Planning Commission Discusses Tree Removal Process, B&B Definition

The Planning Commission tabled a decision on if it should transfer decision-making powers on tree removals to the Commission on the Environment. 

At the July 10 meeting, it was explained that commercial property owners go to city staff members, typically a city engineer or Department of Public Works (DPW) employee, to request a permit to remove trees. Trees can also be removed without a permit if they meet an exemption, like being infested with bugs or are diseased. 

If a commercial property owner is unable to obtain a permit or meet an exemption, they may appeal the decision to the Planning Commission. 

“Essentially what we’re debating is who should be the arbiter of that appeal for an applicant,” Planning Commission Chair Joseph Sullivan said at the July 10 meeting. 

When the commission voted against allowing several trees to be cut down on Saginaw Street in February, a discussion emerged about whether or not tree removals were within the Planning Commission’s scope. 

At the July 10 meeting, commissioners were unable to develop a better system, but did discuss the need to have a review process in place while limiting the layers of bureaucracy involved. 

Commissioners pointed out that some criteria that should be considered for removals, like wetland impact and wildlife habitat, are best addressed by the Commission on the Environment. However, other considerations like privacy and economic use may be best determined by the Planning Commission. 

Naturally, this led to ideas like each commission reviewing removal requests or a joint review process being formed. However, some commissioners expressed concerns about adding another layer of bureaucracy to address requests that are sometimes minor. 

Ultimately, the topic was tabled to be revisited at a future meeting. Commissioners said they would like to hear the opinion of the city arborist and if members of the Commission on the Environment would like to take on tree removal appeals. Additionally, commissioners said they would like to further explore a joint review process or a way to streamline the process through staff members. 

Proposed bed and breakfast definition discussed by commission. 

The lack of a definition for a bed and breakfast has been an issue locally recently, as a property owner looking to create a B&B on Grove Street has been unable to gain approval for his project, in part because of ambiguity around zoning. 

Past B&Bs, like the Wild Goose Inn, have been regulated as Class B multi-family dwellings. Now, the Planning Commission is starting the process of independently defining B&Bs. If approved, the definition would clarify how B&Bs are regulated and where they are permitted in the city. 

The commission presented City Attorney Anthony Chubb’s proposed definition at the meeting:

“A single family residential structure that (1) has 7 or fewer sleeping rooms, including sleeping rooms occupied by the owner; and (2) 1 or more sleeping rooms are consistently available to transient tenants; and (3) serves meals at no extra cost to its transient tenants,” the definition reads.

The July 10 meeting was just an introduction to the proposed definition. A vote on whether or not to recommend the definition be approved by City Council is scheduled happen at the Planning Commission’s next meeting on July 24. 

Before that meeting, commissioners requested information on why the number of rooms was set at seven and if the property owner would have to stay on site, or if they could hire an employee to oversee a B&B. 

Planning Commission hears proposal for “stay and play” motel and banquet space. 

In another public hearing that was not voted on at the meeting, the Planning Commission discussed a motel that is proposed for Harrier Drive, near the Eagle Eye Golf Club. 

If approved, the project would transition an existing building that is currently rented out as a meeting space. The motel would include four to six rooms and the banquet space could fit about 30 people. 

A representative for CNP LLC, the building owner, said in 2019 the plan was to rent the building as office space. However, the COVID-19 pandemic lowered the demand for office space and the plan shifted to its current form. 

If approved, the motel would be rented to single parties, the representative explained. The Eagle Eye Golf Club hosts weddings and other large gatherings, and the representative said club management “loved” the idea of transitioning the building to a motel. 

“They lose business because they don’t have a place on-site to [host parties overnight],” the representative said. 

The proposal will return to the Planning Commission at its July 24 meeting. There, the commission will vote on whether or not to recommend that City Council ultimately approve the project.