Planners ponder changes to zoning rule
ESCANABA — The Delta County Planning Commission discussed potential changes to the county’s zoning ordinance during its regular meeting Monday.
Delta County Building and Zoning Administrator Dan Menacher said he hopes to revise the ordinance’s definition of “home businesses,” improve the ordinance’s definition of “structures,” develop a list of structures exempted from Delta County’s zoning, and change the ordinance’s definition of “seasonal dwellings” before next spring.
“I think a ‘seasonal structure’ is really just a residential or commercial structure that lacks one or more of the basic amenities or utilities required for year-round occupancy or use,” commission member Christine Williams said. According to Menacher, a “seasonal dwelling” is currently defined in the ordinance as “a residential building, whether temporary or permanent, which was not originally intended or constructed for year-round occupancy.”
Members of the planning commission also spoke about complaint resolution. Currently, the commission has no official complaint resolution process; as a result, they are unable to directly enforce the county’s zoning ordinance in some cases.
“Basically, what we have for a system … is I make a decision, and if one or the other parties doesn’t like it, they go and they have to file in (the) Board of Appeals,” Menacher said.
Williams presented a draft of a potential complaint resolution process in the hope of resolving the issue. If a version of the process is approved, it would begin when a complaint is officially submitted to Delta County’s building and zoning administrator. At this point, the administrator would review the case and conduct an investigation.
If the administrator was to find that the case was a clear violation of Delta County’s zoning ordinance, they would issue a letter about the case to the person responding to the complaint, the prosecuting attorney, and the planning commission. If the administrator was to find no clear zoning violation, the case would be forwarded to the planning commission.
At this point, the planning commission would be tasked with deciding whether or not there was a violation of the county’s zoning ordinance during its next meeting. If they were to determine that the ordinance had been violated, the administrator would forward the case to the prosecuting attorney for further review and approval; a cease and desist letter would also be sent. If they were to determine that there was no zoning violation, the administrator would send a letter to the person responding to the complaint on the case’s status.
Menacher said he plans to prepare drafts of amendments regarding the issues discussed by the commission. Members of the commission will review these drafts and vote on them during their next meeting.