001Okay, I would like to call to order tonight's Charter Township of Oxford Planning Commission regular meeting Thursday, June 26, 2025. If we could start the meeting with paying respects to our flagg to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you very much. Um item number three, noting of the role. Noted. There is a quorum. Um Patty Durr is excused for family emergency and Commissioner Austin is not in attendance. Okay. But we do have a quorum. Yes, we do. We are good. Um okay, moving on to number four. Approval of tonight's agenda. Motion to approve the agenda. Second. We have a motion. We have a second. Any discussions? Seeing none, all in favor? I I.
002Any opposed? That carries. Number five, conflicts of interest, exparte contact. Does anybody have anything they need to bring up, discuss? All right. Seeing none, uh, number six, approval of minutes. Planning commission regular meeting May 8th, 2025. Motion to approve minutes. Planning Commission regular meeting May 8th, 2025. Second. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Any discussion? Any none? All in favor? I. Any opposed? That carries. Number seven, public comment on items not scheduled for public hearing or on tonight's agenda. Is there anyone from the public wishing to speak on things that are not on tonight's agenda? All right, seeing none, moving on to number eight, commissioners comments. Does anybody have anything they would like to bring up, discuss, or seeing? None, we will move on to number nine, petitions. Uh item A petition
003PC25- Z00 petitioner Forest Jitis 5284 East View Road, Clarkston, Michigan 48346. Public hearing and motion. The petitioner is requesting a zoning map amendment to reszone partial parcel ID from SF2 Suburban farms to R3 single family. The vacant parcel is located on the northeast corner of Hummer Lake Road and North Baldwin Road and is approximately 11 acres. And just so that everyone is aware of the procedures for this evening, we will start off with number one a presentation by our planner. Uh followed by a presentation and discussion with the petitioner. Um at that point we will open it up to public hearing. Um which I will read the rules for that. Any member of the public wishing to address the commission during a public hearing shall give their name, address, and position on the issue under
004discussion. The general public shall limit their remarks to three minutes each, and we do have a timer that uh will let you know when you get down to a minute. All speakers shall address their remarks to the chair only. It is not a dialogue. It is just us listening to your thoughts and opinions. Uh, no person shall be permitted to speak twice on the same issue until everyone wishing to be heard has had a chance to speak. Person will only be recognized a second time if they have something new to add that has not already been brought to the commissioner's attention. Uh, no person other than the commission member, township consultant, or township staff shall be allowed to address an issue for public hearing following the closing of that public hearing by the chair. Um,
005after public testimony, we will uh close the public hearing. We will then have comments and discussions with the township consultant staff. We will review any correspondence. And my understanding is we do have a couple of letters to read in tonight. Uh, the commission will discuss the topic and possibly make a motion, discuss the motion and vote. So, if you are ready, sir. Sure. Good evening. Uh Matteo Pasqua, Carlile Wartman Associates. We are the planning consultants for the township. Uh so yes, in front of you this evening, and I'll put uh our report, at least the overhead of the site there. Uh so in front of you this evening, you have a resoning request um for an approximately 10 acre. I know you'll notice at 11 acre there's a little bit of net grows calculation in
006that but in 10acre lot located at the northeast corner of Baldwin Road and Hummer Lake Road current zoning is SF2 uh 5 acre lots the requested zone as R1 1 acre lots the site is currently vacant uh the resoning application includes a conceptual lot split showing seven lots formal lot split or site plan application has been submitted to the township. The surrounding zones of the site are SF2, R3, R1, and Rural Estate, which is in Brandon Township across Baldwin Road. If approved, the lot as it is would conform to the dimensional standards of the R3 zone. Uh, and we have provided in your uh in our review the permitted and special land uses uh in the R3 zoning. When we're looking at natural features, uh the site appears to be relatively flat. Uh there's no
007wetlands that appear to be on site. Uh there are small woodland clusters present, but there are no major wood um there are no major water bodies on the site or any, you know, the rest of the site is relatively brush. Uh whenever we're considering a resoning, uh the ordinance points us in the direction of the master plan. Um it's a great policy document to take a look at and guide the planning commission as they consider these resoning requests. Um pertinent sections uh when we are considering resoning that we look at are typically the goals and objectives as well as the future land use sections of the master plan. In the 2019 master plan uh the site is designated in the future land use as acreage states 5 acre lots. Uh it does not envision the
008R3 on this slide. It does envision residential uh but not the density that R3 provides. The current draft feature land use map. So we bring this up because as you are aware you are currently at the last stretch of updating your master plan. Uh that document is not adopted. It is not your guide here but we do try because we're in that phase of transition from one master plan to the next. We do reference it just to see if there isn't any kind of guide or consistency or changing sentiment in the township. Uh the current draft future land use map uh does have the site ated acreage states as well which is a five acre uh a fiveacre lot designation. Um the the current master plan, the 2019 master plan though does speak uh goals
009and objectives to offering a variety of housing in the township. Um obviously with this site here um it could be a free zone to and we'll get into it a little bit further, but if we zoned, it could house more than one single family home on the site under R3 uh with the appropriate circumstances of a lot division. Um when we look at development potential, you know, kind of at what what is possible under the proposed zoning under the current zone, one single family detached home could be built. Uh if reszoned, the site could be developed into one to potentially seven or eight single family homes under the correct circumstances which I just mentioned. Um given the current infrastructure and the market demand, uh the site does have development potential under the R3 designation. The
010ordinance does outline some resoning standards the planning commission to consider when a request comes in front of them uh for a reasonzoning. Uh so tonight I'll go through what those standards are. I'll kind of paraphrase what the standard is and provide you with a synopsis of our response. So as it relates to consistency with the master plan, we've kind of touched on that um but the master plan does provide guidance on promoting a variety of housing. Uh the future land use does not contemplate desert denser residential in the area. However, denser residential zones are adjacent to the current site. Compatibility with the site's physical environmental features. Um, the site does not contain any major environmental features and appears to be compatible uh with uses in R3 if it was developed under such. Compatibility with surrounding
011zones uh and uses in terms of environment, density, traffic, infrastructure, and property values. The properties located around the area of the uh around this area are zoned SF2, R3, and R1. All nearby uses are similar in nature with lot sizes varying between 27,000 square ft and 10 acres. Uh uses in R3 would be similar to the surrounding area. Utility capacity support proposed zoning. Uh public utilities are not available in the area. Uh the lot is large enough that if split, septic and wells could could potentially be utilized on uh the individual lots. However, the Oakland County Health Department would be the ultimate uh body to approve or deny those requests. Um you may have noticed this evening uh you do not have a review for this site for Sharp Engineering. Um given the area that
012the site is located in, there's no major infrastructure there. Obviously, Baldwin Road is a major road. Um but per the nature of the request and the lack of water and sewer, engineering didn't have any major comments other than should the site be developed under R3 at a later point in time. The site plan goes through various points of review. One noting is uh the consideration for storm water. Again, there's a lot of considerations for site plan, but engineering just wanted to offer that up for reference for this evening. But otherwise, there were no major they did not cite any major concerns with the request this evening. Road traffic capacity uh permitted and special land uses would generate varying levels of traffic. Um it is not foreseen that if two to potentially eight homes were developed
013on the site, the traffic would be negatively impact. Again, R3 is kind of the top of your smaller lot designations, although they are acre minimums. Um, if we were looking at something obviously much denser than R3, uh, the traffic conversation might pick up a little bit. Uh, demand for the proposed zoning, the majority of the township is zoned for residential uh, use. However, housing demand in the township and the region is very strong. Uh, would a lot conform to the dimensional standards of R3? it would um the township uh to deem if the proposal is inappropriate uh from other potential zones. So uses in R3 are in high demand. The area is predominantly single family homes on varying lot sizes. The lack of water and sewer does limit the level of density uh that could
014be accommodated on the site, thus making R1, R2, R1A difficult asks. Uh though Baldwin is a major road, there doesn't appear to be a demand demand for lots of a commercial or industrial nature here. Uh we do have to consider spot zoning. Um while it's not necessarily designated under future land use, um it's not it is adjacent to other R3 zoning. So we don't consider this to be spot zoning. Um if it was more of an island type of request, that may be of more of a concern. Um there's been no application in the last year for this site. Um and as it relates to the overall public health, safety, welfare, and investment of the site, uh we cited no foreseen issues with those items, public health, safety, and welfare. So in summary, uh the
015proposal is consistent with market demands um and conducive with the location. There are conflicts in the 2019 master plan as it relates to the future land use. However, the planning commission does have the ability to consider current market conditions, other factors when making these determinations. Um, and at the end of the day, I'm sure you've got this memorized by now, but the processes that the planning commission recommends to the township board and then the township board considers approval or denial during a first and second reading. Uh, with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Fair enough. Any questions? Any questions? Question. No, I do not have any questions. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. With that, we will move on to number two. Uh any presentation or information from the petitioner? Is
016it okay if both of us get up? Yeah. Come on. This is my father. He bought this land over 30 some years ago with the anticipation that he was going to with the anticipation that he would someday build on it whether it was one home, two home, whatever. So many years ago, we talked about it. I'm a builder by trade. uh he offered that property to me quite a few years ago and I I just wasn't interested at that time. I had enough going on. He's getting up in age and he said his dream would be to give the property to his grandkids and he's got seven. So we are splitting it seven times. And my daughter's here today, my son's working for me. He's currently working and the rest of the kids are busy,
017too. So, um I know you're going to hear a lot of naysayers in here that are going to tell you about they don't want to see it. They like looking across the street. They like seeing the field, but we've been there longer than they have, most of them. There's a couple my dad's acquainted with that used to live across the street. They would always call him when someone entered the property and you know, they would call him right away and say, "Hey, there's someone on your property." But it at the current time we're thinking we can form with the R3. We have all the proper widths. We have the proper depths. And I don't see any reason how this would impact anybody in the neighborhood as a blight or a something that they couldn't or
018wouldn't want to see. These are all going to be brand new homes. They're all going to be young kids bringing up children. And so with any luck at all, we can get this approved and we can get moving because we'd like to start breaking ground right away. There's a few of them that are just waiting for this to happen so they can break ground or they have to move on and try to find something else. But as a builder, I'd like to help them and they all want to put homes up on the property. Again, dad's been around the neighborhood for a long time. He graduated with Bob Turner. just found that out tonight. He does remember you. He says, "Oh, I remember him now." So, uh, hopefully we can get this done. And like
019I said, for anybody that wants to come forward and and say negative things about what's going to happen across the street or maybe across the side of their backyard, um, yeah, I can see where they probably just love to see it vacant forever, but that's not the way it works. And most of them probably moved from the south to the north and they moved on a lot and now I I've been doing this for a long time. There's a lot of people that come out and they and they just don't want you there. But he bought this so many years ago. I happened to buy one of the pieces on Coach Road just south of that that he had bought many years ago and I you know I'm just lucky that I got to go
020there myself. So you want to say anything different? Yeah, I would appreciate it. You know, we could get these lot splits done for my family. Uh, they all want to I got grandkids that all want to build houses. There's seven of them. So, I'd appreciate it if you guys could approve us to get the splits so that they could have a place to build their house. Thank you. Just for the record, can you both give name and address for the record? Uh I'm Forest Jitis Senior. I live at 5284 East View, Clarkston, Michigan. And uh been there for since 1964. Jagus Jr. and I am at 1731 South Coach Road. And again, dad was born and raised in Lake Oran. Knows the area. He put most of the septic systems in most everybody's houses around
021the area. Uh they're very well known through the area. So we've already preliminary done perk tests on the whole property. Um a couple with permit just to see how it was back when I was a young man, but we know exactly what's got what what the ground looks like and we know exactly what we're doing there. So with any luck at all, we can get this done. And thank you for your time. Thank you. West. Um I guess it's just worth for clarifying and it just for clarification that the reasoning go through bank mission and township uh lot splits are reviewed and approved administratively through the township and the county. Right. Just so everyone knows the process. Oh, you know what? That's something else. Can I add that one more thing? Sure. I have the
022paperwork in 1988. the township presented to my dad to split it at that time and he didn't say no at that time. He didn't have the funds to start building. So he was not for it nor against it, but we have the letter and I made copies of it for you. They wanted to split it up back then in 1988 and he just was nervous about the fact that he would get charged in for taxes on each individual lot. So this would have been done way back when you know and and he's had two different occurrences like that where they confronted them and set letters. Thank you. Okay, with that I will move on to item number three and I will entertain a motion to open the public hearing. I'll second it. We have a
023motion. We have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Public hearing is open at 18:49. Um, if anybody would like to come up again, state your name, address, position, and uh we will start the lovely timer when uh Okay, my name is Ed Johnson uh and I live uh 2144 North Ball Road. right next to Becky on the north side. I just like to I've been here since 1956. Been out here my whole life. Been at this current address since 1986. Uh I've been hunting this whole time. Uh anyways, I'm a lifelong resident of Oxford. I've lived at the current location for 39 years. I enjoy using my land for farming, hunting privacy that Suburban Farms provides. In fact, instead of moving, when we wanted to upgrade our house where
024we're currently at, I tore my house down and built a brand new one because we like where we live. Anyways, we did that. We had grandchildren. I got a pond stocked full of fish. I've got three young boys. We hunt on it. We fish on it. We bow and arrow on it, tractor rides, all that stuff. And uh we had corn there, you know, rooms out too, which offered space, privacy, and a quiet rural character. This this was a deliberate decision, especially because I wanted to avoid dense development and the kind of crowded living that comes with this multi- living zoning. One of the reasons I chose to live here was to hunt on and enjoy the open land. Resoning the R3 threatens that. Dense housing means more people, more restrictions, less safety, privacy for
025activities like responsible hunting, which which are legal and valued in our area under the current zoning. The shift from SF2 to R3 would permanently change the feeling of the neighborhood from quiet, rural, open, busier, and crowded. That is not what I moved here for and and not what we were promised under the current zoning. Mr. Jitus requested this reszoning has never lived there on that property. I've been part of this community for decades and it doesn't sit right that someone with no connection to the land or the people around here found push through a change that negatively affects those of us who have built our lives here. I'm just about the risk of further subdivision pressure setting a precedent with acre one zoning could encourage further subdivisions gradually urbanization of an area originally intended to
026remain rural and semi-ural. The initial 1acre parcels could pave the way for clustered or cookie cutter developments reducing the diversity and housing types. It could also introduce developer speculation surrounding rural areas. This resoning does not serve the public interest, only private profit. Please uphold the original zoning and protect the character of this neighborhood and the rights of the long-term property owners. I respectfully request the commission denied the petition to reszone to R3 and uphold the SF2 designation for this parcel. Thank you for the consideration and my perspective. Thank you. Anybody else have questions? No. Okay. Evening, commission. My name is Tar Binsky from Darren Bones. I live at 2345 Home Lake, which is right across from the property being divided. Uh, I would like to thank you for anytime that we did have a problem
027out there. You handled it. Um I do speak in opposition of it. Uh in 2020 we had uh in January uh quite a bit of water uh township was out there. The uh they did a study and it found out um I'm not sure the term uh a ground well whatever the the way the water flows. Um we were told where we live we back up to uh our backyard is Bull Run in Elks View. We were told that would never be built on. Uh, and the reason I bring that up was because during this time that 2020 when those houses were being built, uh, somebody paid somebody 20 bucks with the tractor. They ran over the the swale, the swell, uh, and they created floods, flooded all the new basements, flooded my backyard, flooded
028Hubl Road. Uh, and I just would like for you guys to review that if possible. I do have some, uh, photos I can share off of Google Drive, um, from that time period. Um, and it hasn't gotten any better. Uh, my backyard, my sump pump runs constantly. I don't know what seven to eight new homes would do, watering their lawns, uh, uh, just road runoff. Uh, Sunday when I came home from work, uh, if you remember, it rained really heavily and the ditches on Baldwin Road were full, uh, and overflowing. Uh, so it it's been something that we've just been ongoing. Um, uh, I have I have no problem with building new homes there. there there there's plenty of homes being built in Oxford obviously on East Trainer Road. You know, you got a thousand
029more homes coming in. Uh plus, uh well, I moved out there to be the same as Ed who I purchased my first home off of. Um was was it was out to be out in the country. It was out to be quiet um and not to live uh in a further populated area. I enjoy the peace. I enjoy the quiet uh just as my neighbors do. So, speak in opposition. I would hope you do not change the the ordinance or the zoning. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, my name is Rebecca Cox. I live at 2096 North Baldwin Road in Oxford, Michigan, which is right next to the parcel in question. I would like to oppose, please, and that you would not pass the resoning of this. Reszoning is a decision that will directly affect the
030character and quality of life in our community. The neighborhood was planned and built with a purpose and its current zoning reflects the balance that residents rely on. Changing that zoning threatens to disrupt what makes this area lovable, livable, and sustainable. It would have set a precedent that undermines the stability of our neighborhood. Residents have invested time, energy, and financial resources into building their lives here based on the current zoning, which is exactly what I have done. I'm a li lifelong resident of Oxford and purchased this property 17 years ago to make my forever home. The property and zoning are what was the deciding factor. If I knew that reszoning was an option in the future, I never would have made such an investment, nor would I have used my savings to build a large garage
031last year. I'm extremely worried if reszone how much this would devalue my property and those around me. This isn't just a zoning change. It's a fundamental shift in how land in our community is allowed to be used and it affects every one of us who lives nearby. My property borders the entire length of this parcel in question 950 ft. These 1acre parcels would back directly into my property line. I have already had times with trespassers and I feel this would exasperate that exponentially. I've been preparing to get farm animals to worry about the impact that resoning would have on that. Since this parcel borders mine, we have different setbacks, thus putting neighbors closer to my animals than the electric fence. I'm not sure how I'm not sure how that would work since R3 is not
032permitted for farm animals and how these rules would coexist. Currently, the zoning section is separated by Hummer Lake Road. If that changes, the division would be my property line, which I don't see as fair. Multiple homes will be built on this parcel and that comes changes to the use regulations which could permit daycarees, nursing homes, and adult foster care. All further adding to more population, traffic, noise, etc. And with the addition of multiple dwellings, I'm concerned about wells and septics and how my adjacent land and utilities could be impacted. concerns about property values decreasing, higher population density, altering scenic beauty, environmental impact, increased congestion, utility demand, and the interruptions to existing residents with those items in place. And the domino effect of what's permitted via the R, please. These are not abstract issues. These are
033daily realities we will have to deal with when if this zoning is approved. Reszoning drastically changes the setbacks which exist for good reason. providing breathing space between properties, protecting privacy, ensuring adequate drainage, and preserving the character of our neighborhood. This should not be discarded for profit. Reszoning to allow denser or larger development is a direct threat to visual appeal, safety, and long-term livability of our community. Approving these changes would send a message that established neighborhood standards can be rewritten on demand and that long-term residents investments and concerns come second. We are not against development or progress, but we are Thank you. Anybody else? Good evening. My name is Steven Manley. I live at 9 uh 2093 North Baldwin Road across the street from proposed development. Um, I have uh no objection to homes being built
034on the property. Um, I congratulate you on having so many grandkids who actually want to live near each other. Um, I have nine kids myself and I would be happy if they just stayed in the same state. Um however um as Becky and Nick before me um have expressed opposition, my main issue is um uh the roads and the traffic on North um Baldwin Road. I know you had spoken to um no negative um impact will be made, but I wish that the um uh the board new here would look at the recent um accidents that happen especially between um gardener and um North Shipman. We have accidents on there regularly and we've had casualties and we've had fatalities there right on this the very intersection that we're talking about. car the the speed limit
035ends just north of um Seymour Lake Road and people who are coming to visit me, they are nervous and I'm nervous because we have to put on our turn signals way in advance and people honk and land on um our rear ends just for us to get into our um driveways. I I think this is very dangerous. I know it's a county road, so you probably don't have a lot of jurisdiction on reducing or putting in the speed limit there, but I do believe this added congestion will cause a major problem for us and unfortunately for the folks who live there, I think it would be a lovely property to perhaps divide into two or three smaller ones. And then um as I hope what happens to my property if I pass early that it
036can be sold um and the the proceeds could be um distributed amongst my grandchildren and they could choose where they live. So that is my opposition. I really please uh wish that you would consider um those traffic situations on Northland Road. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? My name is Eric Stasac. I live at 2257 Hummer Lake Road which is directly across from the property uh um so historically speaking uh there's been water runoff issues in the area like my neighbor spoke of uh being uh basement being flooded because of the Bull Run Road development and it hasn't gotten any better. Uh Lake Road constantly floods uh right across from my property. I live across from the uh water uh pool in my neighbor's um parcel and that uh gets water runoff from this property.
037So I can only imagine how much more water I'm going to get in my front yard uh which is currently standing water. Um it it won't go away. Uh whatever the uh township has done to mitigate this hasn't worked. I know they put a large culbert, but that just brings more water into my yard and my neighbor's yard. And uh nothing's being done to solve this issue. Um, so I think the uh the comments that there's no concern about water runoff um need to be relooked at because I deal with this constantly every time it rains. And uh I oppose reszoning this because more uh more houses on in that area means less soil for water to seep into. And uh I just fear it's going to end up in my uh parcel and uh
038my sump pump already runs constantly. Uh it never goes off. Um so that's my concern. I oppose this uh resoning. Thank you. Thank you everybody that's speaking. I have a question. Corey, there's so many over there. But he's already spoke, so we got to go through everybody that wants to speak first. Okay. Um, my name is Wendy Dell and I live at 1425 Hummer Lake Road. It's on the southeast corner of uh Coats and Hummer Lake. My question is if we allow the zoning to be switched from SF2 to R1 or three. So you're going from big lot to little lot. Who's to say that that's 600 acres that are across the road from me in the future would not be divided as well. We moved to the country to be in the country. My
039husband is a retired Marine of 26 years of service. He has some issues since he did two trips to Iraq and the more people the more noise effects for him do not do less any blessings. Um so my thing is is more people more noise more congestion more disgrunted person. So, my thing is is I know I'm not the only one that has maybe some issues with noise and stuff, but we moved to the country to be in the country. We have a horse, we have chickens, we have dogs and cats, and we've built a beautiful barn on our property. I don't want our country land to be divided into subdivision land. So love that you want to give to your children. Sell the land to somebody who wants to have the country land and
040then bless your grandchildren with those blessings so that they can have something else. That's all I have to say. But my question is still who's to say in the future that the land across from me doesn't get divided as well and then we have subdivision city. So, do we have restrictions on how much land in the in the township gets divided into being city homes or or subdivision homes versus how much land gets to be farmland? Do we have a policy like that? Do we have a protocol? I I don't know. That wouldn't be for me to know. I guess now with this issue or this topic, we could look into that. I mean we have policies about wetlands and farmlands. We have to say we don't have any policies about how much is farm
041and how much is not. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Christine Binsky. um 2 3 4 5 Hummer Lake Road directly across from set property. Um we've been there since 2001. Uh so it's going on 25 years that we've been there and and enjoyed the peace and quiet as everyone has said. Uh one thing that I think has not been spoken to yet is the condition of the road. Yes, we have standing water um a a little bit further east of the intersection. Um, but the the washboardness of it. I don't know if the manufacturing plants at the east end of Hummer Lake play into it, but there are quite a number of trucks that come through at high speed throughout the day um and then come to an abrupt stop at that stop sign.
042It's very washboarded. It can get very potholes and um and create a lot of damage. I I try to consistently contact Oakland County and make them aware and have it remedied. Um, but my fear is that this is going to add to it. Uh, as my husband stated, it's been an ongoing issue with water in our yard. Um, building up like he said, our sump pump runs. Even throughout the heat wave of last week, our sump pump is running. Um, there's parts of the yard that cannot be walked on. we have to restrict our dog because anytime he goes out, we've got to dry him off completely in the spring when the snow melts. Um my my fear is that that's going to exacerbate the issue. Um I get the whole, you know, everybody likes
043to live in the country. I do. Um but I my fear is that it's just going to create a lot of damage more to the road and to the homes along that stretch alongside ours. So I do oppose the reasoning. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else before we get to his second round? It's just one quick one. I when you're talking no water issues, that's much baloney. My property runs at the back at 950 or 55 ft. There's a natural runway down there. I got a springfed pond in my yard and it runs off and it runs right across the back of her property and hits both. That's where they go across Humber Lake. So, it is a high water table area. If you walk around anywhere around here, the guy that split up the
044100 acres you guys let years ago, they had the 100 here just south of these guys that with the subdivisions got water issues. It's all high water table area. So, say it's not a high water table is just that isn't true. and you had a bad wreck this last year at Hummer Lake Road and 20 and Baldwin that killed a person. So, it's a it's an issue that way too. That's it. Thanks. Okay. Thank you everybody for your speaking. Um, excuse me. Can I say something after you said about the water table? I think it's important. Yeah, I'll appreciate that. I wasn't going to say anything. My address is 2345 Miller Road will appear. I'm the father Rebecca. When she moved in there, we turned around and had uh the state come out in conjunction
045with the people to put the septic field in and to uh look at the water table. I forget how many holes they had to dig. Six to determine how many six. Six. They had to dig six of them. and they had to move the septic buildup because of that water table. it floods over in the back of our yard or I'm sorry, my daughter's yard uh come spring and when we have hard rains and if the state department or public health or whoever we call that they had said that they cannot believe how how high that water table was. I just wanted to support all these people here in the concern of this water situation. Somebody in the city has overlooked something because we do have a high water table there. Thank you. Thank you.
046Excuse me, sir. What was your name? What is your name? Oh, I'm sorry. William Cox. In regards to the water table, so we live on that corner of the southeast corner. When we go to dig fence posts, you don't have to go further than 2 feet to get water. So you dig down 2 feet just like everybody else. their sub pumps are running. You can't even put fence posts in, let alone I mean, I have an engineered drain field because I did not build my house. An older gentleman, but they put an engineered drain field on my property. My neighbor has one. My other neighbors on that one whole block who's Mr. Perau Pacher is the man who owned that property. He also went and sold all of those subfarm lots and there were like
047five or 10 acre lots and some of them are a little bit more, a little bit less, but all five or six of those houses that are on that piece of property all have engineered drain fields. And not one of us, because we all talk have ever heard our sub pumps stop because there is constant water. I even have a river that runs through it and you don't really have to ask where the river is because it goes right through our property. Didn't make it but it's there. My husband has made a swale through my property so that the horses don't have to wallow in mud all the time. So there's a major erosion property problem. on Hummer Lake, let alone Coats Road, and it's all you have to do is drive it and you
048would see it and you'd be like, "So, the road problem, the water problem, don't adding five, six, seven houses. Two I'm okay with five or six, seven, not so good." Great that you want to add your grandchildren to the population, but I wouldn't want to see your great grandchildren playing against such a condition. Thank you. Thank you. Can I speak again? Okay, we'll get back to you. Okay. To anybody else that hasn't spoken on us or speak great English. Okay, with that I will uh entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Motion to close public hearing. Second. Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? I. Any opposed? All right, seeing none, the public hearing is closed at 19:15. Um, with that, we will start. I'll
049get to you. Um, any more comments from the consultants or your team? Anything else you need to add, sir? Nothing. Um, since we've already gone through all of the correspondence, we've read or we've all the people that have sent letters in, uh, we probably don't need to read those again. Um, I'll give you a minute, but okay. in regards to the water condition that these neighbors are talking about, my future neighbors. He's in a septic tank business. He owns dependable septic installers and cleaners. I am also licensed to do it. I've been doing it all my life. We perk tested that property in 1980. The water was there. It's not going away. The water was there. It doesn't matter how many homes you put in there, the water table is never going to change. Consulting
050with my daughter and my son, I said, "You're better off building a ranch style house on a slab. We already know we're going to have to put an engineered system in. The water conditions that they're talking about have always been there. It is clay. It is clay. Clay doesn't accept water. Especially if you get storm after storm after storm, it floods. I know. I lived in Brandon, not too far from where I'm living now. I couldn't mow my yard for most of the spring and early summer. I don't complain. That's the natural conditions in which we are going to have to deal with these water conditions that they're talking about. Building them homes in there not going to change a bit. The rain's still going to come down. It's going to hit the house or
051the ground. It's going to try to go in and it's going to do what it does best. Seek the lowest point. It will go into the ground as much as it can. Houses are not going to affect it at all. So, I I mean, I hear like a lot of water stuff here. You guys have been dealing with it since you moved in. Your basement have never turned off. They're never going to turn off unless we go into a trickle. So, in regards, I hope that we can look at that and remember and I'm sure that he could if he has the, you know, information on it, he can include that into his report. We are always going to have rain. Sometimes it's going to be dry, sometimes it's going to be wet, but water
052should not be a a factor of whether or not we can build a home or not. It it it would be ridiculous to think so. Thank you. Excuse me. May I We've already closed the public hearing. Oh, that's so that's Yeah. Yep. Um we will move on to Let me just double check. Yeah, all the letters that came in people spoke. So, we do not need to read anything in. Okay. Um then I will move on to number seven. Uh commissioner's discussion. Um if there's any questions that you need of Matteo, uh start down here. I guess a couple comments. One is I do see on one side of the road there is a little bit higher density housing. Yes. R three is across the street. across the street there's some R1 just south and
053there okay but then on the other hand I also see based on our master plan it was specifically for SF2 and I also see it was u even in our potentially revised master plan it's also it stayed the same so I would be concerned this would be it would be a big change to go from SF2 to R3 because now you're going from maybe one or two to seven. So I would be concerned about changing the the character of that area especially in light of how it was originally planned. So the planning document is our guidance and I would tend to defer to that document especially in case. Thank you. Um have you folks worked that property? Yes, we have. We did it uh right around 1988. I was just a young guy at the
054time, but I was the one with them and we put a driveway in which is currently there. We used to have a cable across it, put some gravel down, stiffen ground, and we went in there and we p probably eight or 10 holes and the water table's high. It's always been high. So we're aware of the fact that an engineered system is necessary. Uh it it's just a burden on the house itself. It does not affect the water table. When you think about anywhere from two to five people using the potty in the shower, that that ground is already set up and it's already cut to absorb water faster than normal. So it wouldn't impact it will not raise the water table at all at not even a bit. Okay. You good? Mhm. Okay. Go
055down to this end. Just a couple comments to build off of uh Commission Commissioner Wagner um about the master plan. Yeah, there's discussion in there about um preserve and promote the scenic rural character of of the township and um larger residential lots and especially it refers to the northwest corridor or quad, excuse me, quadrant in particular. Um and there's other language in the master plan um that guides us um that supports the um the le lesser density. So I just want to share that with you Mr. Chair. Okay. Yeah. My only comments are to echo the other commissioners on the uh guidance from the master plan. That's what that's what my thoughts are right now is the guiding the guidance that we have to use is the master plan. So that's kind of what we're
056stuck to. Thank you. Okay. Anything else anybody would like to add? Yeah, I kind of I kind of am the in the same camp that, you know, we we've spent a lot of time on that master plan and designated those areas uh for a reason. Not real uh not real sure about making a change, but with that, I will entertain a motion. So I move to recommend denial to the Oxford Township Board of Trustees for a reasonzoning for the par part parcel located on North Bald Road in Oxford Township approximately 11 acres tax ID 04-07-3000-00009 from SF2 Suburban Farms District 5acre minimum to R3 single family district one anchor minimum based upon a finding that the actual applicant does not meet all the factors relevant to the petition pursuant to section 18.6 of the township
057zone zoning ordinance specifically the reasonzoning is not consistent with the goals policies and future land use map of the township master plan I'll second Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Any last discussion? Anything? Just confirm this is a denial vote. That is confirmed. The motion is for a recommendation to deny to the township board. All right. With that, can we get a roll call vote? Wagner. Yes. Blok. Yes. Blankenship. Yes. Turner. Yes. Bailey. Yes. Motion passed to recommend denial. Thank you very much. With that, we'll move on to you know seems funny here. You guys sent me out of wanting to resone that property. What I wanted and now it's Are you serious? We're going to conduct the rest of the meeting if we can take conversations out into the hall, please.
058Enjoy your party. All right, moving on to number 10, unfinished business. I do not see any. Number 11, new business. Discussion of industrial setbacks. reviewed by the ordinance review committee. Okay. So, the ordinance review committee has uh and we've included their work plan just to kind of give the plan commission an update on where we are with certain projects. And so, one of the items that was indicated as a higher priority on that work plan was reviewing industrial setbacks and lot coverages in the uh in the township. Uh, and this was brought on kind of by a review of your industrial lots, um, and your industrial standards. Uh, there was last year a need for a variance for an industrial, uh, property that wanted to expand to the township. Um, and they required two variances
059because the odd shape of their lot and what they were looking to do made it so that they could not meet the national standards. And one of the reasons was that the type of work that they were looking to do required that the building actually be so long because it is a conveyor belt process. So this kind of got all of us thinking about well let's take a look at our industrial standards and see if there isn't a way to potentially amend them in a manner that allows for a better efficiency of the property. Um so with that what you have in front of you tonight is we're this is not a public hearing for these. It's just really kind of a feedback from the planning commission on their thoughts of what the ORC has
060reviewed and approved to at least come to you, you know, under an official review. Um, again, that the the step from here would either be that if the planning commission uh agrees with these amendments, uh, that we would schedule public hearing probably for late July. uh or the planning commission can provide feedback to the OC to consider and we can at our next meeting kind of take those planning part those comments into consideration and see if we want to bring you something revised with that. These these changes are influenced by review of some similar communities uh in the adjacent area. Uh, we looked at Auburn Hills, we looked at Lake Oran, or I'm sorry, Oran Township, and we looked at um Rochester Hills. And again, this was just kind of upon the review of your
061current standards with the setbacks being what they are, the lot coverage limitations being what they are, but then also more importantly, the size of your industrial lots andor the op the odd shape of them can create some challenges when industrial users are trying to maximize the efficiency of the site. There were communities that had similar setbacks and lot coverages, but they were for parcels that were much larger. So, putting the kind of restraints that they had in place, there really wasn't an impediment to that development. Um, so with that, again, we just kind of want to garner uh any feedback from the planning commission on what they put here tonight and uh we can take next steps from there, but I'm happy to answer any questions. And this is just for the the first page,
062the uh setbacks like the per the light industrial is moving wanting to move from 50 to 40, the rear from 50 to 25. Correct. Correct. So yes, and so as you can see for um I1, front would go to 40, side would say the same, and rear would go to 25. And for I2, which is kind of your your heavier industrial, uh front would go to 50, side would go to 40, and rear would go to 50. We do Oh, and then your lot coverages for I1 would be 50% and for I2 it would be 60%, so they could utilize more of the site uh with building coverage. Um, footnote O at the bottom states that exceptions for industrial buildings when adjacent to residential zones. So within your zoning ordinance, there are some exceptions regarding
063R1A, R1, R2, and R3. We kind of use that as a guide for this in that when either an I1 or an I2 is adjacent to R1A through R3, the rear septics would go back to their original amounts. Um the thought being that once you get into SF1 through AG those lots become so big that that there already is kind of a natural buffer created between the size of the lots and the setbacks that already exist. So what would that do if we're kicking those percentages up? Um won't that kind of limit parking spaces or parking lots or is that factored in as well? It does. I we actually I kind of ran some mock site plan reviews to see, okay, they got to meet their buffering requirements and they got to meet their parking
064requirements. Um especially if they wanted parking in front of the building, the building would not be at the 40ft line. It would be further back. Now, that said, it's still a good point. They're still going to have to figure out drive by's got to be 24 ft. Parking spaces have to be 10 ft deep. You got to have a 20ft buffer. What this allows is if the lot will allow for it, it's kind of their problem to figure out. We're just giving them a little bit more uh margin to work with. Okay. So, in your opinion, this would allow builders a lot more flexibility in developing I industrial lots we have here in Oxford. Yeah. And it's again, it's kind of conducive with some other communities that are kind of the same mix as this
065township as far as industrial and residential and commercial uses. Um, and again, I think the other caveat here is, you know, up in the northern part of the community, you have kind of some odd shaped industrial lots where by no fault of their own, and due diligence is a part of buying a property. You make sure it's going to work before you pick it up. But this does offer them a little bit more leeway to kind of fit this here and fit this there. The big the light bulb for me was when the former applicant came through and said, "I can't make the building any shorter. I have to have a conveyor system that's 70t long in order to do this type of work." So that's yes that's kind of where a lot of this
066came from. Mr. Chair, is that Baron Industries? Is that what you're referring to? Uh Baron. Yes. When we went through the Baron site plan last year. Yep. Mr. Chair, go ahead. Um, is there an opportunity if we're going to say decrease the rear setback or even side setbacks to maybe then um up the requirement for trees and buffer buffering you so you do have um I had the language at the OC meeting and I apologize for having it here but when you have conflicting land uses up against each other I believe the buffer is required to be I believe it's like 80 the trees of maturity have to obscure 80% % of the view during summer and 60% during winter indicating like you need to mix in evergreen uh plantings. Okay. Uh so we did
067talk about the landscaping buffers and your your current zoning ordinance does offer some uh stricter requirements when conflicting land uses above each other. Okay. Do you see any risks with this potentially that I mean this is really to ease the process for applicants to um to build on a site right or to expand um within the do you see any risks with this that we might run into I given the current location of where you have industrial and where you're promoting it and the adjacent zoning of residential that is quite that is really SF1 or higher I don't see a huge conflict between residential industrial uses. I will I will circle back and confirm that landscaping information that I just bounded off. One thing if I I guess for me what I envision I do
068not have a crystal ball. I wish I did, sure I don't, is that if if they're allowed to utilize a little bit more of their rear yard for the building placement, it actually might cut down on rear drives where the building abuts up to a green space because they do have to have 20 ft or 30 ft of buffer. Anyways, so the hope would be that maybe the drives are more oriented along the side or the truck traffic is more oriented along the side than the rear of the building. That is that is purely taken out of the sky. I can't offer that. you don't see site plans where the drives are at the back. Um, and I will double back on the buffering requirements, but no, I don't see based on where your industrial
069is, based on where you're promoting it, and based on where you're promoting low density residential and high density residential, I don't see an immediate conflict with these standards. Thank you. Any last questions, sir? Well, u just wanted to comment that the OC has done this work to this point. We brought it here looking for your input. Not that this was to be voted on tonight and made part of a motion to go forward, but it was to highlight for you to think about and we would bring it forward as part of one of our packages. to build on that the next we would either take your comments tonight make adjustments so you see it again at unofficially or if you're comfortable with this then we would schedule a public hearing for to start the adoption
070process okay Mr. Chair yeah I guess we'll you know any any objections or any modifications you'd like to make one comment I would the dimension under um I1 late industrial for the rear setback going from 50 to 25 I guess my only feedback would be if that could be increased slightly. That would be all just to give more of a buffer. 25 ft of a buffer is seems pretty thin, but um that's it seems reasonable other than that. Okay. Thank you. So my question is what precipitated the change? Was there some kind of plans being brought forth that would make their planning more feasible if they had better setback requirements? Or is it just we're reviewing it because it's something to review and we're comparing ourselves to other more what's the right word? um other
071communities that are on the move to more competitive. Yeah, more competitive. But also like some of the ones mentioned that you guys compared it to sounds like they are more um in the process of growing right right now. So is it because of that or because you know when I hear the cities that we're we're comparing it to Oxford's a bit more rural than those are. I mean, everybody drives through the heart of the township and probably perceives it to be much like Lake Oran or Orian Township. Um, but if you start getting off of M24 and into the other aspects of the township, it's definitely more rural, right? Especially the northern end. Um, so my concern would be around that like so we're going to change and then how do those industrial properties abut
072against other non-industrial properties, right? and how does that affect them would be the concern. So I guess the original question is what precipitated the the look at changing what we already had in place and initially I mean the the specific case study was Baron Industries. Okay. But that kind of facilitated this further look into gosh if the guy next door wanted to do something similar he'd hit the same wall and the guy beyond it would hit the same wall and so on and so forth. And there is I'm not saying that this is the position of the planning commission. And I'm not speaking for the township as a whole, but from an economic development standpoint, there have been some conversations around trying to develop um trying to develop some job centers through your industrial districts.
073Um and with the long long-term utility goals of potentially having water and sewer work their way up M24, there have been conversations that that investment would be to support those job centers. Um I think it's well noted that it's not necessarily going there to promote residential development. Um but that if these if these utilities make their way up through these areas then these sites there's probably going to be desire to for higher levels of utilization on those lots. Okay. So it's a proactive approach. I Yes. I think that's a fair statement. Thank you. Yeah. question. No, we'll get you. Okay. I guess with So, I've got some cons. We I think OC has a consideration for some of the rear setback. Um, are there any other I guess as a you know, specific nitty-gritty feedback
074that the OC can consider. I guess the next step was a planning public hearing and I want to bring it in front of you guys on the right. I'm not saying you vote yes or no for it, but I think that what I always want to say your last name, I'm going to murder you. A little sick. I echo him. So the 25 ft is a bit concerning, right? 25 ft. We've all got a 20 foot tape measure. It's not very very deep, right? So I'd probably echo that comment there on the on the rear setback under light industrial. Maybe make that a 40. um at the at the minimum of 30, right? Just to protect the surrounding lots, but outside of that, everything seems to make sense in my mind. Okay. I appreciate it.
075Thank you. All right. I like I said, I don't need a motion or a vote. I'm just taking feedback to the OC. Just a comment. I mean, I would say I'm pretty comfortable with the 25 foot. So, fair enough. Okay. Oh, we've got a next meeting in Yeah, we got a meeting coming up in July. Cool. That's all I have for that item for tonight. Perfect. Thank you, sir. All right, we will move on to number 12, communication and committee reports. Ordinance review committee. I mean that was he said the work plans you know kind of familiar stuff familiarize yourself with the work plan because you'll kind of start to see some stuff right now we're also we've just started to kind of dip our toe into mixeduse zoning so I wouldn't say at the
076next meeting or the meeting thereafter but at some point time this year you'll see something regarding mixed zoning from the or mixeduse zoning from the Okay. Number 13, uh, planner and engineering report. Uh, Mr. Sharp has, uh, information in his, uh, packet or in our packet. Um, anything else you need to add? Just for planning, uh, as a heads up, we will July 24th will be the public hearing for the master plan. So, we are getting close to our 63-day review period coming to an end. Uh I have been in touch with Oakland County because they do typically review and offer feedback. I'm kind of waiting to hear their timeline on that. Um but our plan right now is to public hearing uh the master plan at the July 24th meeting. At that you would
077again we'll have to see what comments come in. um you know, we'll try to, you know, put in a memo what we've heard back and you'll provide, you know, be provided copies of whatever comments might come through from the county or the other entities. Um, but at that meeting, it could be the step of the plan commission taking the vote to recommend approval to the board to adopt the plan as it is or taking into consideration all the comments that that have come in and whether or not you want to see additional um additional edits made to the plan. That meeting will also likely be a public hearing notice for some amendments to article 11, which is your private road ordinance. Um, that those those amendments are really to try to allow the township to
078address some issues that are common sense to fix, but the ordinance itself kind of ties our hands behind our back when it comes to road easements and private road construction and things of that nature. So, you will be seeing some proposed amendments at the July 24th meeting for that. Um, and then we'll see about industrial standards that that may or may not be on for the 24th. Um, and then I would say late August, early September, we probably will start to see some site plans. Um, but not 100% on that yet. Do we on that note do we have anything that needs to be done for the master plan or anything else at the earlier July meeting the 10th and I only ask because I'll be out of town for work, Mr. Turner will be
079out of town. So I don't know if anybody else is not going to be available if that would be a quorum issue. It I mean if you're out and we have everybody else that's fine. Both of us will be out of town. He's got a mean Mr. W. Although boy oh man, you've been waiting for this moment. You want to try it in for I guess I mean to to you know Commissioner Bailey's point um July 10th would be too soon because the 63 day period ends I want to say the 18th of July. Um but just keep us in the loop on your schedules because quorum is important for certain matters. We we'll be here the 24th, just not the 10th. Oh, for the 10th. I don't know that I I don't know about
080the 10th yet. I don't know if we'll have anything. Okay. Um, but we'll be here the 24th. It's still a good point, though, because as we start to round out I can't believe I'm saying this, but we have to think about starting to round out summer and all that kind of fun stuff. Keep us in mind when it comes to meetings, you may not be able to attend. So, if there are quorum issues or per your bylaws, we need so many people to do so many things. We can kind of schedule around that as well. Okay, that's all I've got. Perfect. All right. Anybody else have anything? If not, we'll take a motion for adjournment. Motion to adjurnn. I'll second. Second. Motion. All in favor? I. Motion carries. We are adjourned.