| REGULAR MEETING |
DECEMBER 10, 2009 |
| PLANNING COMMISSION |
1 - 1 |
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Amerman at 7:30 p.m. A quorum was present.
PRESENT
Vice Chairman Kathy Amerman; Commissioners David Ebert, Gary Goodenow, Craig Johnston, Larry Keef, Timothy Juidici, Bill Serchak, Karen Worrell
ABSENT
Chairman John Heidt
ALSO PRESENT
Village Manager, Arthur Shufflebarger; Zoning Administrator, Randy Sapelak; Planning Consultant, Nickolas Lomako; DDA Director, Ann Barnette
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Reconsideration of Motion PC-09-70
Vice Chairman Amerman acknowledged a letter at the table from Ann Barnette, dated 12/10/09 (on file at Village office), and asked if Ms. Barnette had any comments.
Ms. Barnette stated that the Downtown Development Authority, (DDA) Board asked her to come before Planning Commission regarding motion, PC-09-70, that was made at the November meeting. She said the Public Hearing at the last meeting produced what it should, which was comment from the Public. She said however, that Kroger was present and had expected to respond. She said after the Public Hearing was closed, discussion began and then a motion was made without hearing from Kroger. She explained that the DDA is respectfully requesting that Planning Commission set another Public Hearing for the January meeting to allow Kroger the opportunity to address the concerns of the Public.
Marc Weinbaum, owner of the property, was present and stated that the representatives from Kroger are available and prepared to address concerns the public expressed at the November meeting, or if it is the desire of the Planning Commission to set another Public Hearing for January and the concerns can be addressed at that time.
Chris Rogers, Real Estate Manager for Kroger was present and stated that they would like the opportunity to address the concerns of the Public and assure them that Kroger would comply with every law and ordinance regulation necessary.
Commissioner Goodenow asked that the minutes reflect that no one from Kroger stepped up to speak at the Public Hearing held in November, except for Marc Weinbaum.
Commissioner Johnston asked Mr. Rogers how many proposals that include a fuel station do they present in a year and if it was a surprise to him that there were so many environmental concerns.
Mr. Rogers said they present somewhere between 10 and 15 requests for a fuel station per year. He said when environmental questions have come up they address them by stating they would comply with all laws and ordinance regulations the community may have.
Commissioners Johnston and Keef asked to hear the basis for which they are asking the motion to be rescinded.
William Curry, Engineering Consultant with SSOE said that he should have stepped up at the last meeting but did not. He stated that there is a unique situation being that the location of the fuel station is in close proximity of a creek and wells in the area. He said the concerns are valid and would like to be given the opportunity to speak and make a presentation to the Commissioners and the Public. Mr. Curry said that he was prepared to make a presentation at the last meeting but did not believe he had the opportunity to do so. He explained that since the last meeting he has gathered further information pertaining to MDEQ Requirements and Village requirements.
Commissioner Johnston asked if an example of having a fuel station in an environment similar to the Village that has been in place for longer than five years could be provided.
Mr. Rogers said he could not provide an example.
PC-09-71 Keef moved, Goodenow seconded, to reconsider motion PC-09-70.
Commissioner Johnston suggested that Kroger be able to provide for the next meeting an example of where a fuel station has been in place and working for a period longer than five years in an environment comparable to Milford.
Mr. Shufflebarger said that he would provide the Commissioners with information regarding the Wellhead Protection Program.
PC-09-71
ROLL CALL VOTE
YES – Goodenow, Keef, Juidici, Ebert, Amerman NO – Johnston, Worrell, Serchak Motion CARRIED
PC-09-72 Keef moved, Goodenow seconded, to postpone RZ-09-01, until the January 14, 2010, Planning Commission meeting. Motion CARRIED
PC-09-73 Goodenow moved, Johnston seconded, to set a Public Hearing for RZ-09-01, for the January 14, 2010, meeting. Motion CARRIED
Regular Meeting November 12, 2009
PC-09-74 Ebert moved, Worrell seconded, to accept the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of November 12, 2009, as presented. Motion CARRIED
CALL TO PUBLIC
There was no comment from the Public.
PUBLIC HEARING
Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment, Sec. 94-344, Recreational Vehicle Storage Requirements
PC-09-75 Worrell moved, Juidici seconded, to open the Public Hearing at 8:01 p.m. Motion CARRIED
There was no response from the Public.
PC-09-76 Goodenow moved, Serchak seconded, to close the Public Hearing at 8:02 p.m. Motion CARRIED
PC-09-77 Goodenow moved, Worrell seconded, to recommend approval to Village Council the proposed zoning ordinance text amendment to Sec. 94-344, Recreational Vehicle Storage Requirements as presented in the Wade Trim draft dated 10/8/09, (on file at Village office). Motion CARRIED
Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments Resulting From PA 110 of 2006 (Michigan Zoning Enabling Act), Installments 1-6
PC-09-78 Worrell moved, Juidici seconded, to open the Public Hearing at 8:08 p.m. Motion CARRIED
Mr. Lomako reviewed the proposed language amendments. There was no comment from the Public.
PC-09-79 Goodenow moved, Ebert seconded, to close the Public Hearing at 8:14 p.m. Motion CARRIED
PC-09-80 Serchak moved, Worrell seconded, to recommend to Village Council the proposed zoning text amendments resulting from PA 110 of 2006 (Michigan Zoning Enabling Act), Installments 1-6. Motion CARRIED
PRESENTATION
Milford Skate Park Ric Mueller, 808 Old Milford Farms Dr., Chairman of the Friends of Milford Skate Park, (FoMSP), and Bob Ford, with Landscape Architects & Planners, Inc., presented Planning Commission with a proposal for the Milford Skate Park to be placed on HCMA property on G.M. Road next to the Milford Trail. The skate park will be a concrete park with separate pods for different levels of experience.
Mr. Mueller explained that other sites were considered, but it was determined that the proposed location would work best because of availability, visibility, and proximity to restaurants and convenience stores. Mr. Mueller said that he was before Village Council in October and a motion was made to support the proposed location.
DISCUSSION
The Commissioners, Mr. Mueller and Mr. Ford discussed the traffic on Milford and GM Roads, pedestrian safety and preserving parkland.
Mr. Mueller said correcting traffic concerns in the area of Milford and GM Roads would need to be more than just the responsibility of the FoMSP.
Commissioner Goodenow stated that contrary to what Mr. Mueller may have been told, he believes that Planning Commission can approve or deny a proposed location based on Sec. 94-281of the ordinance. He said while he thinks the addition of a skate park would be great for the community the proposed location is the wrong place. He said property by the YMCA would be better suited for a skate park.
Mr. Mueller said he approached the YMCA about the property to the north of their building, but that too many fees would be involved.
Mr. Shufflebarger said there is a 60 year lease between the Village and the YMCA for the property. He said he did not believe the YMCA would be in favor of allowing the skate park at their site without there being some type of property exchange of equal or greater value. He said there would be no cost to FoMSP, if they use the proposed property.
Commissioner Goodenow said he felt certain that Planning Commission needed to take some type of action based upon the intent of Sec. 94-281 to allow the skate park to be located at the proposed site.
Mr. Mueller said he would hesitate to move forward without having the site obtained. He said he believed he received approval for the location with the motion made by Council and thought the next step would be site plan approval from Planning Commission.
Mr. Shufflebarger said that he would ask the Village attorney what action is required by Planning Commission and, if any, how to move forward.
Mr. Lomako suggested that Sec. 61, of PA 33 of 2008, which Commissioner Johnston referenced at the November meeting also be reviewed by the Village attorney.
The Commissioners discussed placing the item on the agenda for the January meeting.
Mr. Shufflebarger said it would be best to have the item on the agenda if it is determined that action to approve the site is necessary by Planning Commission, and if determined no action is necessary by Planning Commission the agenda item could be removed.
Mr.Lomako cautioned the Commissioners stating that it may be determined that the use might make sense at the proposed site until the details of the plan are known and then the plan and site are rejected. There might be general agreement that in concept the site makes sense for a skate park.
Commissioner Goodenow said he is trying to avoid having the applicant spend money on a site plan, come before Planning Commission only to have them deny the location.
PC-09-81 Keef moved, Goodenow seconded, moved to carry over to the January agenda, the issue of the Milford Skate Park. Motion CARRIED
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS
Mr. Shufflebarger reminded the Commissioners of the Joint Boards and Committees meeting with Village Council in January and asked that strength and weakness items for each be given to the Chairman for discussion at the meeting.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Nancy Scott, CMC
Milford Village Deputy Clerk | 
