approve case #22-05, a request by Gary Litzner for a Special Use Permit, US-31, Section 34, Carp Lake Township for the main use as being farm use. Letzmann supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote: Yes; Jones, Behan, Alexander, Derrohn, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers Scott, Laughbaum.
8. Case #72A-03 Lee Roofing, Site Plan Review/Change of Use, US-31, Section 27, McKinley Township A request by John B. Lee for Site Plan Review and Change of Use for property located at 1066 US-31 N, Section 27, T37N-R4W, McKinley Township. The property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial and is tax parcel number 24-10-10-27-300-010. The proposed use is a contractor’s office, a change from a residential accessory building. The request is per Section 1300 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Michalek presented the case using a site plan and tax parcel map. The property is zoned I-1. The proposal is to convert the existing residence to an office. The office use in the existing garage was approved. There is adequate parking with a 30' x 40' storage building for display and sales.
The case was tabled until the following regularly scheduled meeting.
9. Case #21-05 Readmond Township Hall, Site Plan Review, 6034 & 6008 Wormwood Lane, Section 21, Readmond Township A request by Readmond Township for Site Plan Review of a planned new Township Hall to be sited west of the existing Township Hall at 6008 Wormwood Lane in Section 21, Readmond Township. The property is some 25 acres in area, it encompasses two tax parcels, numbered 24-12-08-21-200-007 and 200-014. The zoning is FF-2 Farm Forest. The request is per Ordinance Section 800-9, where public buildings are a
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 10 principal use permitted. Up to fifteen (15) of the required 56 parking spaces are requested to be deferred per Section 2202-8.
Staff presented the case using a site plan and tax parcel map. The proposal is for a new Township Hall. The building meets the setback requirements of the FF-2 District. There is a sealed drainage Plan on file. There is no letter on file from the Emmet County Road Commission. Fifty-six (56) parking spaces are required. There are 12 existing, 29 are new and 15 are requested to be deferred.
Eby asked for comments from the applicant. There were none.
Letzmann moved to approve Case #21-05, a request by Readmond Township Hall for a Site Plan Review, 6034 & 6008 Wormwood Lane, Section 21, Readmond Township because it meets the standards of the Ordinance, there is Township approval, and the Emmet County Road Commission approved the driveway access. Derrohn supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote: Yes; Letzmann, Derrohn, Jones, Behan, Alexander, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
10. Case # 23-05 Richard Clarke, Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review, Section 36, Readmond Township. A request by Richard Clarke for Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review to establish a 12-Unit Site Condominium Project on an approximately 17.4 acre property west of M-119 and East of Lake Michigan in Section 36, T37N-R7W, Readmond Township. The property is zoned as SR-1 Scenic Resource and RR-1 Recreational Residential. The property is tax parcel number 24-12-07-36-300-018. The review is per Article XXI – General Provisions, Section 2102 (14) Land Development Standards, of the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance.
There was some question on the notification of the neighbors. Bob Cardinal requested that the case be tabled to allow the Township to review.
The case was tabled until the next regularly scheduled meeting.
11. Case #20-05 Bob Howard for Birchwood Landscape Company, Special Use Permit for a Contractor's Use, 4622 W. Brutus Road, Section 29, Maple River Township A request by Bob Howard for Birchwood Landscape Company for a Special Use Permit for a Contractor's Use on property located at 4622 W. Brutus Road, Section 29, T36N-R4W, Maple River Township. The property is zoned FF-2 Farm Forest and is tax parcel number 24-09-14-29-200-010 & 003. The request is per Section 801-9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Laad presented the case using a site plan and tax parcel map. The request is for a contractor’s use per Section 801-9 of the Zoning Ordinance. The property is zoned FF-2. There are two parcels of 15 & 8 acres designated to be for one zoning lot. The Township recommended approval. The property is naturally screened and isolated. Emmet County Road Commission approval is pending.
There was discussion on the uses for this request, and the screening. The property is naturally screened. Letzmann made a motion to approve Case #20-05, a request for a Special User Permit for a Contractor’s Use, 4622 W. Brutus Road, Section 29, Maple River Township, with Road Commission approval or proof that it is not needed, there is approval from the Township, the property is naturally
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 11 screened, there is no detriment to the neighbors, the 2 lots must be combined as one zoning lot. Behan supported the motion which passed by the following roll call vote: Yes; Jones, Derrohn, Alexander, Behan, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
12. Case # 72A-04 North Woods Investment Company, Final PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan, 7688 Maple River Road, Section 23, Maple River Township A request by North Woods Investment Company to overlay a Final PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan, to a 17.0 acre property located in the E 1/2 of NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 23, T36N-R4W, Maple River Township. The tax parcel number is 24-09-14-23-100-005. The underlying zoning is R-2A General Residential with a Preliminary PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan in place. The Final PUD is for 21 duplex buildings (42 units) and a clubhouse/pool amenity. The duplex units are proposed to serve as a residential housing complement to the Hidden River Golf and Casting Club. The request is per Article XVIII, PUD-1 Planned Unit Development of the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance.
Putters presented the case using a site plan and tax parcel map. The request is for a proposed duplex housing development to complement the adjoining golf course. The property is approximately 17 acres and was rezoned from SR-1, FF-1 & FF-2 to R-2A with a PUD-1 overlay. There are plans for 22 duplexes with 44 units & a Club House with a Swimming pool. Michigan DEQ has approved.
Letzmann asked for clarification on the original approval. Laad stated that it had been approved for 56 units at the completion of Phase II. Philport stated that there would be no Phase II, since they are only adding 4 buildings.
Philport discussed the site plan and the changes made to the initial site plan.
There was discussion on a conservation easement, and on what the requirements are for the PUD and the Site Plan for the open spaces.
Eby was of the opinion that the Site Plan was missing some details and that they were just hearing the PUD, not the site plan. Putters stated that they could return with more detail.
Jones stated that the PUD must go to the Board of Commissioners because it is a Mixed Use.
Derrohn motioned to approve the request by North Woods Investment Company for a Final PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan, 7688 Maple River Road, Section 23, Maple River Township, with the condition that there is a conservation easement for 40 foot buffer, approval is for the plan dated May 4, 2005, the Township approved, the DEQ approved, and on the condition that it is approved by the County Board of Commissioners. Alexander supported the motion which passed on the following roll call vote: Yes; Jones, Letzmann, Behan, Alexander, Derrohn, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
13. Case # 83E-00 Wade Trim for Crooked Lake Properties, LLC., PUD Modification, 3520 Oden Road (US-31), Section 18, Littlefield Township A request by Wade Trim for Crooked Lake Properties, LLC., for a clarification and determination of the front setback on the Marina Building approved as part of a PUD-1 Mixed Use Master Plan and Site Plan. The
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 12 building is located on tax parcel number 24-07-17-18-151-012 at 3520 Oden Road (US-31). The request is to modify the setback to permit an 18 inch eave to project into the 25' front setback area. The building fronts the south side of US-31 and lies east of Cincinnati Avenue. The modification is per Article XVIII, Section 1805(8) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Putters presented the case. The request is for an interpretation of the Site Plan for the eave overhang. The proposed total is 18 inches in the setback. The Staff approved a 4 inch eave overhang in the setback. The Township decision was pending.
There was discussion on the interpretation of the Ordinance, such as the building setback, is it measured from foundation wall or from the leading edge of the eave.
John Ernst, from Wade Trim was present. He discussed the building location and the requirements of the Ordinance. There was a mistake on the foundation, which was fixed, but the eave itself was shown on the approved PUD. There was no identification on the Site Plan as to whether the building foot print was showing the eaves or just the foundation. The Ordinance requires a location, the location is measured at the foundation. He also discussed the right of way, which is an MDOT issue.
Letzmann asked if it is within the setback? There was discussion again on what is included in the setback.
Derrohn stated that they need to look at the fact that the building was started before a zoning permit was applied for. There was discussion on what happened. Putters stated that setback issues were discovered by Doernenburg and Houghton. The applicant’s surveyors verified the setback.
Ernst stated that it was built in the approved location (shown on the Site Plan), there was nothing stating that the setback was to be from the eaves. The applicant suggested that a future change be made to the site plan checklist. Staff reported that the Site Plan check sheet specifies that the setback is from the eaves.
Derrohn again stated that if the permit had been applied first, this likely would not be an issue. Ernst answered that it does not change what was permitted, it was his opinion that the approved site plan shows building location, and that is what was followed (the Site Plan did not show eaves). An accompanying elevation sketch of the building did show eaves, but they were not related to lot lines or setbacks.
Eby stated that they may need to make an interpretation on the request, were eaves included or not.
Eby asked if there were any more public comments.
George Schoene stated that Contractors should know the requirements and be held responsible, it was his opinion that Contractors deal with questions like this all the time.
Letzmann made a motion to deny the 14 inch infringement on the setback for Case # 83E-00, North Woods Investment Company. Jones supported the motion which passed by the following roll call
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 13 vote: Yes; Behan, Derrohn, Alexander, Jones, Letzmann, Eby, No; None, Absent; Summers, Scott, Laughbaum.
14. Case # 14-05 David Hall, Special Use Permit to construct a larger than maximum size accessory residential building, 4246 Hiawatha Trail, Section 26, Bear Creek Township. A request by David R. Hall for a Special Use Permit to construct a larger than maximum size accessory residential building on a property located at 4246 Hiawatha Trail in Section 26, T35N-R5W, Bear Creek Township. The tax parcel number is 24-01-16-26-100-023. The property is zoned R-2B General Residential and the request is for an accessory building that is 720 square feet or 60% larger than the 1,200 square feet maximum for the district. The request is per Ordinance Section 2201-8.
Laad presented the case. The request is for a 40' x 48' (1,920 square feet) accessory building ( the maximum allowable size is 1000 square feet for front and side yards. A rear yard location can have 1,200 square feet. The building is to be used for a travel trailer and for restoring an old truck. The building has the potential to be screened. The Township tabled the case.
Eby asked for comments from the applicant. Debbie Hall was present. She stated that the building was for personal use only.
Eby asked if the case was to go back to the Township? Laad answered yes.
The case was referred back to Bear Creek Township.
15. Case #16-05 Dale Daniels and Frank Daniels, Jr for Daniel's Pit, Special Use Permit to renew a Level III Resource Mining Permit, 1415 Cedar Valley Road, Section 10, Bear Creek Township A request by Dale Daniels and Frank Daniels, Jr for Daniel's Pit for a Special Use Permit to renew a Level III Resource Mining Permit originally approved by Bear Creek Township under their Interim Zoning Ordinance, on December 7, 2000, at 1415 Cedar Valley Road. The property has frontage on Greenwood Road, it is zoned FF-1 Farm and Forest and is tax parcel number 24-01-19-10-100-014. The review is per Section 2102-10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Jones requested to abstain from this case as the Daniels are doing work on his property at this time.
Laad presented the case. The request is for renewal of a Level III mining permit in an area outlined as Phase I on the Site Plan. The original permit was issued under Bear Creek Township Zoning (12/7/00) and renewed by the Township on December 19, 2002 which expired on Dec 31, 2004.
Compliance inspection was completed on April 21, 2005 by Larry Houghton of the Code Enforcement Department. A report was distributed.
The excavation appears to be close to the 50' setback along Greenwood Road. Future reclamation may be difficult because of steep slopes and nearness to Greenwood Road. Neighbors are concerned about the dust and possible erosion. The applicant provided a new site plan to show present conditions and will restore the slopes along Greenwood Road. The Township tabled the case. The hours of operation in the permit are different from the approved plan. As per the plan: M-F 6:30 a.m. - 8:30 p.m., Sat: 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., Sun 8:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. (Hauling only).
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 14
Eby asked for applicant comments. Applicant stated that he is present just for renewal of the prior approval area.
Eby asked for comments from the public.
Tom Fettig stated that he is concerned about the depth of the pit, as his well level is down to 165 feet. He is also concerned that his property may erode into the pit. The slopes are steep and the excavation is not that far from the property line.
Eby stated that these issues need to be considered and the case will be tabled.
Applicant explained the site plan. As far as the well, where house trailer is located, the water level is at 120 feet, it is his opinion that Fettig is far enough away and should not be affected.
There was some concern on possible contamination or loss in filtration to recharge the water table.
Letzmann stated that she would like to see a cash deposit or a bank letter of credit.
Alexander suggested that the Planning Commission schedule a site visit to the property before the next meeting.
There was discussion on the hours of operation and work being done on Sundays.
Eby was of the opinion that the Township should be asked for a list of conditions.
The case was referred back to the Township.
16. Case #83A-04 Burdco, Inc., Special Use Permit to construct a professional office building, US-131 (Rotary Park), Section 7, Bear Creek Township A request by Burdco Incorporated for a Special Use Permit to construct a professional office building on a 2.16 acre property located on the east side of US-131 South generally known as Rotary Park in Section 7, T34N-R5W, Bear Creek Township. The property is currently zoned R-1B One Family Residential but will effectively be re-zoned to R-2B which was approved by the Emmet County Board of Commissioners on March 24, 2005. The property consists of two parcels, being Tax Parcel numbers: 24-01-19-07-150-016 and 24-01-19-07-150-018. The request is per Ordinance Article V, Section 501-2b.
Laad presented the case. The property is being rezoned to R-2B General Residential in order to permit a professional office. The applicant is seeking Storm Water Approval and MDOT’s approval for the two driveways. Trees are required for the parking areas (1 per 10 spaces). There are no objections to the use. The case was tabled by the Township.
There was discussion on the trees and the screening. The applicant felt the screening was sufficient, but will do whatever is needed for approval. More trees were needed in the parking area. Parking lots need to be screened from adjacent residential uses. Eby asked for public comments.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 15 George Chaney stated that from a traffic stand point it was his opinion that one drive would be better than two. There was some discussion on a plan to join the two parking areas so that only one driveway would be needed. Putters stated that the grade was too steep, possibly 10 feet, to safely make the inter-connection.
The case was referred back to the Township.
Eby requested that the next two cases, #19-05 and 19A-05 be discussed together.
17. Case #19-05 Alpena Wholesale Grocery, a request to re-zone from B-2 General Business and R-1B One Family Residential to all B-2 General Business, E. Mitchell Road, Section 04, Bear Creek Township A request by Alpena Wholesale Grocer Company to rezone all or part of tax parcel number 24-01-19-04-200-011 from B-2 General Business and R-1B One Family Residential to B-2 General Business. The property is located approximately 780 feet east of the Division Road-Mitchell Road intersection on the south side of E. Mitchell Road. The parcel has 252.44 feet of frontage on E. Mitchell Road and extends south 365.11 feet. The current zoning designation is B-2 on the northerly half of the property and R-1B on the southerly half of the property. The rezoning would place the entire parcel into one zoning district, B-2 General Business.
Staff prefers a PUD-1 Mixed Use Overlay to match the request on the adjacent property to the east.
The Township tabled the case.
18. Case #19A-05 Alpena Wholesale for Alpena Oil Company, Inc., Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review for a Louie’s Fresh Market Grocery Store and a gasoline station within the B-2 General Business District, at 2394 E. Mitchell Road, Section 4, Bear Creak Township A request by Alpena Oil Company, Inc. for a Special Use Permit and Site Plan Review for a Louie’s Fresh Market Grocery Store and a gasoline station within the B-2 General Business zoning district, part (north 179 feet) of a parcel located at 2394 E. Mitchell Road. The property is tax parcel number 24-01-19-04-200-011, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of E. Mitchell Road and Orchard Ridge Drive, Section 4, T34N-R5W, Bear Creak Township. The review is per Article X, Section 1000-1 and 1001-1.
The requested use will be completely within the B-2 part of the property. A retention pond will be located in the south half of the parcel in the R-1B District area. The proposed building height is unknown, (the maximum is 30 feet). It meets the setback requirements of the B-2 zone for buildings and parking. A wetland investigation may be needed. The Emmet County Road Commission and the Fire Department have both approved the plan. There appears to be adequate space for snow removal. The Township tabled the case.
There was discussion on the economic impact of this use.
Putters stated that this part of the property is zoned commercial. They have the right to use the property for whatever is allowed in the B-2 District.
Eby asked for public comments.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 16 Jerry Johnson, of Great Northern Foods was present. He discussed his reasoning for the request. He intends to build a grocery/convenience store and gas station resembling the Louie’s on M - 68 East of Alanson.
Jones stated that Mitchell Road is already very congested. His statement was followed by a discussion on the congestion that would be added to the area and the numerous complaints that would come up.
Johnson, pointed out that the parcel is heavily wooded, he plans to leave 50 feet of the existing trees for screening purposes along the south property line.
The case was referred back to Bear Creek Township.
19. Case #55A-04 Phil Duran for Suzanne Engle, Final PUD-1 Master Plan and Site Plan Review, Country Club Road & US-31, Section 34, Bear Creek Township A request by Phil Duran for Suzanne Engle, for a Final PUD-1 Master Plan and Site Plan Review to establish a 20-Unit Site Condominium Project on an approximately 44.3 acre property located south of U.S. 31, some 300 feet East of Manvel Road, and North of Country Club Road, in Section 34, T35N-R5W, Bear Creek Township. The property tax parcel number is 24-01-16-34-100-049. The property is zoned R-1B One Family Residential, except for a small B-2 area at the NW Corner (US 31). The request is per Article XVIII, PUD-1 Planned Unit Development of the Emmet County Zoning Ordinance.
Putters explained the case. The request meets or exceeds the 50 foot setback for a PUD-1. The lot sizes are larger than the required 22,000 Square feet for R-1B District. There are 20 single family residential lots and 1 commercial/residential lot. The plan shows 2 business buildings. The Fire Department would like to see the following conditions. The 25 foot access road for lots 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 is insufficient for fire trucks. Units 6 and 18 should have their driveway access from the Cul-de-sac. There is a sealed drainage plan on file. The Staff suggests the entire parcel to be residential with no access to US-31. The Township tabled the case.
There was discussion on the road access and the proposed driveway.
Joan Kleinsteiver, pointed out that on her property there is a steep embankment which was left by a previous developer. Kleinsteiver has worked for years to stabilize the slopes. She would like to see a greenbelt area. She objects to the creeping of business into the residential property. The applicant has an area that is zoned B-2, why can’t he put the office there? She also points out possible traffic safety issues and would rather see the entrance on Country Club Road, not US 31. She discussed the lack of traffic lights to aid traffic safety. Lights will effect the residents. She would like to see additional screening for noise.
Kara Schoene, a resident of Bay View Heights, stated that the first thing they checked before purchasing their property was the zoning. They were assured that there property would remain residential. She pointed out that the area had been zoned residential since 1972, when zoning began in Emmet County.
Pat Tefall stated that she has a memo written in the 1970's, where the area was zoned residential. Prior commissioners wanted a break in the commercial and residential areas.
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 17
George Schoene stated that he supported the neighbors, it was his opinion that protecting the views of existing homeowners was very important. It was also his opinion that the driveway at Country Club Road will be very hazardous.
Behan stated that the speed limit on Country Club Road was illegally posted at 25 mph.
Duran, discussed the property lines and the trees that have been cut illegally on the Engle property by neighbors th create a view. He pointed out the green spaces and steep slope areas, he stated that there is a natural barrier to the East. He referred to the B-2 area and what could happen in that area, a gas station for example. He is trying to buffer the residential area. Duran explained his views of transition zoning.
The case was referred back to Bear Creek Township.
IV Public Comments - There were none.
V Other Business
· Enforcement Report - No discussion was held.
Eby concluded that the following items would be discussed at the June meeting. · Resort Township Density Bonus Language
· Case #77G-00 Resort Township, Zoning Coordinating Committee, Text Amendments
· Dave Kring, Sign Review, US-31, Bear Creek Township
VI Adjournment
Chairperson Eby declared the meeting adjourned at 11:52 p.m.
______James Scott, Secretary Dated
Emmet County Planning Commission 05/05/05 Minutes Page 18