City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

like to call this meeting of the market city planning commission to order today 6 o'clock on Tuesday September 16th we'll begin with roll call just here and Kevin Clay is here um we have two items on our agenda we have a motion to approve the agenda or musicians. I'm sure you need a motion to excuse the uh

you you don't need a motion to excuse them, but it is good practice to to at least acknowledge that um we have members missing because of illness. Both of the members are out because of illness. Alex Wilkinson and and Mar Trainer. I will move to approve the agenda as presented. I'll second that. All right. The motion uh is on the floor. All those in favor say I. I.

All opposed. Same sign. Motion passes. All right. Um minutes from 9 to2. I know I saw something up. Yeah. Uh just I think that the at the bottom of the second page of minutes um there's a paragraph stler.

Yeah, there's a fairly large mistake there. Um that motion isn't the right motion. I I'll read the motion that we recorded and sent to the Vidia group. It was moved by S. Lori seconded by A. Wilkinson carried 70 that after review of 01 PUD325 and 01 SP9 25 final site plan data and received 8525 the staff file review analysis for 07 SP925. Planning commission finds substantial compliance with the city of Marquette land development code and hereby approves the site plan with the following conditions. An amended site plan is submitted to meet staff comments for the final site plan review, particularly lighting, landscaping, fencing, and engineering details. And then as built plan is submitted after construction is completed.

I would uh move that we amend these minutes to include that motion um in place of the one that's incorrect. Were there any other Otherwise second? All right. Second, Mr. Motion's on the floor. All All in favor say I. I.

All oppose same sign. All right. Motion passes. Any conflicts of interest tonight? Okay, seeing none, we'll move forward with our public hearings. Um, for public public hearings, the way that it proceeds, first thing we'll do is we'll hear from city staff. They will talk through our packet. Um, then we'd like to hear from the applicant. Uh, we'll read any correspondence into the record. Um and then uh public will have a chance to provide testimony and then commission discussion. Um Dave, if you would like to start us off, please.

Okay, I see people squinting at this, so I'm going to try to make it bigger. Um thank you. Where is read? [Music] If you go down a little bit, you see that one.

Okay. So, tonight the planning commission is being asked to make a re recommendation to the city commission regarding request to reszone the property. This is not a development approval or development request. It's a reszoning for uh request for the property located at 1700 Division Street. is currently zoned mixed use to be zoned general commercial with conditional reszoning. Um, and I'm going to go through the materials that the planning commission is being uh provided with. They have a sample motion for this. So this is um basic information about the parcel, where it lays, what the adjacent parcels next to it are zoned, um the provision of utilities around there, the current zoning district standards, the intent of the mixeduse district, the permitted and special land uses that are currently provided for for the mixeduse district. the dimensional regulations for the mixeduse zoning district and footnotes that go along with those dimensional regulations. Uh there are a lot of footnotes. Then we have landscaping design standards for that zoning district. Now we get to the proposed zoning with conditions. This page is what the applicant provided to the planning commission. And per the state law that regulates um zoning, the zoning enabling act, an applicant can propose to reszone the property with conditions that the planning commission or city

commission cannot counter. This is not a a negotiation. The planning commission will either vote up or down. The city commission will get the recommendation from the planning commission and make their own decision. Um, so this what this sheet shows you from the applicant is the uses that are being uh exempted out of the possibility of use if this resoning is approved. and the planning commission has um I'm sure done their homework, but I will say this that our our staff has verified that the uses shown here that are left, the ones that are not crossed out and highlighted are exactly the same as what is now allowed in the mixeduse district for both permitted and special uses with the exception of these four items for storage facilities, self storage and indoor storage as permitted or as principal or accessory uses. So these are the only options as a special land use. These are the only things different than is what's currently allowed in the mixeduse district. And as a special land use that requires if the applicant if this property is reszoned and the applicant chooses to pursue a development proposal for this, they go through site they go through a special land use uh application with site plan uh submitted for the use with the specific design and um use of that property that they're seeking. that comes before a hearing of

the planning commission. And so there is this is not the development there is no development proposal on the table tonight, but there could be in the future with a special land use request. Um the rest of this section covers what are the dimensional requirements for that general commercial district. Um the main differences here are there's uh the lot sizes are a little different, but there is a larger sideyard setback requirement. And as we get into lots of footnotes again, as we get into landscape buffer requirements, that district does have landscape buffer requirements for uses for specific uses, including uh item F here, any 24-hour non-residential use of the property. So, there are landscape buffer requirements. Um and then the rest of the staff file report is the zoning ordinance amendment procedures which we are going through tonight. Standard for review of the amendments. We have provided comments to the planning commission on how uh our our analysis of how this proposal lines up with the requirements uh the standards of review. um the MA for the community master plan recommendations which this is um the first resoning under our new land use typology that's recommended in the community master plan since the master plan was adopted last October. completely

different type of land use master or a land use map for the city which places an emphasis on the general area and not the specific parcels in the area. Um, I'll take an aside here to read just um a little bit out of the master plan. What it says about this, the future land use plan is not necessarily concerned with specific uses of each parcel. Instead, it considers the collective uses for each area that establishes a place within Marquette. This plan prioritizes the function and atmosphere of specific mic here.

Yes sir. The future land use plan considers the collective uses for each area that establishes a place. This so this is a place type. This blue area shown on the screen is South Marquette. That's a place type. one of the I think 11 different place types outlined as a place uh typology for the city of Marquette. And so the plan prioritizes the function and atmosphere of specific areas or places over discrete land use classifications. The future land use map divides Marquette into 11 distinct place types. The boundaries of these places are not drawn at a parcel boundary, but instead follow general land use patterns and trends. It leaves the specificity of future land use decisions to the planning commission and planning staff while providing overall guidance. So, the planning commission has of course access to all of the master plan recommendations for each place type as does the community. It's in the community master plan. Um then we get into the intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance, the street system, utilities and services, change conditions since the zoning ordinance was adopted, land development code, uh exclusionary zoning, environmental features, potential land use and impacts, relationship to surrounding zoning districts and compliance with the proposed district, alternative districts, reszoning as is preferable to a text amendment to the zoning ordinance and isolated and incompatible zones are prohibited. Um then it just gets into the other

procedural stuff notifications that are required. Um and it does discuss the conditional resoning agreement which is in this case uh much different than a typical resoning. The applicant provides an agreement which outlines what they are proposing and there are several specific items here uh that I'm scrolling through that are required to be answered in that resoning agreement that can be provided um after this hearing but before the city commission. So, the city commission has that resoning agreement, but it is it's pretty um straightforward. And then um some other procedural stuff like expiration of approval and um then we have besid that's the staff report. Then we have the applicants. the application itself and the applicant specified which uses that they were excluding from the general commercial district. As I said, they're everything except those storage uses that are already allowed in the mixed use. Here we are again. This is what the applicant submitted. The only uses allowed are special land that aren't already allowed in mixed use are the special land uses for storage facility, self storage, and indoor storage, which are only allowed in the general commercial districts or regional commercial districts or industrial districts. Dimensional requirements. Uh this is

still in the application. Um this is the map with the parcel outlined in blue. parcel map showing the location on Division Street. This is the block map. Parcel outline in blue showing utilities in the area and all the parcels and the zoning map showing relation to other parcels. The zoning of other parcels in the area. Photos of the site are public notice for this meeting. And this is the future land use map that I spoke of. The dark blue section where we know South Marquette is. That is the South Marquette place type. And then we have some resoning considerations for planning commissions that they must consider for every reasoning that comes before them. We have three pieces of correspondence that were provided before the application was published to the city's website and provided to the planning commission. In addition to that, I received one piece of correspondence and that is the last thing in this packet for the U case. This case I will read that piece of correspondence received um on Sunday the 14th. Dear sir, madam, we will not be able to attend the resoning meeting regarding this issue. We are against reszoning this property. Self- storage facility does not fit in our neighborhood. Unlike the small businesses on Division Street,

a self- storage facility is unstaffed, open to more traffic, more noise, and more trouble in our relatively quiet area. The in addition, they are ugly. Having lived near a self- storage complex previously, I can attest there are other unpleasant trees that go on occasionally at these facilities. Thank you for your consideration. Our response is a big fat no. Donald and Marty Lome 215 Sandstone Drive. That's all I have. Thank you, Dave.

Members of Logan to Pine Drive, Michigan. Uh requesting conditional reszoning tonight uh from mixed use. Um, this property sat undeveloped for a long period of time. I I strongly feel that it fits the character and nature of the area. Um, and I'm politely requesting the reszoning of conditions. As D has highlighted, I took the mixed use district and simply transferred everything that was currently allowed in mixed use to this with the exception for storage. Really appreciate your consideration. Oh, and and one other note is uh while tonight's hearing isn't specifically for it, you know, the intent was and for those of you who sat through the meetings, I would really like to build a storage facility. So, I make it through the self or the reasoning process, then I'll be replying at a later date to that. Thank you for your consideration. If you guys have any questions for me, any questions? All right, at this time we need the rest of the correspondence that we received in earlier. Uh so can go on to public testimony. If any members of the public would like to speak in this matter, you have three minutes to talk. Please come to the podium, state your name and address and say what you would like. My name is Robert Jensen and my wife and I reside at 237 Rockwood Drive directly across the street from the subject parcel. We object to the resoning and installation of the self uh storage facility on this site. Number one does not fit it with the neighboring properties usage. There are several established commercial businesses along Division Street. However, they are primarily standalone buildings with one or two tenants. These businesses conduct

their business during daytime hours. Do not draw traffic outside these daytime hours. Number two, most buildings in the area are homeless. Number three, no information has been provided to us or our neighbors about the size, scope, hours of operation. We do not feel that a 24-hour self storage with associated car and truck traffic and noise is conducive to our neighborhood. We wonder what kind of security would be afforded such a system to present to prevent nighttime theft etc. So to summarize, we object to the reszoning to allow for a self storage facility. Respectfully, Robert Johnson, I have if you'd like to. Sure.

Thank you. Thank you.

I'm Daniel Le, my wife, Tanya Jennings. We are at 400 Stone Quarry Drive right next across from the creek. My front window will look right into this complex. Currently, there are full grown trees there and this protected oriental creek, [Music] but my front yard will look directly into this complex. My neighbors backyards are going to be 50 feet 50 feet from this complex. They have decks there and their children play there. I don't know who gave the approval of putting up the monstrosity power poles. So, you are now going to add this into our neighborhood. So, we have the power poles and now we're going to have black asphalt buildings of what heights has not been determined. And when hasn't been determined is how much visitation are you going to take out at the crossing of the two creeks there. This will significantly affect our standard of living and our resale value and our taxable value by having this type of complex there. I understand it's a quiet business, but that doesn't negate the fact of what we would have to look at 24/7 at a piece of property like this. So now we see beautiful birch trees, pine trees, and the streams going through there. I don't know what access you're talking

about. Two entrances, one entrance on a corner. You would think there might be a safety issue. I totally oppose this development in our neighborhood and I'm wondering whether all of you have walked that property. and literally walked and looked at that property and across the stream and all of my neighbors backyards. I would like you to vote no. That's small opinion. Thank you.

And other members. Yes.

Good evening. My name is Mark Miller. I live at 474 Stone Corey Drive with my wife Laura and we own our house. I'm sure she won't want to talk. First, I want to thank client commission members for volunteering for what can be a thankless job at times. Um I um am opposed to the conditional resoning. I am somewhat familiar with the conditional resoning. The conditions have to be proposed by the owner developer. um from from where I stand there is no certainty that the development could look like there's no plan submitted with it and I feel that the self storage proposal which is part of the application is not really compatible with with the neighborhood. I would also go on a little bit further which isn't really part of what here but some of the uses which are permitted in the existing zoning district like drivethrus I don't feel that are for that neighborhood but that's that's not really pertinent for your decision making this even but we're we're against the uh proposal and I think that's all I have. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else? Hi, my name is uh Richard Hartwig at 217 Sandstone. Um we are directly uh with the opening of our fence directly across uh my concern is uh one is lighting. Uh I have been around storage facilities in the past. uh we could be really flooded with lightning uh at night and and uh that that's a big concern of ours. Also, if uh and depending upon this would be an ideal spot for mayors and goats to uh store materials, this kind of thing because they're just on the street. Uh and we would have semis out there all night long. I don't know what you know I uh a 40 foot building um in the light but the lighting is what really concerns us. Uh and so I just wanted to mention it that that's where our opposition is. We have no idea other than than that there's a proposal for this and uh until we hear more about it, we're going to stand in opposition to it. So thanks thanks for your time.

Thank you very much. Anyone else like to speak?

Good evening. My name is Tom Sula. I live at 221 Sandstone Drive off of Division Street along with my wife and wife Elizabeth. Uh briefly, I appreciate the planning commission. Your service and the decisions you have to make are never easy. simply say I stand in support of the other property owners in this area residential uses. Second everything they've said and I also stand in support of our condo association board of directors that you received written communication. I understand there'll be other opportunity to have input on the development plan if and when it comes. But I I do join the other speakers here and that I question the appropriateness of this use on the reasoning request. So I thank you for your fair consideration of all that's occurred. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. I'm going to say something. I don't know anything about all this, but I just moved here and can you state your name?

My name is Laura Miller. I live on a stone corny also. And I I I I didn't really want to move to South. There's not a lot of stuff to do in that area. I would like to see maybe something more friendly to the community than I don't even know how they're going to fit these in that little section, a little piece of land. I mean, it's just a narrow narrow strip. Load them up like that. That's an eyesore. It's so unfriendly to the community. And I would really like to see that space opened up to people that live there. Whether it's maybe a double family house even or just something that brings the community in or opens that space up more to the use of the people that live in that area seems rather neglected compared to the rest of Marquette. Mark's a beautiful city. I would just like to see that come this way a little bit. Sure. Thank you.

And I don't think those are beautiful. So

my name is Brian Zunzer. I reside at 217 Crest Street Drive. I'm also a member of the board of directors of Shers Point Condominium Association, which represents 33 residential units directly across the street. Many of our residents have already spoken tonight. I just want to reiterate what our board submitted in writing. We are totally against this unanimously against this proposed reszoning. Um and and we already got dealt these. I don't if you've been in South Marquette, but we've got utility poles. I don't even know how that got approved, why they didn't go underground. I know that's not to deal with here, but between these industrial utility poles, mercury vapor lighting, which somebody mentioned, which most likely be flooding the area. Um, and then we also, I guess the other question I would have, does that mean that the billboard that's on that site would also remain on the site if it was resolved? Is there anyone else? Good evening. My name is Paula McCormack. I live at 468 Stone Quarter Drive. Thank you for serving on the commission. I'm just coming up to support what all of these people have just said. I I don't even have to say anything else. I already said it for various reasons. So, I'm not in favor of that for most of the reasons that they Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Is there anyone else that would like to speak? All right, seeing no more. Um, the commission like to suspend the rules discussion rules. All right. Do we have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor say I. All opposed. All right. Mr. Bick,

um, you know, I recognize that we're looking at a resoning request and not a site plan proposal. Um, you know, I hear all the public comments. Um, and I noticed that I think that this particular parcel is kind of on like a boundary um, where Yeah. like I think it would be very clearly like an um very clearly a compatible use if it was like one block over, but I think it's definitely kind of on the fence whether um whether it isn't compatible use in the area. Um yeah, I mean the master plan uh talks about the South Marquette neighborhood um and specifically notes Division Street will have the look and feel of a village main street um with buildings located close to the walks and parking hidden behind the buildings are permitted on the street with sandstone buildings and whatnot. Um I don't know. It's hard not knowing like what exactly the project is that would go there, but you know, seeing the crossing of the two streams does prevent concerns. I don't think that a self storage unit would have significant runoff um into those streams, but and I think that our overlay district would likely protect um those are from encroaching on screen too closely. 25 ft from the river's edge from the top. So it's not as it speak [Music] to protect the rivers. It's 25 ft from

the top. So it's not as if Dave um I have a question regarding the rimarian overlay. Um, so that's 25 ft from each interior from each triang because it's a triangle. Are those considered

um both sideyard, backyard or just 25 ft on that? So, the riparian overlay requires um a minimum of 25 ft plus a slope factor that might add a little bit of uh extra uh distance from the edge of the uh stream bank to any buildings that would be able to be built. U so that would apply to both the Oriana Brook and Billy Butcher Creek. Okay. Do we have any idea how much square footage remains on that parcel after that 25 and the yard set?

That's probably a better question for Mr. because I know he's had um an engineer looking at the parcel and that kind just one of the questions that was posed earlier and question that I I'm going to here too. If we reszone this, um, obviously the the billboard that's there now is grandfathered in to the existing zoning. If we reszone it, does it maintain that grandfather status or does it have a certain deadline to be removed?

It does. Unfortunately, it does. Okay. And just

does what? It does retain its uh nonconform. It's a legal nonconforming sign and it will continue to be a legal non-conforming sign until it basically falls apart and can't be structurally maintained anymore or the property owner chooses to get rid of it, no matter who owns it. And just uh to address a couple of the concerns that we heard uh from the public, the current zoning ordinance and the repairarian buffer strips that were mentioned here will pretty much require that all the trees that presently border the streams remain during the whatever development occurs there, no matter what type of development it is. Um, so those screens will stay in place and from from the opposite sides of the streams, you're not going to see much of whatever type of development occurs there. Um, as far as lighting, um, the zoning ordinance requires that whatever type development occurs, no lighting can leave the property. Basically, the any lights on the property have to shine down and the cone has to cone of light has to stay within the property boundaries. So, it's not going to be a glare across the street or something of that nature. And that would be a case no matter what zone or what type of um development should occur. Um, I did want to um bring up the fact that the planning commission did discuss this issue a year or so ago. Um, Mr. Stber had at least explored the idea of a text amendment to the zoning

ordinance. I think that would have allowed for um self storage in the mixeduse district zoning. Um and we have miss mixed use district zoning throughout the entire community scattered along most of the major streets. Um the planning commission discussed that. I don't know if it was a formal application. I think it was discussed informally, but um it was discussed at an open meeting and um it was determined that while there may be a few mixeduse sites in the city where it would uh not be a a problem that most of the mixeduse sites in the city would not support self storage unit. So, we were indicating that perhaps this one was isolated enough. It might support something. That's no commitment from the planning commission, but there was an indication in him that it it might be um something that would be amendable to that, but that um we weren't interested in changing the zoning ordinance to allow them in other mixed use areas. There are some in the city right now in industrial areas uh zoned areas. I think there's two in industrial zoned areas and one in a mixed use area I believe. Um mixed use

I'm sorry. You come to the podium Logan a there. The uh I just want to say there's two current facilities in your research district. So there's lock and leave story over off Presleum and then off of right by right across from service park is also

I was forgetting sorry um and um so I guess um the project has been at least under consideration for a while and does have other options. There's a lot of lot of development that could take place within the mixeduse district. Um, and you saw earlier the um the list of options that property owners have. But since uh I believe the last actual productive use of this property was by Mr. Daryl Hawker who had a mobile home sales business on the property and typically had about three mobile homes for open there for people to inspect as well as an office trailer to sell them. That was probably closed about 50 years ago. So it sat there pretty much vacant for the last 50 years. So Cory wasn't there by that time.

I have a question too about what you just said. Um we're in discussion right now. We'll um let Mr. or Commissioner Low finish.

Okay. Well, that's just about all I got, but I do note that um the large um power poles that the public has mentioned certainly seem like they would probably um devalue this property, at least make it far less attractive for residential development um than it was previously. and it wasn't attracting residential development during that 50 years either

um before those went up. So, I I think it's likely to see some type of non-residential development whether it's this proposal or something else. And um I think we need to consider it from that standpoint that um there are a number of non-residential uses that could take place under the current zoning ordinance or current zoning applications on the property. But uh this one that is being proposed uh if it's resolved is one of them and I think that's um I guess the other point I have is that um the the um general commercial being asked for. I did note general commercial zoning district does about Shar's point condominium property on the north directly but it's not any other street separating barrier or anything there's warehousing in place there

we have I'm sorry

and so I think that's something else um I have a question for um so while uh we do need to consider with all the with this that all potential uses of the zoning district must be considered but the parcel at604 division is currently zoned mixed use and if we resone this with conditions is that not affording this parcel at 1700 rights and privileges that are not afforded to at 1604.

Well, yes. Um, but that's why there's this conditional resoning option. It's it's not it is an exception to the normal resoning process. Okay. So, so a lot of things that would apply in a spot zoning consideration don't apply here because it is a it is a different process. But then that this becomes an isolated zone according to our land development code.

It's that's a matter of interpretation. That's completely an interpretation if it's isolated zone or not. Um you know what is isolation? It's you know mixed as a mixeduse district. Is it isolated now from other mixed use districts? Maybe a little bit, not really. Is it's it is would be isolated from most of the general commercial district, but that so that's that's something you've got to consider whether that's a factor enough of a factor to rule that's incompatible. Uh, I would say that um remind everyone that uh prior to the resoning of many of these parcels in 2019, um most of Division Street was general commercial or a lot of these properties were general commercial. Um uh the planning commission reszoned much of the division street area and um Hampton Street to mixed use to promote more mix of residential and commercial instead of just solidly commercial uses that were only allowed in those general commercial districts. uh correct me if I'm wrong, but our intention with the mixed use sewing district was to promote the neighborhood of field which we had seen evidence of and our master plan.

I wouldn't necessarily say that that's true. Um as Mr. Lori talked about before, the planning commission decided they didn't want to change the mixeduse district standards to allow for or land uses to allow for storage because they wanted to promote the residential aspect of mixed use more than the commercial aspect in areas in most of the areas of the city that have been reszoned to mixed use which didn't exist. mixeduse districts did not exist before 20 2019. It was a this is a brand new zoning district as of 2019. Um so mixed use like North Third Street downtown is the central business district but it's a mixeduse district. the downtown waterfront district where you have working waterfront uses like ths and the doc association that's a mixeduse district. Um it is to promote the mixing of uses but as Steve said with storage uses the planning commission decided those are more uh suitable for general commercial in general.

Okay. Um, regarding the conditional reszoning of a property, my understand it'll run with the land if Mr. Stalbert decides to sell it. And the other question I have is that would a parcel owner simply be able to uh strike all unimplicable uses of a land in order to achieve a different conditional zoning. if like he wants to do storage unit. If somebody else is applying for something else elsewhere, it's not super applicable. I'm just trying to understand conditional reasoning as a process.

Um this isn't a I mean this is a buy the book. We wouldn't be having this hearing if he didn't do it right. Right. He he we accepted his application because he provided what was required which is to take everything out of your propo the proposal that you aren't intending to pursue as a development option. So it takes it completely off the table if it gets approved. All of those things that were struck through. I I'm not sure if I missed something in your question, but

somebody else could, you know, propose a different set of or a different use that would be uh in a different zoning district potentially than this one. Um the mobile home park could propose to expand into that property for instance. Okay. All right. Are there any other commission comments?

Mr. Thank you. I just want to say thank you for your comments and uh in my exploration of self storage and zoning in general. I found a lot of municipalities classify specifically these types of uses in their recreational districts, which I know Marquette doesn't have one that's specific to that, but some that are in that mixeduse district because they're low, for example, most facilities are low impact. You know, what's seen currently in mixed use is there's light duty manufacturing, drive-throughs, and I believe gas stations currently in the mix district if I'm not mistaken. So, just in terms of what could be there um in this parcel, I just wanted to say driving through the area. What led me to that is the the look and feel of the area is very much general commercial and whether it be by grandfather nature or just what's taking place for example do is having large shipping containers and storage and then just on the other side as Mr. Census has said that there's a basically a snow plowing business that has outdoor storage vehicles and etc. And very much fits the area. Um the one thing I would say is if I do go for something like that, I thought this was a very low impact use. It would not impact the rivers or streams in terms of lighting. All lighting would be facing downward and in fact they call it a fortress build where you build who you can't see into facilities.

Yeah, just to you guys. That's okay. Um but a lot of the concerns and I I understand there's a healthy amount of concern. Nobody wants to see the character of their neighborhood. And I can assure this planning commission and the general public, everything I've done in my entrepreneurial career, I've done to the highest level and do a professional standard. And I would do the exact same with this project. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Um any more discussion? Are we allowed again? No.

All right. If there's no more discussion, um I guess we need to make a motion or Yes. All right. Just a moment. Oh yeah. [Music] I'm going to review public hearing. Um, there's a public hearing. So, check that commission consideration of proposed amendment. recommendation at our meeting today.

Where are you? [Music]

Okay. Standards of review for amendments. Um, as this is a commit conditional reszoning requirement, it is I'm going to read this because conditional reszoning is an alternative to standard zoning. Reszoning the required analyses for compatibility with the community master plan and spot zoning for a standard reszoning request are not applicable. Planning commission must review all supporting information. This report in particular and the attachment titled reszoning considerations for planning commission public hearing for community input prior to making a determination of whether to recommend approval for the request as presented or not. Okay. intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance. We find consistency with the basic intent and purpose of the zoning ordinance that refers to our zoning district and standards from above. Street system. the capability of the street system to safely and efficiently accommodate the expected traffic generated by uses permitted in the requested zoning district. Um division is classified as a minor arterial for the community master plan. Particular traffic volumes are moderate. Expected traffic volumes at any one time to a uh storage self storage facility would be low moderate. But that's not here or there. We're kind of putting the curve forward. But um utilities and services the capacity of the city's utilities and services sufficient to accommodate the usage permitted in the request district without compromising the health, safety, and welfare of the city. No problems.

All right. Um change conditions since the zoning ordinance was adopted or errors in the zoning ordinance. No conditions have changed nor was there an error in the zoning ordinance. Six. The amendment will not be expected to result in exclusionary zoning. The proposal will not result in any substantial changes that would make exclusionary zoning more likely. environmental features. This one we should talk about a little bit. The zoning is requested. The compatibility, the proposed zoning is generally compatible with the sites physical, geological, hydraological, and other environmental features with the uses permitted and the proposed zoning district. The riparian overlay district is applicable to this parcel. This Oriana Creek and Billy Butcher Creek are on the properties showing maps in the packets. [Music] Yes. Okay. [Music]

Could I ask a quick question? Um so with a riparian zone and then with um having that space between to have um landscaping done is it 25 feet in and then also including the riparian zone. Would there be enough footage for the development? That's I'm just trying to figure out and I know that you said an acre, but um an acre mapped out in a square is one thing different than something at an angle. So I have some concern with the rifarian zone as well as the landscaping that's going to be necessary. So I'm just trying to wrap my head around that. Make sure that that's

Well, it does. Yeah, the riparian buffer area would accomplish what it's intended to to protect those streams. um from immediate uh encroachment of buildings. Um so no structures could be built within the 25 ft. So I would imagine there's there's no uh there's no uh reason to remove existing vegetation within that 25 ft. Otherwise, there is a buffer requirement if there wasn't already or a a vegetative strip requirement to be built in that area if there wasn't existing vegetation. But being that there is, it just makes sense that the that existing vegetation would be left in place. Um, the remainder of the property, I I I don't know what the square footage of that buffer area is going to be around the property, but uh it's considerable being it's at least 25 ft wide and uh adjacent to the river. So, uh that's you know, Mr. Stabber again has had some modeling done on different design options for the property and access in and out of it. Um, and I don't think he'd be here if he didn't think it was a reason still a reasonable option to build on it.

All right. Um number eight, potential impacts if resoning is requested. Compatibility of all potential uses allowing zoning districts surrounding zoning in terms of land sustainability impacts on environmental density, interuse, traffic impacts, aesthetics, infrastructure, and potential influence on property values. Now, because he's requesting a conditional reszoning, the only permitted uses that are changed from the current zoning are those um permitted uses of a storage facility. Um special land uses may only be approved if found to be in harmony with several special use and specific use standards. Um so it will have to go through a special land use permit um proposal after if this is approved. Um but I see there's no other potent clarify something.

Yes. I'm not sure if I misspoke earlier and and I asked to clarify this was my understanding with the repairarian buffer strips that basically those become a a no touch area. Um and and that's why I indicated to the public that whatever trees were there would stay as a screen. Am I incorrect with that that they can't put a building there? But that does count as part of the sideyard setback and they could rellandscape that area or or perhaps put a drive area over part of it or

let's uh let's look at the code. Okay. [Music] Okay. So um so these are waterways. They're classified as waterways. Uh the streams. So um the buffer applies to uh let's see where a portion of parcel is within the district any portion of it. The regulations of the district apply to that portion of the parcel. Um, a waterway including the top of the bank and 25 ft perpendicular away from the bank plus any additional buffer as specified. The additional buffer is the P is what would be added depending on the slope of that um waterway uh to to the top of the bank where the bank is where uh water the flow of water can be detected. Um so that is section E and the vegetative strip is required. The buffer for the areas delineated in section E consists of vegetated strip of land extending along both sides of the waterway and its adjacent wetlands or steep slopes. It shall contain undisturbed native vegetation. Permitted species must comply. If it's existing vegetation, it is accepted as as accept it's acceptable. I mean, you're not going to have to uh necessarily cut down the trees because there was a a ornamental tree or something planted in there. Um

that's not on our list. But um there are some exceptions then to what's allowed within the within the um riparian buffer area like uh there are exceptions for roads, bridges, and paths. um utility rights away, flood control, um access, let's see, stream restoration, water quality monitoring. Um so you only have to uh the required planting thing for a vegetative strip. um reads that in in addition to maintaining the required vegetative strip um the following conditions would trigger the requirement for inventorying and planting of native vegetation in these areas. Uh if the for a parcel um uh for a PUD or a site condominium let's see I was going by what what you had just above there a little bit where you said undisturbed native vegetation and

what's that where Oh, trying to find it again.

Undisturbed native vegetation in section F. Okay. I was interpreting that as being that if it's already, you know, non eroding stream bank um totally vegetated at this point that you can't disturb it. It says not disturb. You leave it in its natural state.

Um that would be my interpretation of it. I don't think we've had a riparian buffer applied. I mean, this is another thing that's only existed for the last five years. Uh we've only applied these in wetland areas to to date. Um but in this area I would I would interpret that as that existing trees and shrubs ground cover is acceptable as as the vegetation for that buffer.

Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify make sure I didn't speak about the trees. I mean unless it was all occupied by nate, you know, uh invasive species, I think we would be, you know, this is this is probably perfectly acceptable. Thank you.

All right. Um eight um proposed conditioning would allow all the possible use six planning commission must determine the compatibility of the proposed reszoning of this in this location and then of the matter that is fully inconsistent. I find it really inconsistent. He's already these are just the additions or slight changes that are approved with this sign change.

Can I ask a question? Mhm. Um, so you said that mixed use has only been a zoning district since 201 19 2019. So what was it zoned prior to that?

Um, I believe it was um a commercial zoning. It was general business or general commercial. I am not entirely sure. Number nine, relationship to surrounding zoning districts in compliance with the proposed district. Um, if requested boundaries of the requested reszoning district will be reasonable in relationship with surrounding zoning districts and construction on the site will be able to meet the dimensional regulations for the requested zoning district. Parcel to the west forms the majority of the border with the subject parcel and in the mobile home park uh district while the other boarding parcels are in medium density residential zoning. There's a residential plan unit development to the east directly across division street. General zoning is in place along furnace to the northeast of this property.

Yes. And this is where it kind of goes against what I just said. Setting number eight because all the surrounding zoning is mostly residential. This would be more commercial. But that changing too much from what it previously was is use. necessarily um with all the surrounding I feel that it's not consistent with the directly adjacent zoning uses but not necessarily inconsistent with the others surround the general surrounding in the south place.

Yeah.

And if we had not adopted a mixeduse zone district in 2019, this would be allowed in our current. All right. So kind of all right. Number 10, alternative zoning districts. If a reszoning is requested, the requested zoning district is considered to be more appropriate from the city's perspective than another zoning district. Um, is there anybody that would find that a different zoning district would apply more to this than All right. [Music] Okay.

I think I I also respond to kind of that because I mean it is surrounded like directly adjacently by residential. We've seen the public say residential use, but then it's the slope and stuff like would it actually turn into a residential use? And it hasn't in the last 50 years despite the other surrounding properties. Sorry, um so kind of all right. Number 11, uh, rebuilding is preferable to a text amendment where appropriate. Um, we kind of went over this one already, uh, that was pursued about a year ago and the planning commission found that a text amendment to allow this in the mixed use district citywide was not appropriate. All right. Um, number 12, isolated or incompatible zone prohibited. If a reszoning is requested, the requested resigning will not create an isolated incompatible zone in the planning commission must determine if the proposed zoning would create an isolated or incompatible zone. The land use of this site has been vacant and undeveloped except for a billboard sign that has been in place for more than 20 years. And income levels alone cannot be approved while isolation of land use is unacceptable to the degree that it may create incompatibility or an otherwise undesirable outcome following development. Thoughts on this one?

I feel it would be isolated in that um it currently has mixed use. It's an individual parcel zone mixed use, but it was done that way as a part of the entire division street corridor and applied to parcels that were not already in um residential use. The master plan speaks about that being the entry corridor to South Florida and that it should have a mix of businesses and residences. If you take the corridor to mean division street and furnace street, you already have general commercial on street as well as Jennese. whichever you take there. It's extended that court rather than actually question the city on this one. You say the word isolated. Are you talking about the zoning itself or isolated as though it's not truly compatible in giving to the local neighborhood? Um I I would say the latter. Um it talks about an inco uh you know incompatible zone in the neighborhood.

So my question here is when I don't know it's been brought up there.

Yeah that's the way I read it. Incompatible zone in the neighborhood. Um is it's it's definitely if you looked at the spot zoning set uh criteria and said is this creating a spot zone um you you might say yeah because it is not directly adjacent to another zone uh general commercial zone but is it incompatible in the neighborhood? That's a different question. Right. How do how far do you extend the neighborhood to be in your mind? Right. It's is unacceptable to the group that it would create that incompatibility and otherwise undesirable outcome. It has I'm curious if it has the two meanings. One being physically zoning wise or look at the map and see the zones and also how it relates with the rest of the local neighborhood. if it's isolated by itself, think it's actually getting back to that local community.

Yeah, there there's it's not clear.

Well, I think um I think judges make decisions all the time that are uh on gray areas that one might think it's clear and one might not. Right. Note as well that this if we do approve this, it goes to the city commission and then the applicant would have to go through a special land use permit. There are many steps in order for this to be complete. Um does anyone will have any findings of fact on this? Okay.

Thank you.

All right. So on our standards for review, we found that yes, for number one, uh the is affirmative because it's a conditional reason only. Two, intended purpose. We refer to that. That's a yes. Three, street system. Yes. Four, utilities and services. Yes. These are the reviews that are or the standards that are met. Number five, yes, that is no conditions. Number six, no exclusionary zoning. Yes. Number seven, environmental factors. Uh the features um generally compatible. Yes. Number eight, potential land uses and impacts. That one was amazing. Number nine, relationship to surrounding zoning districts and compliance with the proposed district. That one was a me. Number 10, no alternative zoning districts are appropriate. So that's a yes. Number 11, text amendment is not appropriate to this parcel. That's a yes. Number 12, we need to determine if it's an incompatible zone. I think more discussion is required on this one. Unless someone

um I'm just looking at the permitted and special uses in the mixed used district mixed use district And light manufacturing is a permitted use which means that it has to be totally enclosed and it looks like a retail business from the front. Um in mixed use medium impact light manufacturing which can have outdoor visibility glare etc is a special land use in mixed use. So just a consideration currently.

Yeah. which is currently special permitted by special

women. Well, let me see. Perhaps um I already addressed whether it was isolated uh by its zoning, but um I guess if you look at is it isolated because of the neighborhood users, I agree it could be a local part of isolation. noticed compatible with the neighborhood uses. If we look strictly at um the area across the street, um it's probably is compatible with the trailer park. Those people probably have plenty for additional storage. Um honest sitting outside right now. Um and um the other businesses extending to the north. Um I can't recall if self storage was allowed under light industrial previously. Um,

I would think so.

Seems to me it was um, but as they mentioned, this probably wasn't so industrial per used at the time. So, the the building that is now occupied by the landscaping company was a manufacturing shop, fabricating shop. that the next building has been an accounting or tax type office for a long time, but uh was primarily a welding shop and stuff, too. So, um it was an industrial area. it's evolved into something different or is in the process of evolving

and I guess if we're going to follow that as a natural course we probably don't want to see it back in the opposite direction is the way most of the developing at this point so I'd say there is some compatibility with the others okay that sounds like that to Okay. All right. [Music]

All right. Commissioner L. After conducting a public hearing in review of the application and staff report analysis for 01 rec 0925, the planning commission finds the proposed reszoning with conditions is consistent with the community master plan and meets the requirements of the land development code section 541405 and hereby recommends the city commission approve who has presented um 01 025. All right. Do we have a second?

Second. All right. Commissioner seconds. All those in favor say I. I. All oppose, same sign. Motion passes.

I will There are plenty of opportunities coming to make this fit the neighborhood. No matter what the development is, it will generally have to comply with enough rules that as it's developed, it can fit into that space without disturbing the neighbors and look like it has been there for some time. I would also like to say I'm uh interested to see the specific plans. We know what is intended but not any specificity. So moving forward it could potentially be an asset to our community in South Nat. Um but I'll reserve judgment until that time. But I think it does meet this condition. Okay. So, we will be forwarding this recommendation to the city commission and uh at this point in time that public hearing would probably be the last meeting of October. It won't occur before the last meeting of October. So,

whatever the last Monday of October is would be when the city commission makes a decision on this, they make the decision at that date. Yeah, they have the final say because it's a change in the law regarding that property. So, so how do we as residents who are going to look look at this every single day get to see what they're trying to plan?

So, so let let me clarify that the city commission has to approve this conditional resoning request first. no development plans. Then if that if they approve the conditional reszoning request, the applicant can come back with specific plans to develop the property. There will be another public hearing at the planning commission for that. So we get to talk at that commission.

Yes, abs that that would be back at the planning commission. If the city commission approves the resoning, the applicant can approve or can request a special land use permit, there's 11 special land use standards that they have to meet um with the design of the pro building for that property and uh the planning commission would make the final decision on that whether or not it meets the special land use standards. So that would probably be if the applicant were ready with everything, if the city commission approves the resoning, that will probably not take place until sometime in December, I would imagine, or January. December, probably at the earliest, maybe sooner. I don't know how ready this guy is. You have at least three more opportunities to speak on this.

If the city commission approves it that there will be more opportunity to speak on the development. Yeah. All right. Moving. Someone would like to ask has a question. Yes, sir. It's a procedural question. If assuming city commission approves the reszoning, are there uses that will require a planning commission public hearing potentially? Um, say that again. If the city commission approves the reasoning, Yeah. and the owner developer submits a development proposal, could there theoretically be uses that don't require

Yeah. All of those permitted uses? My I guess my clarification you said that it would require a public hearing but are the potential uses that don't require a public hearing. The self storage would require a public hearing. Nothing else would because everything else that's being proposed is already allowed in the mixeduse district. Yeah. Would they ever consider resing that res because of all the surrounding areas? I mean,

somebody can come in here with the same type of application. If this one gets denied for a residential zone there, but m in mixed use, you can already develop uh most types of residential pro development could be developed there right now as use by right. As for all there will be an agenda. This will come before the city commission and your comments are best directed to the to them at this time. Uh we need to move on in our agenda. Thank you for attending and foring your

All right, moving on. Our second public hearing for the evening 02 RZ925 for a river park circle like us through this part of our Okay. So, unfortunately, the shophouse park project uh did not receive the backing that the applicant was seeking. And so, the uh plans are not going forward and the PUD is expired per city code after two years. if the development he he didn't even uh actually get final site plan approval. Um so as it shown here in highlighted in yellow, if such plans have not been submitted within the 2-year period, the right to develop shall be terminated. Um the city then shall commence to reszone the property to its previous zoning classification or a different zoning classification supported by the master plan accordance with section 541405. So um same as the last one, we have prepared the staff report that explains um what the existing zoning uh it it is

a PUD because the preliminary plan was approved. Um but as an expired PUD, it it's not it's really in limbo. Uh we're proposing that just be returned to industrial manufacturing um which all the other parcels that is an industrial park in which it was uh that parcel is located. Um and so simply proposing it goes back to that classification and my understanding from the applicant who's been in touch with us pretty regularly. Uh he didn't really see I don't think he really saw any point in attending tonight, but he intends to submit an application for development um once the resoning goes through. So, uh, I don't really have a lot to add. I mean, this is pretty straightforward. Um, compared to the last resoning in particular, uh, there's really not a lot of question marks about the that resoning. So,

all right. And this uh topic, the applicant is the city. So, we've gotten past no correspondence, I would assume.

No correspondence, but uh you know, here's the maps. Again, the parcel is uh up uh off of the very end of River Park Circle adjacent partially adjacent to the Kaufman Soccer Complex, Field Complex. Um that area is very interesting. Uh, I'm sure Steve could give us a more detailed history, but I know there used to be a sawmill right in that area, and there are still massive piles of sawdust that look like they just look like these weird little hills that maybe a glacier left behind, but there are these huge piles of sod soggy sawdust that probably weigh tens of thousands of tons. Um and uh so um yeah, just to go through the rest of these pictures of the site. Um it's a fairly uh um uneven topography is very, you know, up and down throughout the site. Uh but uh obviously it's developable. And so that's that's it. All right. Um there's no public or public testimony. Um commission discussion on this item.

Should we go through list of things? All right. Um, yes. P instead of moving it back to industrial manufacturing right next to conservation recreation. It can't remain PUD. The code says it must be reszoned. It's expired. The PUD expires. It must be why it's it's procedures. We have to have a reszoning hearing. All right, Commissioner,

I'll just point out that the the city developed this industrial park with a lot of federal funds, too, but it was a lot of local funds. They developed this industrial park, platted it, um put utilities in because they wanted it sold industrial and now we have a chance to again try to get a business on there that meets that industrial classification and we have very few opportunities in the city for those places to locate. I think we should open this one back up too. All right. Is anyone willing to make a motion on this?

All right. All right. After conducting a public hearing and review of the application and staff report for 02 re0925, the planning commission finds that the proposed reselling is consistent with community master plan and meets the requirements of the land development code section 54.1405 and hereby recommends that the city commission approves 020925 [Music] as presented. Do we have a second? I'll second. All those in favor say I. I.

All oppose, same sign. Motion passes. All right. Um, moving on. Citizens wishing to address the commission on agenda items. None. No old business. No new business. No citizens wishing to address the commission on non-aggenda items. No correspondence reports, minutes, no training, no work session, commission and staff comments. Mr. Vick, you would start.

Yeah. Um, I'm thankful that the public came out. I thought there were uh I thought they raised valid concerns and I'm looking forward to if the city commission passes it, I'm looking forward to seeing that special land use application and doing as much as we can to retain the neighborhood field there, you know, within that application process.

Um I'm grateful for the public hearing their comments. Um, I thought it was um, interesting when you move into an area that nothing's happened for 50 years and then of course you just want it to stay the same. And so I think it's it'll be interesting to see what will come of that and just making sure that you know the creeks are taken care of. Yeah, basically St. Thomas is really happy to see the turnout tonight, the feedback from the residents and also happy to see that there's potential businesses coming to South Marquette and helping to grow market see where it goes and hoping that it'll fit well.

Dr. Well, I think it's always difficult to accept change in your neighborhood. Um, especially if it's something you don't really know the details of yet. And I think that's where we have an opportunity as commissioner is to um make it fit later when we have that special land use permit request in front of us. Um, it's a parcel that I, especially with the new power poles on it, I can't see it being developed in any type of residential use that the neighbors are asking for. Um, that's about the only thing that's going to fit there. I don't know that anybody would want to live right under the high voltage lines anyway. Uh so I think we've got you know a task ahead of us if this is approved to try to make it fit. We've already heard most of their concerns hopefully and uh I didn't think they were they would be impossible to overcome and get a compatible business. So hopefully um they'll realize down the road that we can we have enough restrictions on development in this community already.

Yeah. That we shouldn't just try to rule things out before we even get a chance to to make them fit.

Thank you. Um, yeah. I I wanted to say that the the city really didn't have anything to do with locating those power poles there. It's totally the PLP's purview to put power poles where they like in the rightway. I think that's a state state law gives them that authority. Um but we as I said earlier the only other comment is there will not be a meeting on the first uh Tuesday of of October. Uh we didn't get anything submitted so won't meet until that third Tuesday next month.

And my comments are that uh I'm glad to see the public turn out. I'm glad to see that people are passionate about the places that they live. That's exciting and that is an asset to our community. Um I am looking forward to seeing what they do with the process or with the parcel if the city commission approves it. I think it could be a asset to our community. And thank you all for doing the hard work. This was not the easiest meeting I've ever attended. So I can tell that everybody did their homework and I appreciate that. Um this meeting is adjourned at 7:38.