 |
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
 |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||
 |
Metropolitan Planning Commission Meeting MinutesCALHOUN COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMISSION January 28, 2008 The Regular Session of the Calhoun County Metropolitan Planning Commission convened at 4:07 p.m., Monday, January 28, 2008 in the Planning Office Conference Room, Calhoun County Building, 315 West Green Street, Marshall, Michigan. Roll Call: Present: Comrs. Daniel Kesselring, Larry Rizor, Robert Bolton, Mike Rae and Becky Rocho. Excused: Comr. Dian Schubel. Also Present: Planning Consultant Jennifer Bomba; Road Commission Addressing Administrator Erin Cummings; Mr. Jeffrey Rutter, County resident; and Deputy Clerk/Board Aide Mary Lou Barrett. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS -- ELECTION OF 2008 OFFICERS:
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
ADDRESS APPEAL HEARING REGARDING 4455 W. BASELINE HIGHWAY: Vice Chairman Kesselring explained the Planning Commission’s authority and addressed the procedure to be followed during the hearing. Road Commission Addressing Administrator Cummings advised that the purpose of the addressing changes had been due to complaints received from Lee Township regarding mail not being delivered correctly and problems with voter registration, and from Calhoun County Dispatch regarding delivery of emergency services. Ms. Cummings stated that sixteen addresses were to be changed from Old 27 to the 25000 block. Ms. Cummings advised that September 20, 2007 address change notifications were mailed to the residents affected in Lee and Clarence Townships. Ms. Cummings advised that the ordinance states that only one numbering system can be used. This is the exception, numbers from 4932 to 1500 in Eaton County, and 18,000 to 20,000 in Calhoun County, which has created duplicate numbers. Ms. Cummings advised that the existing range correlates with Bedford and Pennfield Township addresses. Ms. Cummings continued that in 1962 Baseline Road was certified, however, that staff was directed to change from Road/Highway to Drive. Ms. Cummings advised of address numbering changes made in 2002, i.e., 59 along the southern county line; and in 2003, 34 changes along the western county line. Ms. Cummings advised that after the changes were made, Eaton County indicated that an agreement regarding address changes existed, however, it was determined that the agreement had not been signed. Ms. Cummings further advised that of the 16 changes initiated, all but two have complied according to the post office. Comr. Rizor inquired whether the state requires counties to coordinate. Ms. Cummings responded that she is not aware of state regulations. Comr. Rae inquired regarding the addressing system utilized on the Barry County boundary. Ms. Cummings responded that along that boundary Calhoun County’s numbering system is utilized. Vice Chairman Kesselring inquired regarding the name change from Road/Highway to Drive. Ms. Cummings advised that Public Act 51 certifies the road as Baseline Drive, however, that she had been directed by the Managing Director to make the name consistent with Kalamazoo and Jackson Counties. Ms. Cummings continued that she did review Eaton County’s numbering system, however, that it is completely different and no communication was made prior to changing the addresses along that boundary. Comr. Bolton questioned whether there are still two residents whose addresses have not changed yet. Ms. Cummings responded Yes. Comr. Bolton inquired regarding the time frame for residents to make the change. Ms. Cummings advised that the residents have 30 days to change as stated within the ordinance; however, that the Road Commission has been providing a longer amount of time because 30 days is just not long enough for everyone to coordinate the change. Comr. Bolton inquired regarding the penalty for not making the change. Ms. Cummings responded that the penalty for first violation is $300, and $500 for the next violation. Vice Chairman Kesselring addressed Section 407.B of the ordinance, which in part states that the administrator may allow a 60 day adjustment period and then 30 days. Ms. Cummings responded that the section probably should be changed. Vice Chairman Kesselring stated that it looks like 30 days to make an appeal and 60 days to comply. Mr. Jeffrey Rutter stated that he is worried about the safety of the public by changing the numbering, that it will lengthen the response time for emergency services, pointing out that with two different addressing systems it will do the opposite and delay emergency response time. Mr. Rutter pointed out that along Baseline Road the fire and emergency responders come from Eaton County and the ambulances and fire trucks come from Calhoun County. Mr. Rutter stated that there is big potential for confusion. Mr. Rutter stated that things would not be quite so bad if the numbers were going in the same direction as in the manner that they were prior to the changes. Mr. Rutter stated that since the change in the addressing system both dispatch centers advise that there is the potential for a bad situation to occur. Mr. Rutter advised that he presented a letter from Eaton County Dispatch to Ms. Cummings, which he discussed with Ms. Cummings and Ms. Johnson, and that they feel that it is Eaton County’s problem to fix. Mr. Rutter pointed out that the ordinance states that Calhoun County should attempt to coordinate with the other counties, and the county has made no attempt to do that. The change is just a decision that Calhoun County made for convenience in numbering. Mr. Rutter pointed out that when there are even numbers on both sides of the road it is confusing. Mr. Rutter further pointed out that there are Calhoun County residents to the west of Old 27 on the north side of Baseline that have Eaton County addresses, which if their addresses are changed, there will be even more confusion. Comr. Rae questioned whether Mr. Rutter is saying “If it’s not broken, why try to fix it?” Mr. Rutter responded Yes. Comr. Rae inquired regarding the ambulance incident. Mr. Rutter advised that the ambulance was dispatched from Marshall and it took half an hour to arrive because of confusion regarding the address. Mr. Rutter stated that if all the numbers were consistent, emergency responders would not have to worry about which side of the road. Comr. Rae inquired whether there has been a problem on the north side. Mr. Rutter responded that there should not be as long as the dispatchers have the proper information. Vice Chairman Kesselring inquired whether Mr. Rutter has seen Eaton County’s Address Ordinance. Mr. Rutter responded that Eaton County’s Address Ordinance is identical to Calhoun County’s ordinance. Ms. Cummings advised that Eaton County’s numbering system, however, is not set up as Calhoun County’s. Mr. Rutter advised that Eaton County starts their numbering from the center of the county and Calhoun County starts on the western side of the county. Vice Chairman Kesselring inquired whether the complaints from dispatching and regarding voter registrations have been documented. Ms. Cummings responded that those complaints were taken over two years ago prior to her time in the position. Mr. Rutter advised that he asked Jill Fish if dispatch filed any complaints, and she was not aware and will check into it. Comr. Rae inquired whether the existing system can be changed, or whether it would make the situation worse. Comr. Rizor pointed out that 14 of 16 have already been changed, and that he believes the “die has been cast.” Mr. Rutter voiced displeasure that he had filed his appeal in early October 2007, and that it took this long to have a hearing to address it. Mr. Rutter stated that he would have liked to have had the hearing earlier prior to all of the changes being made. Vice Chairman Kesselring closed the appeal hearing at 4:52 p.m., and advised Mr. Rutter that he will be notified in writing within 45 days of the Planning Commission’s decision. Consultant Bomba advised Mr. Rutter that should the Planning Commission schedule a special session to further address the issue she shall notify him; further that should additional information be required, she shall contact him by letter. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Comr. Rizor requested to be excused from the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Comr. Rizor stated that he would tend to lean towards upholding the ordinance. Comr. Bolton stated that he would like to hear from the two central dispatch centers prior to making a decision. Vice Chairman Kesselring pointed out that within the ordinance it states the any change is to be coordinated with the other counties, and that it appears that Calhoun County did not. Comr. Rae stated that it is not Mr. Rutter’s fault that this appeal hearing was delayed. Vice Chairman Kesselring stated that he believes the Planning Commission needs to send a message that Calhoun County is to coordinate with the other counties. Comr. Rocho inquired why 16 addresses were picked to be changed. Comr. Rae responded that there had been a complaint by Lee Township. Comr. Rocho stated that she would like to view a schematic map of the stretch of road being addressed. COMMUNICATIONS: Ms. Bomba presented an Address Summary dated January 7, 2008. Comr. Rae requested to be excused from the meeting at 5:30 p.m. Comr. Rocho recommended the Planning Commission address the action items prior to receiving the communications, and inquired whether action items can be placed first on the agendas in the future. Ms. Bomba responded “Sure.” TOWNSHIP PLANNING AND ZONING COORDINATION: Case #01-08-01, Sheridan Township - Zoning Text Amendment Regarding Michigan Avenue Corridor Overlay District Ms. Bomba stated that the submittal is from the Sheridan Township Planning Commission. Ms. Bomba advised that the Township along with the Road Commission was awarded a transportation enhancement planning grant through the Michigan Department of Transportation to study the existing land uses along the section of Michigan Avenue in Sheridan Township west of the City of Albion. As a result of this study the Township’s Planning Commission has developed zoning policy as a means to implement the outcomes. Ms. Bomba advised that the Michigan Avenue Corridor Overlay District will apply to all parcels with frontage on Michigan Avenue from Clark Road to the eastern boundary of the Township. Ms. Bomba pointed out that as an overlay district, the underlying zoning classifications which establish the permitted and conditional uses allowed takes precedent, and the overlay establishes new additional requirements or standards governing a variety of design standards including access management, pedestrian pathways, landscaping, lighting, etc. Ms. Bomba stated that the proposed language to be included in the Township’s Zoning Ordinance as Article 18 shall serve in redeveloping that area of the Township, and recommended approval of the zoning text amendment.
Vice Chairman Kesselring stated that he wonders regarding the amount of pavement, and inquired whether there is language within the ordinance pertaining to storm water management. Ms. Bomba responded that she does not know whether storm water management is addressed within the ordinance, however, believes that it would be addressed during the site plan review process. Vice Chairman Kesselring addressed Page 4 of the Michigan Avenue Corridor Overlay District Zoning Amendment, Section 18.04 regarding design standards for driveways along a side street, and questioned whether it should be listed in an alphabetical manner to clarify the options. Comr. Rocho stated that she believes that it does, because as it reads it appears that it is “either/or.”
Case #01-08-02, Leroy Township - Zoning Text Amendments Regarding P.A. 110 of 2006 Ms. Bomba advised that the submittal is from the Leroy Township Planning Commission to comply with the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, and recommended approval.
Case #01-08-03, Fredonia Township - Public Act 116 Application Ms. Bomba advised that an application for farmland agreement has been submitted by John and Nancy Dietz for approximately 50 acres located in Section 28 of Fredonia Township. The specific parcel consists of approximately 31 acres of cultivated land and has no building improvements. Ms. Bomba stated that the applicant has requested a 10 year agreement. Ms. Bomba stated that the application is valid and recommended that it be recommended for approval by the Michigan Department of Agriculture.
COMMUNICATIONS CONTINUED: Ms. Bomba presented the following communications:
Ms. Bomba advised, regarding the Marshall Chronicle article, that the Zinn family is planning to develop the property for mixed use residential along with a winery, which shall require re-zoning. Brief discussion regarding topography for growing grapes. STAFF COMMENTS: Housing Grant and Survey and Remonumentation Grant Discussion Ms. Bomba reported that work under the grants is progressing. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m. at the call of the Vice Chairman.
|
|
||||
|
||||||
|
Calhoun County Government
| Visiting Calhoun County
| Living in Calhoun County Calhoun County
Click here to contact the webmaster
at Calhoun County
Click here to report technical problems with this website,
This page last modified
08/03/05. DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
|
||||||
Minutes Archive
Several photos included in this 
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |