Charter Township of Raisin
Minutes of Planning Commission 1-13-09
Submitted by Cheryl Benham, Secretary
Meeting called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairperson, Bob Utter.
Members present: Dale Witt, Bob Utter, Jimmy Colburn, Lee Mohr, and Cheryl Benham.
Agenda: Witt motioned to accept January 13, 2009 agenda, seconded by Colburn. Motion carried.
Minutes: Mohr motioned to accept December 2, 2008 meeting minutes, seconded by Witt. Motion carried.
Public Comments: There
were none.
Public Hearings: There were none.
Communications:
A meeting was held with the Township Clerk & Deputy Clerk on December 16, 2008 with Utter & Witt to clarify the site plan application requirements.
There was a brief review of projects that have been and/or may be submitted for consideration in the Federal Stimulus Program.
Old Sutton School was discussed at the Board meeting. A proposal was made to move it to Township owned property on Occidental.
The land use plan will be added to an informal meeting agenda for the Township Board.
Benham will not be at the February 10th meeting.
Utter will not be at the February 10th meeting.
Section 9.90 on the Township website is the old, obsolete version. The website in general needs to be updated. ZBA minutes need to be put on the website also.
Meeting Business: Unfinished Business –
1. Special Conditional Use Request for Watchmen’s Quarter’s, 3000 Ives Road –
Michael Slusarski was present for questions. Currently there is a mobile home on site and the owner would like to replace it in the same location, with the exception of the south setback, it would now adhere to the setbacks. They would like to replace it in order to improve the appearance of the site. They have an employee that would be the watchman and utilize the quarter’s full time.
Question was asked if the property was currently being used.
Mr. Slusarski stated that they use the property to place their stone and for temporary storage for storm sewer materials but the biggest use is the storage of the stone. They have had some problems with materials disappearing and items appearing, such as trash, etc.
Review of the checklist:
#5 was marked no – applicant stated that in keeping with the simplicity of the plans he didn’t have access to the names at the time of preparing the drawings. As a note the Township has mailed letters to the surrounding property owners as required.
#7 was marked n/a – this is acceptable as there are no subsequent developments intended.
#9 was marked n/a – this is because there are no proposed streets, and the existing streets are named. This should be marked yes.
#10 was marked n/a – there aren’t any utility easements crossing on the site, outside of the road right-of-way. This should be marked yes.
#11 was marked no – The applicant has noted on the site plan that there will be no grading changes, without a new survey existing topography contour intervals were unavailable.
#13 was marked n/a – there are no rivers, streams or lakes in the area so this should be marked no.
#14 was marked n/a – in order to determine this extensive soil borings would have to be done, the existing well and sanitary will be used so nothing new has to be dug. This should be marked no.
Question was asked if they would be doing a perk test when hooking up to water & sewer. They will be working with the LCHD when they get to this point to see what they require.
#15 was marked n/a – they will utilize the existing septic tanks - this should be marked no.
#16 was marked n/a – this should be marked no, there are no lines that run through the site except for the force main for Fisher Body running down Ives Road.
Questions were raised regarding the following:
The tax description is not a complete legal description; it doesn’t id the Township or the range (6S, 4E). This will be marked on the site plan.
There were no dimensions shown on the lot line, per section 9.90.4.4, dimensions for lot lines & location of the proposed structure will be added.
There are no contour lines shown per section 9.90.4.7 per applicant’s note on the site plan no grading changes will be made.
No signs are shown on the site plan per section 9.90.5 Applicant stated that they are not installing any signs at this time.
There is no screening shown between the site and the residential properties per 9.90.3.e. The applicant stated that they will work on keeping the stacks of materials more towards the rear of the site.
There will be a full-time watchman living on site per section 7.30.1.b
The applicant stated that the traffic will not be increasing; he doesn’t anticipate any upgrades being required for the driveway.
Motion by Mohr to approve the special conditional use request for the watchman’s quarters at Slusarski, 3000 Ives Road, RAO109-1300-00 as discussed per the check list, and noted in the minutes, with the addition of the township & range added to the legal description and add dimensions to the drawings including lot line description and structure location. Support Witt. ROLL CALL -Colburn – Yes, Witt – Yes, Mohr – Yes, Benham – Yes, Utter – Yes, MOTION CARRIED.
2. Sign Ordinance
Harry Hutchinson presented some information about signs and what some workable numbers for dimensions, sight distance, etc. are.
Planning Commission
to Board:
By-laws should be updated; MTA recommends 3 members have to be present for a quorum. Currently the by-laws don’t state a requirement.
Agenda Set For: March 10, 2009
At 9:30 p.m. motion to adjourn was made by Colburn, seconded by Witt. Motion carried.