Planning Commission Meeting - 2020-07-09

Detailed briefing

Planning Commission Meeting — July 9, 2020 • The commission confirmed it had a quorum and selected Mary Catherine Hannah as acting chair for this meeting. The prior meeting minutes were approved as amended. Corrections included identifying Vice Chair Bowman as the person who called the earlier meeting to order and checking the record of who seconded a nomination during the Planning Commission election discussion. • Staff addressed recent public feedback about a tall wall around a new home under construction at the corner of Ann and Fairview. Staff said the wall was allowed because it was voluntarily set back to meet the principal-building setbacks. The city’s fence and wall restrictions apply to structures closer to property lines within setback areas. Staff described the wall as unusual for Harbor Springs but said the zoning code did not provide a basis to deny the request. No action to change the approval was taken. • Planning consultant Larry Nix provided an overview of master planning and zoning. He explained that a master plan is a long-range policy guide, while zoning is the enforceable set of land-use rules. He said the documents should be kept in sync when zoning changes are made and that master plans may be amended through a formal process involving review, distribution, public notice, a public hearing, Planning Commission adoption, and City Council consideration. • The session also covered the Zoning Board of Appeals, which may grant variances from zoning rules. Nix said ZBA decisions do not require City Council approval, though decisions may be appealed to circuit court. A person directly affected by a zoning administrator’s decision may appeal, with the ZBA determining whether that person is an aggrieved party. • Commissioners reviewed public-process expectations, including conducting deliberations in public, avoiding private discussions about pending matters, directing public comments to the commission, and stating reasons for approval or denial motions. Staff also cautioned that electronic communications among members can be discoverable. • Commissioners asked for a more detailed master plan work plan that identifies review segments, anticipated public-input opportunities, and the general sequence of work. Staff agreed to work on a proposed plan and try to provide it before the next Thursday meeting. Master plan materials are posted on the city website, and a binder will be available for public review in the office. Worth watching: • Whether staff delivers the requested detailed master plan work plan before the next Thursday meeting. • How the commission structures public participation during COVID-related space and participation constraints. • Whether concerns about the Ann and Fairview wall prompt future zoning or master plan discussion. Upcoming: A master plan review meeting remains tentatively set for August 6; staff also referenced the next Thursday Planning Commission meeting for discussion of next steps. Why it matters: The commission is moving from preliminary master plan education toward a structured review process that will guide future land-use policy and zoning decisions.

No open public follow-ups are linked to this meeting yet.