View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Thursday, August 13, 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 June 11, 2015.
III. Public Hearings
A. Hearing, Case 2015-13: Staff-initiated request to amend the Muskegon Parks & Recreation
Master Plan.
B. Hearing, Case 2015-14: Staff-initiated request to amend section 400 of the zoning ordinance to
allow multiple family dwellings under circumstances in R-1, Single Family Residential districts.
IV. New Business
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
June 11, 2015
Chairman T. Michalski called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Mazade, J. Doyle, L. Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Smith, B. Larson, T. Michalski
MEMBERS ABSENT: F. Peterson, excused
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: K. Irey, 1507 Carlton, Whitehall; Tim, Architectural Group
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion that the minutes of the special meeting of May 16, 2015 be approved, was made by J. Doyle,
supported by B. Larson and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Hearing, Case 2015-11: Request for an outdoor wedding ceremony venue in a B-3, Central Business
District at 1104 6th Street and 520 W Clay Avenue, by Kait Irey. M. Franzak presented the staff report. The
property is located in a B-3, Central Business District, which allows similar uses such as assembly/rental
halls and outdoor music concert halls, as a special use. The special use permit requested in this case would
allow wedding services and similar uses, but would not allow receptions. The Planning Commission may
restrict the hours of business at the site. There are several reception halls near this location. The parcels
combined measure about 135’ x 140’, which is about .42 acres. The venue would hold seating for about 200
people. Bathrooms are not proposed at this time; however, staff is researching the building codes to see if
they are required, even though a principal structure is not being built. A small parking area, about 2,850
square feet in size, will be constructed off the alley. Notice was sent to all properties within 300 feet of the
subject properties. Staff had not received any comments.
M. Franzak stated that, after researching the issue, he found that bathrooms will be required, at the rate of 1
per 150 people. Additional parking would not be required. L. Spataro asked how this request fit in with the
recently approved Form Based Codes (FBC) zoning. M. Franzak stated that he had found an error in the
FBC and this one area was inadvertently left out, so it was still B-3. B. Mazade asked if there were any other
improvements besides parking that were proposed. M. Franzak stated that there were not, but now there
would have to be restroom facilities. B. Mazade stated that he would not want to see porta-jons there; M.
Franzak concurred.
K. Irey stated that this wedding facility would complement the many reception hall venues in the downtown
area, and it would be available only seasonally, from approximately May to October. She stated that she
would have to explore available options for a restroom facility. J. Doyle asked about the picket fence and
shrubs shown on the site plan. K. Irey stated that those items were part of the plan for an English garden-
type look. L. Spataro stated that, although there were no permanent structure proposed, the site plan lacked
detail. He stated that there was an old foundation on the site and asked if that would be removed. K. Irey
2
stated that she planned to work the existing foundation into the design of the lot. J. Doyle asked what other
type of events would be allowed there besides weddings. K. Irey stated that it could host bridal or baby
showers, or small corporate lunches.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Mazade, supported by L. Spataro and unanimously
approved.
L. Spataro stated that since the changes to the existing lot were mainly cosmetic, he was okay with the
limited site plan. B. Larson asked about the restroom facility requirements. M. Franzak stated that it would
have to be a permanent structure, based on the Michigan Building Code. T. Michalski stated that the
applicant would have to work with staff on a solution to the restroom issue.
A motion that the special land use permit to allow an outdoor wedding venue at 1104 6th Street and 520 West
Clay Avenue, by Kait Irey, be approved based on compliance with the City’s Master Land Use Plan and
conditions set forth in Section 2203 of the City of Muskegon Zoning Ordinance, was made by B. Smith,
supported by L. Spataro and unanimously approved, with B. Mazade, J. Doyle, L. Spataro, S. Gawron, B.
Smith, B. Larson, and T. Michalski voting aye.
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2015-12: Request for a site plan review for an addition to the surgery center at 1365 & 1400 Mercy
Drive. M. Franzak presented the staff report. The Muskegon Surgery Center is located at 1400 Mercy Dr.
The applicant is seeking approval for a major addition to the front and back of the building, totaling 118,145
square feet between three levels. The first page of the site plans provided showed the breakdown of
additions to each floor. Both properties are zoned MC, Medical Care. The vacant doctor’s office building
across the street at 1365 Mercy Dr will be demolished and a parking lot serving the surgery center will be
installed. Heated sidewalks will be installed at 1365 Mercy Dr; they are already installed at 1400 Mercy Dr.
The new parking lot will add 130 parking spaces; however, 56 spaces will be eliminated at 1400 Mercy Dr
due to the additions. There will be a total of 363 spaces for the surgery center; only 343 are required. The
layout of the building meets all setbacks and other zoning requirements. A stormwater management plan and
calculations must still be submitted. Water supply fire flow information must be approved by the Fire
Marshall and the number of hydrants shall comply with the International Fire Code of 2012 appendix C. The
new canopy must meet the minimum requirements for height and clearance of 14 feet. Staff recommends
approval of the site plan for the building additions.
M. Franzak stated that there would be two phases to the addition, one for the front and one for the back.
Since the staff report was done, a stormwater management plan had been received and approved by the
Engineering Department. Also, per Fire Marshall M. Metcalf, the 14-foot canopy would not be needed.
However, a motion for approval should still include #6 in the list of staff observations, regarding water
supply fire flow information. L. Spataro stated that the site plan was very complete and he was glad to see it
was pedestrian-friendly.
A motion that the site plan for the parking lot and building additions at 1365 & 1400 Mercy Drive be
approved as presented, with the condition that water supply fire flow information must be approved by the
Fire Marshall and the number of hydrants shall comply with the International Fire Code of 2012 appendix C,
was made by L. Spataro, supported by B. Larson and unanimously approved, with B. Mazade, J. Doyle, L.
Spataro, S. Gawron, B. Smith, B. Larson, and T. Michalski voting aye.
3
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER
Training – P. LeBlanc from LSL Planning was in attendance with a training presentation for Zoning Board of
Appeals and Planning Commission members after the meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:24 p.m.
4
STAFF REPORT
June 11, 2015
Hearing, Case 2015-13: Staff initiated request to amend the Muskegon Parks & Recreation Master Plan.
BACKGROUND
The City is updating its Parks & Recreation Master Plan. Staff will make a brief presentation on the changes
to the update plan.
MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION
I move that the amendments to the Muskegon Parks & Recreation Master be recommended for
(approved/denial) to the City Commission.
5
Hearing, Case 2015-14: Staff initiated request to amend section 400 of the zoning ordinance to allow
multiple family dwellings under circumstances in R-1, Single Family Residential districts.
BACKGROUND
1. The R-1, Single Family Residential district is the most prominent zoning district in the city. Only
single family residential units are allowed in these districts. However, many of these homes were
previously approved to allow for more than one dwelling unit. These homes with additional dwelling
units are considered “grandfathered” and are allowed to be utilized as multiple-family homes as long
as the additional dwelling units do not remain vacant for more than two years. Currently, the zoning
ordinance does not allow these “grandfathered” homes to add additional dwelling units, even if there
is enough space to create one. This amendment would make it possible to create additional dwelling
units in underutilized homes.
2. Many of the homes that would be able to take advantage of this amendment are located near
downtown. There are many former lumber baron homes that were built in the late 1800’s and early
1900’s as mansions for affluent single-family home owners. However, as time has progressed, many
of these homes were split into duplexes and turned into rental units, as the price of maintaining the
homes increased. Turning these homes into profitable income-generating sources has helped keep
these homes from falling into disrepair. As these homes continue to age, they become increasingly
difficult to maintain, as well as heat in the winter. Allowing landlords to create additional dwelling
units can increase the profitability of these homes, which would likely encourage investments into the
homes.
3. The current ordinance makes it difficult to maintain some of these older homes. If a large 3,000+ sf
home has two units and one becomes vacant for more than two years, the ordinance states that it must
revert back to single family. However, it is not likely that this home would generate much interest as
a single-family home, as it would be much larger than most people living downtown would need and
it wouldn’t be feasible for one family to heat a home of this size, especially one that is over 100 years
old and not insulated very well. Having a landlord with a vested interest in maintaining the home
may help preserve the home.
4. Allowing additional units to be built in these downtown homes will give more housing options to
those that want to live near downtown. Many people are forced to live away from downtown, as
there are not enough market-rate rental options in the area.
5. This amendment would only allow previously split-up homes to continue to add additional dwelling
units, when there is enough space. Homes that have never been split-up would not have the option of
adding another dwelling unit. Also, new homes would not be allowed to be constructed as multi-
family homes.
6
6. Below is an excerpt from Section 2319, which gives the guidelines for multi-family homes with more
than two units. These guidelines would have to be followed if a home was to add a third (or more)
unit:
Each dwelling unit shall have a minimum living area (excluding all basement area) of six
hundred and fifty (650) square feet for a one (1) bedroom unit, of eight hundred and seventy-
five (875) square feet for a two (2) bedroom unit, and of twelve hundred (1200) square feet for
a three (3) bedroom unit. For each bedroom thereafter, an additional 100 square feet of living
space shall be provided.
NEW LANGUAGE
Deletions are crossed out and additions are in bold:
SECTION 400: PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED
In R, One Family Residential, Districts no building or land shall be used and no building shall be erected,
structurally altered, or occupied except for one or more of the following specified uses, unless otherwise
provided in this Ordinance;
1. One Family detached dwellings.
2. Multiple family dwellings 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.
b. Homes that have already been altered for multiple dwellings may add additional
dwellings as long they meet the living area standards listed in Section 2319.
House at 71 W Southern Ave (approved for 2 dwelling units)
7
Unoccupied 3rd floor of 71 W Southern Ave
8
DELIBERATION
I move 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 mentioned in the
staff report, be recommended to the City Commission for (approval/denial).
9
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails