March 08, 2005

Drama at the Planning Commission

City Council and Board and Commission meetings are where the public life of our community is thrashed out in full view of anyone in the audience or watching the public cable channel. Tedious as they are 90% of the time, it is well worth settling in with a cup of tea or a glass of wine and watching our community create or wreck itself.

The marathon five hour long City Planning Commission meeting on Thursday night was every bit as dramatic as anything you can rent at Movie Gallery.

Last week's meeting consisted of a young builder making his first public petition for a variance. He may have been a little nervous, but acquitted himself well and you could feel the good will and support for him coming from all in the Council chambers.

A couple wanting to develop an unusually configured lot on Park Street made a pitch for three town houses. The Commission listened and encouraged them to consider detached houses. Although the presentation may not have concluded with the support they wanted, the petitioners and the Commission members conducted the discussion in a mutually respectful manner.

Next came a preliminary presentation of the proposed development for Indiana school. This project is massive, imaginative and very expensive. The neighbors of the school have concerns about the impact of increased traffic and the scale of the project given the single-family homes that surround it. The developer offered his sketches - a preferred one and an alternative. He made the case that the school is unlikely to be remodeled as a single-family dwelling. He cited the architectural integrity of his design and suggested that if a multi family project isn't approved the attractive old building will simply slowly die before our eyes. (A sentiment attested to by the softly collapsing old Baptist church at Center and Huron.) The council and the developer agreed that a forum for public comment is needed before more is invested in this project.

Then the finale. The developer of the Sherman Hills project was asked to appear to answer to possible violations of the approved site plan. If you haven't seen this project from the Kal-Haven trail or 72 1/2 street you don't know that every tree, bush and blade of grass was scrapped off this rolling land last fall. During the winter snow and rain and freeze-thaw cycles the topsoil has rushed in a torrent into the river and over the streets that surround the area. Surprisingly (!) there was an environmental crisis that the developers felt required emergency measures to stop erosion. So some retaining walls were built and the communication between the developers and the city became either erratic, contentious or murky depending on who is telling the tale.

The attorney representing the developer strode up to the podium, planted his feet wide, lowered his head like a bull and looked at the Commission through slitted, penetrating eyes and rumbled that he was from Lansing and was here to clear up a few things. The only thing missing was Gary Cooper across the room reluctantly strapping on his six-gun.

During the next hour the Commissioners puzzled through the sequence of events, listened to explanations and defenses - all delivered to them in an unrepentant, defensive and vaguely intimidating tone. The Council and Kathy Staton remained cool and focused. At one point Elaine Herbert modestly reminded the attorney, that - while she wasn't sure what the protocol in Lansing was - when in South Haven he would have a more productive interactions if he could bring himself to be respectful in his comments. Dave Varney got to the heart of the matter when he asked Kathy Staton to give a time line of communications and infractions, James Glas expressed the displeasure of the Commission in a clear and articulate statement and Forrest Austell labored to keep the disputants focused. In the end the stop work order was retained - other than the work necessary to prevent further erosion - until an amended site plan was submitted.

The Planning Commission did a fine job in finding a united voice to oppose an abuse of public trust. As South Haven faces the many pressures of development we can hope that all City Boards and Commissions and the Council will move beyond having thoughtful reactions to problems as demonstrated by last week's commission meeting. We require a new mode of planning development to address the arrival of the many people attracted to South Haven. We need proactive planning that enhances the qualities and characteristics of South Haven. This evolution will require the best thinking listening and action of all of us.

Posted by Julie at 12:33 PM | Comments (2)