Atlas Twp-After months, if not years, of discussion and debate, a five acre minimum was adopted for areas of the township.
Several residents attended the Feb.19 township board meeting in an attempt to sway trustees from voting in favor of the change.
They were unsuccessful.
The board voted unanimously in favor of the re-zoning, which township supervisor Paul Amman said will affect slightly more than 25 percent of the township, or, about eight square miles.
Goodrich resident Susan Arnold was among those protesting the change.
In a written statement she read aloud to the board, Arnold said ‘the township failed to provide adequate notice to the property owners being affected by this rezoning? especially those in the residential suburban district.?
Amman disagreed with Arnold and others who argued the rezoning seemed rushed.
‘This has been ongoing for a number of years. It’s not something we just jumped into yesterday,? said Amman.
Rick Misek, vice-president of the township planning commission, told The Citizen in October the change to a larger minimum lot size has been part of the township’s master plan since 1991, and is necessary to preserve the rural landscape.
Existing lots of less than five acres would be grandfathered in as ? legally existing non-conforming.? The change would not affect property along the M-15 corridor.
Amman, along with the board and members of the planning commission, said by raising the minimum size of lots in the rural estate zone, they hope to lessen the traffic burden put on already difficult-to- maintain roads, made worse when more families than planned for make a daily commute.
By changing the minimum lot size, Misek previously predicted a decrease of 67 percent in generated traffic, citing information that a single lot in the township generates about 15 trips down the road per day.
Arnold went on to express her frustration that a map of the areas to be rezoned had not been published in any local paper, and that she was concerned many property owners in the rezoned area are unaware their lot has been rezoned.
‘As our elected officials it is your responsibility to make sure that property owners have been fully informed of the actions you are taking against their properties before that action is taken’especially when that action may greatly reduce their property values,? said Arnold.
Amman said property owners concerned about the rezoning and with a legitimate need to have their zoning changed, they are able to present their case the zoning board of appeals.
Additionally, Amman estimated more than 80 percent of those properties affected could not be further divided without a rezoning even prior to the five acre minimum.
The volley of opinions continued as Arnold said a property owner with less than five acres would, under the rezoning, be unable to rebuild their home. Additionally, Arnold said an owner of a vacant lot of less than five acres in the rezoned area would be unable to build a home on the property without a variance from the ZBA.
Amman responded to the issue of destruction of a home saying it was untrue the homeowner could not rebuild.
‘If somebody loses their house on one of the changed parcels, as long they can meet the requirements for setback and septic, we would allow them to rebuild. Those requirements have not changed at all,? said Amman.
As for the issue of vacant, non-conforming lots, Amman said the township has a number of lots in all of its zoning districts that are currently non-conforming, but can be developed.
‘We are not going to prevent you from building, never have never will,? said Amman.
Arnold said the rezoning would leave the township’and hence, the taxpayers? open to litigation.
Amman said he isn’t worried.
‘I really believe that the planning commission… they have done all their homework. They have researched this thing to the nth degree. I believe it’ll stand the test of time, and, if necessary the judicial system,? said Amman.
Despite critics of the rezoning, Amman resolutely supports the change.
‘Everything says this is the right thing to do,? said Amman. ‘I do, I did and I always have (supported the rezoning). I think that we didn’t approach (the rezoning) by the seat of our pants. We held public hearings, we tweaked the map, we changed the map.?
Whether or not that will be enough to appease detractors of the plan has yet to be seen.