View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Thursday, October 15, 2015
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: Commission Chambers, First Floor, Muskegon City Hall
AGENDA
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes from the regular meeting of September 10, 2015.
III. Public Hearings
A. Hearing, Case 2015-17: Staff-initiated request to adopt the Muskegon Parking Strategy as part
of the Master Land Use Plan.
B. Hearing, Case 2015-18: Request for a major departure from the zoning ordinance and site plan
approval for a new building at 650 Terrace Street, by Henrickson Architecture.
IV. New Business
A. Case 2015-19: Request for a site plan review for an 11,099 square foot building addition at 1690
Creston Street, by Production Fabricators.
V. Old Business
VI. Other
VII. Adjourn
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION AND ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES
The City of Muskegon will provide necessary reasonable auxiliary aids and services, such as signers for the hearing impaired and audio tapes
of printed materials being considered at the meeting, to individuals with disabilities who want to attend the meeting, upon twenty-four hour
notice to the City of Muskegon. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services should contact the City of Muskegon by
writing or calling the following:
Ann Marie Cummings, City Clerk
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49440
(231) 724-6705
TTY/TDD: Dial 7-1-1 and request that a representative dial 231-724-6705
1
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
September 10, 2015
Chairman T. Michalski called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Michalski, B. Mazade, J. Doyle, L. Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Larson, F.
Peterson, J. Montgomery-Keast
MEMBERS ABSENT: B. Smith, excused
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: D. Kamps, 1885 Buys Rd; J. Buist, 1239 Terrace St.; B. Turnquist,
1575 E Harbour Towne Circle; B. Greenwood, 1309 Peck St.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion that the minutes of the special meeting of August 13, 2015 be approved, was made by B. Larson,
supported by J. Montgomery-Keast and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Hearing, Case 2015-15: Request for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow a non-profit organization to
establish a residence for young adults that have recently aged out of the foster care system in an RM-1, Low
Density Multiple Family Residential district at 1319 Peck Street. D. Kamps of Step Up provided an
executive summary document explaining how the organization was formed, its mission, and their funding.
Their proposal was to provide housing and guidance for up to four young women and a mentor. Step Up’s
purpose is to assist young adults that have recently aged out of the foster care system transition to
independent living. A SUP is needed because although this is a multi-family zoning district, this house will
be one contiguous unit and the tenants do not meet the zoning ordinance definition of “family”. A “family”
is defined in the zoning ordinance as: One or more persons living together and related by the bonds of blood,
marriage, guardianship, foster relation, or adoption, and not more than two additional unrelated persons, with
all such individuals being domiciled together as a single, domestic, housekeeping unit in the dwelling. The
zoning ordinance allows “Adult Foster Care Large Group Homes” as a special use permitted in this district.
This use is not the same, but is similar enough to warrant a public hearing for the use. Property owners and
tenants within 300 feet were notified of the proposed use. R. Rischar, of 1302 Peck St, is supportive of the
proposed use. M. Celestin, who owns 1316 Sanford St, is also in support.
S. Gawron asked if the SUP would apply to this organization only. M. Franzak stated that was correct. D.
Kamps explained that “Step Up” was a non-profit organization currently affiliated with Community
EnCompass, and he discussed their mission. L. Spataro stated that he was a member of the Muskegon
County Homeless Continuum of Care Network and had concerns about transitional housing. He stated that
lenders like MSHDA were moving away from this in favor of permanent supportive housing. J. Buist stated
that this facility would not be a typical transitional living center like a homeless shelter, but rather a place for
young adults to live until they were stable and were able to get their own place. They did not expect a quick
2
turnover of residents. D. Kamps addressed the question of program sustainability, their plans to finance the
program, and the financial expectations for the residents. B. Mazade thought that foster children had the
option of remaining in the state foster care program until the age of 26. D. Kamps stated that some of the
residents may still be eligible for state aid through the foster system. He stated that Step Up had formed a
working relationship with the Department of Human Services (DHS) and they had suggested possible
candidates for the program. L. Spataro asked if this house previously contained multiple apartments. M.
Franzak stated that it did.
B. Turnquist stated that he was in favor of the request. He had heard about the program and believed it
would be a positive for the community. B. Greenwood lived next door and was also in favor. She stated that
the applicants had contacted the neighbors to explain the program and answer questions.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Larson, supported by F. Peterson and unanimously
approved.
L. Spataro stated that the underlying use was RM-1, and 5 people in the house would be less density than
what was allowed under the RM-1 zoning. He was in favor of the request as long as it did not become and
room and board situation. T. Michalski stated that he was satisfied that the SUP conditions would not allow
that.
A motion that the special land use permit, per Section 701 of Article XII of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow
the use proposed in the “Step Up Executive Summary”, be approved, based on compliance with the City’s
Master Land Use Plan and conditions set forth in Section 701 of the City of Muskegon Zoning Ordinance
was made by B. Larson, supported by B. Mazade and unanimously approved, with T. Michalski, B. Mazade,
J. Doyle, L. Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Larson, and F. Peterson voting aye.
Hearing, Case 2015-16: Staff-initiated request to amend the Master Land Use Plan to remove all references
to Fisherman’s Landing. M. Franzak stated that staff recommended removing all references to Fisherman’s
Landing in the Master Plan. Doing so will keep the City’s options open in the event of a land swap in the
future, and make the transition easier. A list of locations in the Master Plan where Fisherman’s Landing was
mentioned was provided in the staff report.
F. Peterson explained a past situation involving Fisherman’s Landing, which led to this request. He stated
that this park was not in the City’s charter as a charter park.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Mazade, supported by B. Larson and unanimously
approved.
A motion that the proposed amendments to the City of Muskegon’s Comprehensive Master Land Use Plan to
remove references to Fisherman’s Landing be recommended to City Commission for approval was made by
B. Mazade, supported by S. Gawron and unanimously approved, with T. Michalski, B. Mazade, J. Doyle, L.
Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Larson, and F. Peterson voting aye.
L. Spataro clarified that anything done with Fisherman’s Landing would still require outside oversight in the
form of state approval.
Hearing, Case 2015-14 (TABLED): Staff-initiated request to amend section 400 of the zoning ordinance to
allow multiple family dwellings under certain circumstances in R-1, Single Family Residential districts. This
case was originally brought before the Planning Commission in August. It was tabled by the board and
3
returned to staff for revisions. Revised language was provided in the staff report. New language under
Section 400: Principal Uses Permitted (in an R-1 zoning district) now states: “Multiple family dwellings
(allowed) under the following conditions: a. The home has already been altered with prior approval to allow
for multiple dwellings. One family dwellings may not be altered to allow for multiple dwellings, nor may
new homes be built for multiple dwellings, and b) Homes that have already been altered for multiple
dwellings may add additional dwellings as long the total number of dwellings does not exceed the number of
dwellings that historically existed in the structure (for example, if a three-unit building was converted to a
two-unit building, that building could legally be converted back to a three-unit building, but not a four+ unit
building), and that all dwellings meet the living area standards listed in Section 2319.”
A motion to close the public hearing was made by L. Spataro, supported by S. Gawron and unanimously
approved.
A motion that the proposed amendment to Section 400 of the City of Muskegon Zoning Ordinance, to allow
multiple family dwellings in R-1, Single Family Residential districts under the conditions listed in the staff
report be recommended to the City Commission for approval was made by L. Spataro, supported by B.
Larson and approved, with T. Michalski, J. Doyle, L. Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Larson, and F. Peterson voting
aye, and B. Mazade voting nay.
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER
Property Updates T. Michalski asked for a status update on the former Sappi property and the WaterMark
building. Updates were provided by F. Peterson. He stated that there was a pending sale on the Sappi
property, and the WaterMark owners had committed to a plan of action on their building.
M. Franzak advised board members that a senior housing project previously brought before the board had
been resurrected at a different location. The new location is the vacant lot at First St. and Webster Ave. The
development would have to meet the form-based code standards.
M. Franzak also stated that he was reviewing plans for the High Point Flats development. Depending on
what the revised plans showed, that project may also meet form-based code requirements and not require
Planning Commission approval.
Proposed housing development on Houston Ave. near 4th St. J. Montgomery-Keast stated that she was
approached by persons involved with the community garden at this location and they wanted to know if the
garden could be incorporated into the new housing development. F. Peterson stated that there had been some
discussion about the garden location, but no decisions had been made yet.
J. Doyle asked for an status update on the housing project. F. Peterson stated that they hoped to have the
homes completed by early spring.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.
4
STAFF REPORT
October 15, 2015
Hearing, Case 2015-17: Staff initiated request to adopt the Muskegon Parking Strategy as part of the
Master Land Use Plan.
BACKGROUND
1. The final draft of the Parking Strategy was completed on July 6, 2015.
2. In order to adopt the strategy as part of the master plan, the City had to distribute copies of the
strategy to neighboring municipalities for review and comment.
3. The 43 day comment period has expired and staff did not receive any comments.
4. The Planning Commission is being asked make a recommendation to City Commission to adopt the
Parking Strategy as part of the master plan by way of resolution.
5. If you do not still have your copy, you can view it at www.muskegon-mi.gov/downtown-parking-
strategy-final-draft/
6. Lynee Wells, our consultant from Williams & Works, will be making a presentation on the strategy at
the meeting.
MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION
I move that the Parking Strategy be recommended for approval to the City Commission.
5
Hearing, Case 2015-18: Request for a major departure from the zoning ordinance and site plan approval for
a new building at 650 Terrace Street, by Henrickson Architecture.
BACKGROUND
1. This parcel is located in the Mainstreet Waterfront Context Area of the Form Based Code District.
2. The proposed development is a two-story, 7,500 sf mixed-use building with retail on the first floor
and office on the second floor. This building is part of Phase 1, which would have other buildings
placed on each side at a later date. Please note that only one of these buildings is being proposed as
of now. Other buildings will be proposed at a later date.
3. This site plan review requires a public hearing because the placement of the building is considered a
major departure from the Form Based Code district requirements. Side setbacks must not be greater
than 15 feet and this single building will be setback from side property lines by more than 100 feet on
both sides.
4. The plans presented are insufficient and do not depict much of what is required in the Form Based
Code District. Some of the missing information includes:
a. Building elevations do not depict which type of frontage option will be used. This is a major
part of the Form Based Code review.
b. The building is not placed in the required side build-to-zone.
c. The plans do not indicate whether the proposed drive is a city street or private drive.
d. Parking is located in the front of the building.
e. Building width at front street is not built to a minimum of 90% of the overall width of the
front street property line.
f. Elevations do not show location of doors.
g. Elevations do not depict a cornice expression line, pilasters, or clear glass.
h. The proposed new parcel would be placed over Viridian Dr, but the plans do not show new
road configuration.
i. The property lines depicted are future property lines that have not been approved yet. More
information is needed regarding the proposed lot reconfigurations.
j. Landscaping plan is not included.
k. Stormwater management plan is not included.
5. Staff will be working with the developer over the next week to try and complete the plans. We would
not normally take a plan this incomplete to Planning Commission, however, the developer stated the
necessity of attending this meeting to keep the project viable.
6
Zoning Map
Aerial Map
MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION
I move that the site plan for the building at 650 Terrace St be (approved/denied/tabled) with the following
conditions: (if any conditions are given)
7
Case 2015-19: Request for a site plan review for an 11,099 sf building addition at 1690 Creston St, by
Production Fabricators.
BACKGROUND
1. Production Fabricators is an industrial company located at 1608 Creston St in Muskegon Township.
2. The City of Muskegon owns the adjacent property to the south at 1690 Creston St, which is zoned I-
1, Light Industrial. This parcel is used by Muskegon Central Dispatch and has a large
communications tower on site.
3. They City of Muskegon is in the process of selling a portion of this parcel to Production Fabricators
so that they may expand their business. The remained of the parcel at 1690 Creston St will continue
to be used by Muskegon Central Dispatch. Please see the enclosed rendering of the proposed lot
split.
4. The site plan meets all applicable setback requirements. They are utilizing the zero lot line side
setback provision, which allows them to build all the way to the property line on the north, which will
connect to the existing building on the parcel in Muskegon Township. They must also work with
Muskegon Township to get their zoning approval for improvements located in Muskegon Township.
5. There are two problems on the site plan that can be fixed with a revised survey. First, the
maneuvering lane for the loading dock is not large enough. As currently presented, trucks would have
a difficult time backing into the loading dock without driving onto the neighboring property used by
Muskegon Central Dispatch. The survey should be revised to give Production Fabricators more land
to the south so that trucks can easily back into the loading docks. Also, an easement should be
granted to Muskegon Central Dispatch to allow them to access the utility sheds located within the
fenced in area. Staff has shared these concerns with the applicant and they are working on the revised
survey now.
6. The plan shows landscaping, pavement and stormwater retention areas on the parcel that will be
utilized by Muskegon Central Dispatch. The plan must be revised to show improvements on their
property only. There may not be any landscaping, pavement or stormwater retention areas on the
neighboring parcel. Staff has shared these concerns with the applicant and they are currently revising
the plans.
7. The Fire Department does not have access around the entire building. They need to provide access
within 150 feet of all portions of exterior walls. The Fire Marshall has requested to meet with the
Muskegon Township Fire Department to review the plans. A meeting is scheduled for October 13.
The building may have to be sprinkled or repositioned on the site. Also, an additional fire hydrant
may also be required as there wasn’t one shown on the plan.
8. There is a utility pole located on site that will have to be moved to make room for the building
addition. This pole will be moved at the expense of Production Fabricators and is a condition set
forth in the purchase agreement of the property. Staff will be taking the lot sale request to City
Commission on October 27. Staff is asking Planning Commission to approve the plans contingent
upon the sale of the lot.
8
1690 Creston St
Utility pole to be moved
9
Zoning Map (white areas depict Muskegon Township property)
Aerial Map
10
Ordinance Excerpt:
SECTION 1403: AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS [amended 4/00]
1. Minimum lot size: 21,780 sq. feet.
2. Maximum lot coverage:
Buildings: 85 %
Pavement: 25 %
3. Lot width: 100 feet (shall be measured at road frontage unless a cul-de-sac, then measured from
setback).
4. Width to depth ratios: The depth of any lot(s) or parcel(s) shall not be more than three (3) times
longer its width.
5. Height limit: 3 stories or 50 feet
Height measurement: In the case of a principal building, the vertical distance measured from the
average finished grade to the highest point of the roof surface where the building line abuts the front
yard, except as follows: to the deck line of mansard roofs, and the average height between eaves and
the ridge of gable, hip, and gambrel roofs (see Figure 2-2). If the ground is not entirely level, the
grade shall be determined by averaging the elevation of the ground for each face of the building (see
Figure 2-4).
6. Front Setbacks: [amended 1/05]
Minimum:
Expressway or Arterial Street: 30 feet
Collector or Major Street: 20 feet
Minor Street: 10 feet
7. Rear setback: 10 feet
8. Setback from the ordinary high water mark or wetland: 75 feet (principal structures only).
9. Side setbacks:
1-story: 10 feet and 20 feet
2-story: 15 feet and 25 feet
3-story: 20 feet and 30 feet
Note, setback measurement: All required setbacks shall be measured from the right-of-way line to
the nearest point of the determined drip line of buildings. [amended 10/02]
10. Zero lot line option: New principal buildings may be erected on the rear lot line and/or one side lot
line provided: [amended 10/02]
a. The building has an approved fire rating for zero-lot line development under the building
code.
11
b. The building has adequate fire access preserved pursuant to fire code requirements.
c. The zero lot line side is not adjacent to a street.
d. A maintenance access easement is granted by the adjacent property owner and recorded with
the County Register of Deeds and provided to the zoning administrator with the site plan or
plot plan.
e. It is not adjacent to wetlands, or waterfront.
11. All required side and rear setbacks shall be landscaped, greenbelt buffers, unless zero-lot-line is
employed for a structure or fire access. At least fifty percent of all required front setbacks shall be
landscaped and adjacent to the road right-of-way. An average minimum greenbelt of 10 feet shall be
maintained along each street frontage. [amended 12/01, amended 10/02]
MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION
I move that the site plan for the building addition at 1690 Creston St be (approved/denied/tabled), contingent
upon the sale of the property, with the following conditions:
1. The survey shall be revised to give adequate maneuvering space for trucks utilizing the loading dock
and an easement be granted to Muskegon Central Dispatch to access the gated area.
2. All landscaping, pavement and stormwater retention areas be removed from the parcel to be utilized
by Muskegon Central Dispatch. New stormwater retention areas must be utilized and stormwater
calculations must be revised.
3. The Fire Marshall approves the revised plans giving Fire Department access.
4. These revisions must be presented to and approved by (staff/Planning Commission).
12
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails