728 24 26018 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/ac3051acbdf9f24337ae572a4786f81e.jpg fa4cc6d8413738cd097cf1bb8b092356 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Douglas R. Gilbert Photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R., 1942-2023 Description An account of the resource Photographs scanned from negatives and transparencies from the Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183). Douglas R. Gilbert (b. 1942) is an American photographer from Michigan. He was born in Holland, Michigan and is the son of Russell W. and Carmen (Andree) Gilbert. Gilbert earned a B.A. in social sciences and art at Michigan State University in 1964, an M.S. in photography from the Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in 1972, and a M.S.W. from Salem State College in 1993. He is married to Barbara (McDonald) Gilbert, and has three daughters, Robyn, Rachel, and Anne. Gilbert took a serious interest in photography at the age of fourteen. In 1963 he joined the staff of Look magazine in New York as the second youngest photojournalist in the magazine's history. As a Look photographer from 1964 to 1966, he photographed folk musician Bob Dylan, the Newport Folk Festival, Simon and Garfunkel, the New York City Financial District, the children and facilities at the Manhattan School for Seriously Disturbed Children. From 1967 to 1969, Gilbert did several shoots, including that of folk singer Janis Ian for Life magazine. After moving to Chicago, Illinois in 1969 to attend the Illinois Institute of Technology, Gilbert conducted notable photo shoots of business and political figure Lenore Romney, and pursued more personal and artistic photography, focusing on urban and rural landscapes in Illinois and Michigan. He then joined the faculty of Wheaton College, where he taught from 1972 to 1982. In 1993, Gilbert graduated from Salem State College, Massachusetts, with a Masters in Social Work, and later pursued a second career as a psychotherapist. Douglas Gilbert died in June 2023. Throughout his photography career, he pursued both freelance commercial work as well as artistic work. His art photography is characterized by its classic black-and-white format, and features people, places and objects shot great attention and sensitivity. Gilbert's works are held in the permanent collections of the Art Institute of Chicago, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, The Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and the Grand Valley State University Art Galleries, as well as in numerous private and institutional collections. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-2011 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783%E2%80%9D">Douglas R. Gilbert Papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography -- United States Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections and University Archives. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image Type The nature or genre of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183_I162-0034 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1968-08-09 Title A name given to the resource Monastery Hotel in Ettal, Germany Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of Klosterhotel Ettal Ludwig der Bayer, the monestary hotel located directly opposite the world-famous Ettal Abbey in the heart of the Ammergau Alps in Bavaria, Germany. Scanned from the negative. Subject The topic of the resource Ettal (Germany) Hotels--Germany--Bavaria Monasteries--Germany--Bavaria Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783">Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/561710b6c21ac2333af12a7a60d6cf79.jpg bd514b3b979fdcfd97b863238131fc83 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Douglas R. Gilbert Photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R., 1942-2023 Description An account of the resource Photographs scanned from negatives and transparencies from the Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183). Douglas R. Gilbert (b. 1942) is an American photographer from Michigan. He was born in Holland, Michigan and is the son of Russell W. and Carmen (Andree) Gilbert. Gilbert earned a B.A. in social sciences and art at Michigan State University in 1964, an M.S. in photography from the Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in 1972, and a M.S.W. from Salem State College in 1993. He is married to Barbara (McDonald) Gilbert, and has three daughters, Robyn, Rachel, and Anne. Gilbert took a serious interest in photography at the age of fourteen. In 1963 he joined the staff of Look magazine in New York as the second youngest photojournalist in the magazine's history. As a Look photographer from 1964 to 1966, he photographed folk musician Bob Dylan, the Newport Folk Festival, Simon and Garfunkel, the New York City Financial District, the children and facilities at the Manhattan School for Seriously Disturbed Children. From 1967 to 1969, Gilbert did several shoots, including that of folk singer Janis Ian for Life magazine. After moving to Chicago, Illinois in 1969 to attend the Illinois Institute of Technology, Gilbert conducted notable photo shoots of business and political figure Lenore Romney, and pursued more personal and artistic photography, focusing on urban and rural landscapes in Illinois and Michigan. He then joined the faculty of Wheaton College, where he taught from 1972 to 1982. In 1993, Gilbert graduated from Salem State College, Massachusetts, with a Masters in Social Work, and later pursued a second career as a psychotherapist. Douglas Gilbert died in June 2023. Throughout his photography career, he pursued both freelance commercial work as well as artistic work. His art photography is characterized by its classic black-and-white format, and features people, places and objects shot great attention and sensitivity. Gilbert's works are held in the permanent collections of the Art Institute of Chicago, the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, The Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, and the Grand Valley State University Art Galleries, as well as in numerous private and institutional collections. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960-2011 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="%E2%80%9Dhttps%3A//gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783%E2%80%9D">Douglas R. Gilbert Papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography -- United States Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections and University Archives. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Image Type The nature or genre of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-183_I166-0013 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Gilbert, Douglas R. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1968-08-09 Title A name given to the resource Monastery Hotel in Ettal, Germany Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of Klosterhotel Ettal Ludwig der Bayer, the monestary hotel located directly opposite the world-famous Ettal Abbey in the heart of the Ammergau Alps in Bavaria, Germany. Scanned from the negative. Subject The topic of the resource Ettal (Germany) Hotels--Germany--Bavaria Monasteries--Germany--Bavaria Black-and-white photography Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/783">Douglas R. Gilbert papers (RHC-183)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1960s Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7372a126dc421f6fbf825b65f0695d8f.jpg 9902cf5a0134e8756be89588d93c6704 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00119 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1918-1921 Title A name given to the resource Mongolian tower at Winter Palace Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of the Mongolian tower at the Winter palace in Beijing, China's Forbidden City. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides China Forbidden City (Beijing, China) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/0fe296768ab1845aae8078a4cf9c3ca9.pdf dcb20d5d54ccfe19fd66b7dea4208498 PDF Text Text '' MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Agricultural Co111poneut �I FROM THE LIBRARY OF Planning & Zoning Center, Inc, May 1985 -- Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update Agricultural Co111poneut prepared by: Monroe County Planning Department 14 1O East First Street Monroe, Michigan 48161 (313)243-7093 r oyce r. maniko, aicp, director dennis ahonen, alcp principal planner report coordinators: glenn wynn planner leslie waiter assistant planner graphic design & printing services: raymond b. williamson, graphic arts supervisor jerry oley, printer kermlt wies planning intern typing: crystal reed secretary �TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I II III IV Title Page Introduction 1 Agriculture: The National and International Context 4 Agriculture in Michigan and Monroe County 6 Methodology 22 Implementation Strategy 40 Bibliography 51 TABLES Number 1 Description Michigan's Major Crop and Livestock Products Page 7 2 Monroe County Agricultural Statistics 14 3 Crops Harvested in 1982 14 4 Characteristics of Existing Agricultural Zoning Districts 48 �FIGURES Number Page Description 1 Number of Farms 8 2 Average Farm Acreage 9 3 Average Farm Value 10 4 Average Per Acre Value of Farmland 11 5 Total Farm Acreage 13 6 Total Cropland Acreage 16 7 Percentage of Farmland i n So u theast Michigan 17 8 Average Value Per Farm Acre in Southeast Michigan 18 9 Number of Farms in So u theast Michi g an 19 t r-[ r MAPS Number Description Page 1 Prime Agricultural Soils 26 2 Class II Soils 27 3 High Yield Soils 28 4 Farmland Agreements 29 5 Large Parcels 30 6 Existing Farmlands 31 7 Class A, Band C Farmlands 32 8 Primary and Secondary Farmland 39 f f f f r F �INTRODUCTION �For many years, agriculture has been a forgotten land use as far as planners were concerned. Planners have typically spent a disproportionate amount of time determining the most appropriate locations for residential, commercial, industrial and public uses. The remainder of the community was subsequently identified as suitable for agriculture with little or no consideration given to those factors that determine whether or not a particular area was, in fact, well suited for farming. This oversight was vividly reflected in the preparation of future land use plans. Residential, commercial or industrial areas were identified with particular color codes. Agricultural areas, on the other hand, were often left white or blank, which in itself signified the lack of attention that was directed to agricultural areas. This plan makes a major effort to move beyond this typical attitude towards farmland to one that seriously considers the importance of farmland to the local economy. This is accomplished by considering those factors that make a particular parcel suitable for farming and then identifying those areas of the county that should be maintained for continued agricultural production. The result of this process is a land use map and plan which more clearly reflects the relative importance of each land use category. This particular component of the comprehensive plan begins with a discussion of the national and international influences which affect agriculture. It continues with a review of the characteristics of agricul ture in Michigan and Monroe County. The third and perhaps most important section of this report describes the process that was used to identify the county's most important agricultural lands. The report concludes with a discussion of different techniques that can be used to preserve farmland. Successful planning activities depend in large part upon the participation of those elements of the local community that have an interest in the results of the plan. Without such participation, the implementation of the plan's recommendations is difficult, if not impossible. A concerted attempt was made to involve members of Monroe County's agricultural community in the preparation of this plan, especially in the identification of the county's most important agricultural land. This participation was invaluable in refining this study and identifying more precisely the location of Monroe County's most valuable farmland. The following individuals and organizations were very gracious in lending their assistance in the preparation of this report. Their help is therefore gratefully acknowledged. Monroe County Cooperative Extension Service • Dale Brose, Director • Paul Marks, Agricultural Agent • Paul Nevel, Director (Retired) AG RICU LTU RA L CO MPO N ENT•! �Monroe County Soil and Water Conservation District • Arthur Schmitt, Chairman • Boyd Kanitz, Board Member • Robert Doty, Board Member • Gerald Rogers, Board Member • Herbert Smith, Board Member • Merrill Smith, Board Member (Retired) • Tom Gould, Former District Conservationist t I t I. Monroe County Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service • Cindy Coleman, Director f Ash Township Planning Commission • Robert Meiring, Chairman Bedford Township Planning Commission • Richard MacAdams, Chairman [ [ • Steve Elzinga, Member Berlin Township Planning Commission • Charles Roelant, Chairman Dundee Township Planning Commission I f • Edward L. Ruehs, Chairman Erie Township Planning Commission • James Leister, Chairman Exeter Township Board of Trustees • Herman Wickenheiser, Chairman • Dorothy Evanski, Clerk Frenchtown Township Planning Commission • Duane Cole, Chairman Ida Township Planning Commission • Lester Nieman, Chairman LaSalle Township Planning Commission • Robert Harter, Chairman London Township Planning Commission • Loyd Sype, Chairman 2•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT f �Milan Township Planning Commission • Philip Bowerman, Chairman • Boyd Kanitz, Township Supervisor Monroe Township Planning Commission • Richard Wilson, Chairman Summerfield Township Planning Commission • Roy Cress, Chairman Whiteford Township Planning Commission • Paul Appling, Chairman • Robert Schnipke, Township Supervisor Monroe County Farmers • Jerry Heck • Frank Smith • Elgin Darling Washtenaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission • Don Pennington, Senior Planner ... AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•3 �. AGRICULTURE: The National & International Context CHAPTER 1 �• Agriculture in Monroe County cannot be considered in a vacuum. Monroe County's agricultural industry is part of a much larger national and international system that needs to be considered to more fully understand the problems being faced by farmers at the local level. Clearly, most of these problems cannot be adequately resolved at the local level. It is, however, important to understand the larger context including the national and international constraints which influence agriculture in Monroe County. Two important factors are currently exerting a significant influence on the agricultural industry throughout the United States. These factors are: 1) the decentralization of this country's population; and 2) the demand for increased agricultural exports. Both of these factors have had a significant influence on the use of land for farming. Farmland is often perceived to be an inexhaustable resource. It is, in fact, a finite one which is being gradually eroded by competing land uses. The National Agricultural Lands Study which was completed in 1980 estimates that the United States has a total agricultural land base of 540 million acres. This total includes 413 million acres of existing farmland plus 127 million acres of potential farmland. An additional 268 million acres of rural land with a low potential for agricultural production is also available in the United States. The study goes on to estimate that this country is losing approximately 3 million acres of farmland each year to urbanization. A major demographic shift occurred in this country during the 1970's which explains, to a large extent, the steady loss of farmland during this period of time. The most significant aspect of this change was the movement of the population from metropolitan areas to non-metropolitan areas. Consider the following statistics: • Forty (40) percent of all housing constructed in the United States during the 1970's was built in rural areas. • Non-metropolitan areas gained 2.9 million people between 1970 and 1978. • The number of households in rural areas increased in the 1970's. • Employment in every major industry group increased at a more rapid rate in non-metropolitan areas than in metropolitan areas during the past decade. ._ A paradox of this phenomenon is that while the population of these nonmetropolitan areas grew at significant rates during the 1970's, farmers became a much smaller part of the total rural population base. Approximately 23 million people lived on farms in 1950 compared to only 8 million in 1980. In 1920, 60 percent of the rural population were farmers versus only 20 percent today. , AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 4 �This population change had a number of impacts on agriculture in the United States. The population increase was accompanied by a significant amount of new land development which was often accomplished at the expense of productive farmland. Much farmland was also left idle prematurely because of unrealistic expectations regarding future development. Finally, the introduction of non-farmers into rural areas created conflicts among competing uses. One example of these conflicts is the problem that is typically created when residential subdivisions are located next to farms. Non-farmers are likely to complain about the dust, noise or odors often associated with farming. The net effect of these demographic changes is that additional pressure is being exerted on this county's agricultural land resources. A second ·major influence on agriculture today is the rise in demand for U.S. agricultural exports. Agricultural exports comprised 23 percent of total U.S. farm production in 1980, and are becoming an increasingly important component of the national economy. This has not always been the case, however. Only a few years ago, increased crop production levels and weak global markets created a situation in which U.S. farm exports were in relatively poor demand. During this time, the federal government paid farmers to keep some of their fields idle. This was done to prevent a surplus of farm commodities from flooding the market, thereby lowering prices and hurting the agricultural portion of the economy. Neither of these factors, however, exert the same influence on the agricultural economy that they once did. The dramatic increase in crop yields which characterized earlier years has since leveled off to the extent that increased crop yields can no longer be considered as a valid substitute for land itself. The demand for wheat, feedgrains, soybeans, cotton and other agricultural products worldwide is rising dramatically. This demand will increase as worldwide population and • per capita consumption also increase. Future demand for these exports is subject to a number of factors, the most important of which are worldwide weather patterns and policy decisions in Washington and foreign capitals. While it is impossible to predict definitively how either of these factors will influence U.S. farming in the near future, it's probably safe to conclude that the demand for U.S . farm products will continue to increase and that a disproportionate share of the responsibility of feeding the world's population will be borne by the U.S. farmer . Both of these influences, the shift of population and the increase in the demand for exports, are creating a competing demand for agricultural land. It is not an exaggeration to contend that this country is at a turning point regarding the use of agricultural land. We are rapidly reaching the point where the limits of our agricultural land resources are clearly visable on the horizon. Cropland reserves in the country could easily be exhausted by the year 2000, well within the time frame of this study. It is, therefore, appropriate to identify Monroe County's most valuable farmland and begin to discuss methods of preserving this important resource because once a parcel of farmland is converted to a non-farm use, it is permanently removed from the total agricultural base. The results are not reversible. 5•AGRICUL TURAL C OMPONENT �AGRICULTURE IN MICHIGAN & MONROE COUNTY CHAPTER 2 �1. Agriculture in Michigan The importance of agriculture to Michigan and Monroe County is obvious; it is clearly an important component of both the state and the regional economy. Agriculture is the state's second largest industry and represents a stabilizing influence to a state economy that is subject to dramatic peaks and valleys because of the traditional dependence on the automobile industry. Total farm cash receipts in Michigan grew at a real rate of over two percent per year during the 1970's, and totaled $2.9 billion in 1980. For the industry as a whole, agriculture operations contributed over $10 billion in value added to the state's economy. Michigan ranks among the first five states in the ·nation in the production of 24 agricultural commodities. Five commodities have a number one ranking: blueberries, tart cherries, cucumbers, dry beans and navy beans. Milk accounts for one-fourth of cash receipts from farm products and is our most important product. Milk, corn and cattle gross well over $1 billion, and represent half of tota l farm sales. The next major group of commodities includes soybeans, dry beans, wheat, fruit, vegetables and hogs. Each of the products represent $100-$200 million dollars in sales. A more complete list of Michigan farm products is included in Table 1. 2. Agricultu re in Monroe County Agriculture is likewise an important industry in Monroe County. Over two-thirds of the county's total acreage is being use d for agricultural purposes. In 1982, the market value of agric u lt u ral products in Monroe County was an estimated $62,064,000 . Monroe County is a major producer of soybeans, wheat, potatoes, grain, corn and grain silage in Michigan. The county ranks as one of the top ten producers in the State of Michigan of soybeans (3), potatoes (3) and wheat (9). Historically, Monroe County has followed trends similar to the remainder of southeast Michigan relative to the characteristics of agricultural land. In 1982, the number of farms in the county was nearly one-half of the 1959 total (Figure 1). During the same period, the average size of a farm increased from 99.2 acres to 166 acres (Figure 2). Both the average farm value and the average value per acre of farmland has increased considerably since 1959 (Figure 3 and 4). In 1959, the value of farmland per acre averaged $361. By 1982, the value had increased 370 percent to $1,701 per acre. Over a 24 year period, the value of the average farm jumped from $34,481 to $293,853 due in large part to increases in farm size, crop yields and overall economic conditions. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•6 �Table 1 MICHIGAN'S MAJOR CROP & LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS, 1980 -. COMMODITY RANK AMONG STATES PRODUCTION (by 1,000s) UNIT ~ OF U.S. PRODUCTION Crops: Blueberries Tart Cherries Cucumbers, Processing Dry Beans Navy Beans 1 1 1 1 1 41,000.0 150,000.0 150.1 7,448.0 4,648.0 Lbs. Lbs. Tons Cwt. Cwt. 41. 2 68.8 17.3 28.5 84 .4 Bedding Plants 2 5,695.0 Flats 15.5 Apples Asparagus Celery 3 3 3 900,000.0 234.0 1,387.0 Lbs. Cwt. Cwt. 10.3 14.0 7.4 Carrots Sweet Cherries Prunes and Plums Red Clover Seed 4 4 4 4 1,340.0 58,000.0 12.5 1,800.0 Cwt. Lbs. Tons Lbs. 6.9 16.9 16.3 7.4 5 771.0 44,300.0 49.5 83.0 20,100.0 10.0 107.0 1,892.0 176.0 38.4 73.7 Cwt. Dol. Tons Gal. Bu. Tons Lbs. Tons Cwt. Tons Tons 5.5 4.8 1.0 8.5 4.4 1.1 5.0 8.1 2.5 5.5 Corn, Sweet, Fresh Market Floriculture Grapes Maple Syrup Oats Pears Spearmint Sugar beets Strawberries Snap Beans, Processing Tomatoes, Processing Livestock Products: Non-Fat Dry Milk Creamed Cottage Cheese Milk Production Butter Ice Cream SOURCE ; 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 7 8 66,214.0 41,915.0 4,970.0 36,709.0 36,637.0 Lbs. Lbs. 1,000 Lb s . Lbs. Gal. Michigan Department of Agriculture, Marketing and International Trade Di_vision, Michigan Agricultural Statistics, 1981, MARS-81-O1 (Lansing, Mich .: Michigan Agricultural Reporting Service, July 1981). "Michigan's Rank in the Nation ' s Agriculture," p. 4. Food Processing Opportunities in Southeast Michigan Market Development January, 1983, Detroit Edison 7•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT 1. 2 5.7 5.1 3.9 3.2 4.4 �. Figure 1 NUMBER OF FARMS 1959-1982 Monroe County, Michigan '- 2900 - 2700 2500 "':Ea: < 2300 LL LL 0 2100 a: w ID > G"l ::a - (") :E 1900 :J z 1700 C t""" -I 1500 ::a > t""" 1300 C • 1529 1458 • (") 0 3: "'O 0 2 m 2 -I • 00 59 64 69 74 78 82 YEAR SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE �Figure 2 AVERAGE FARM ACREAGE 1959-1982 Monroe County, Michiga n 170 160.0 160 152.0 150 140 136.0 130 126 .9 w ~ 120 w--.... 116 .4 a: ) ~ 110 > 100 99 .2 Y', 90 80 70 ;x.. ,.._ 60 59 64 69 74 78 82 YEAR SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGAICUL TURE 9•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT �Figure 3 AVERAGE FARM VALUE 1959-1982 Monroe County, Michigan t') IO Cl) 300 t') 0) CII -., CII 270 ... ~ t') CII 240 ~ -.... 0 210 ~ 0 0 )( w ::> .J c( t,\ 150 CII M~ ~ ~ ~ 0) I. Cl!. (') CII ..J ..J C ~ ~ ~ 180 > cc c( 120 0 7' 0 90 60 30 > t ') "'.., - CII .... xx·~ ~ ., ..,~ 0 IQ , \. y ~)))) I. G'J ~ I','\ \ ~ 0 y 59 64 69 74 78 82 YEAR SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•10 �Figure 4 AVERAGE PER ACRE VALUE OF FARMLAND 1959-1982 Monroe County, Michigan 1800 1701 1600 1583 1400 1200 w ::, ~ < >1000 a:-~ 90 9 < ~ ~ 0 0 X X ",¢<' ;g x0~ 800 600 570 441 400 381 y X 200 59 64 69 74 78 82 YEAR SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGAICUL TURE 1 l•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �Along with the rest of the United States, farmland in Monroe County decreased considerably in the last several decades. Total farmland acreage declined from 280,742 acres in 1959 to 241,736 acres in 1982 representing a total loss of over 39,000 acres of farmland, an average loss of 1,625 acres per year. A low point of 231,839 acres was reached in 1978. Between 1978 and 1982, however, farmland acreage actually increased approximately 10,000 acres from 231,839 acres to 241,736 acres (Figure 5 and Table 2). A similar trend was evident for total cropland acreage, although the change was not as dramatic as the one previously described. The total amount of acreage used for cropland in Monroe County decreased by 7,036 acres between 1964 and 1982, from 224,267 acres in 1964 to 217,231 acres in 1982. The lowest point occurred in 1974, when only 204,731 acres were used as cropland. Since then, however, total cropland acreage has increased by approximately 12,500 acres (Figure 6 and Table 2). '- Table 3 displays the acreage and amount of major products harvested in the county. The greatest number of acres were planted in soybeans, yielding nearly 3 million bushels. Corn for grain followed with over 75,000 acres planted and 7,878,926 bushels harvested. Over 11,000 acres of wheat, another major product, were planted in the county. Other grains, fruit, vegetables, nursery products, other crops, pasture, and woodlands account for much of the remaining agricultural acreage. 3. Agricultural Trends in Southeast Michigan Agriculture is a changing industry in the eight southeast Michigan counties of Monroe, Lenawee, Wayne, Washtenaw, Macomb. Oakland, Livingston and St. Clair. Each county displays unique characteristics that have influenced agricultural production patterns over the years. The amount of land that is used for agricultural production in a given county is influenced by a number of factors. Perhaps the most obvious factor is the suitability of land for farming. Soils that are well-drained, fairly level, rich in nutrients, and are amply supplied with water are well suited for agriculture. Urban development pressures, however, influence decisions on whether or not land will continue to be used for farming. This is particularily true for those areas along the urban fringe where farmers may no longer find it profitable to continue farming. Access to markets, climate, government policies, and market demands represent other influences on farming. Farmland in the eight counties in southeast Michigan is influenced by each of these factors which are illustrated in the following statistics. The only two counties in this region with over 50 percent of their total land area being used for agricultural production AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 12 �Figure 5 TOTAL FARM ACREAGE 1959-1982 Monroe County, Michigan 300 0 0 0 -- 290 0 C, v< a: < V .. .... 270 < w a: 260 0 < :E CD N 280 )( w N •": CD ~ .... G C\I Cit ww Cit ~ IO N G ..... V V V LL X N ..J < 240 t- ot- ., vv vv 250 vv .)', X .,., . .,... Cit N X 0 ., w N N If 220 :XXX v...,v..)C vvv vv 59 64 If Y V 'V',' V V x xx 69 V V N CII 230 X .... VV 74 V V VV 78 ~ 82 YEAR SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE 13•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT �Table 2 MONROE COUNTY AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS 1959-1982 All Farms Total Acreage in Fanns Average Farm Size (acres) Average Fann Value Average Value/Acre Total Cropland (acres) Harvested Cropland (acres) Pasture (acres) Other Cropland (acres) Woodland (acres) Other Acreage Value of all Fann Products Crops Livestock, Poultry, Products Recreational Income 1959 1964 1969 1974 1978 1982 2,830 280,742 99 $ 34,481 s 361 NA NA NA NA NA 2,268 263,971 116 $ 50,343 1,702 232,022 136 $123,892 s 909 204,731 192,666 4,405 7,660 11,737 15,554 1,529 231,839 241,736 21,449 2,000 253,927 127 $ 72,310 s 570 221,396 162,585 4,001 54,810 15,292 17,239 $19,650,761 $14,127,971 $ 5,511,875 10,915 $ $20,089,967 $13,734,309 $ 6,316,803 38,855 $ $36,393,000 $30,214,000 $ 6,158,000 NA $ NA $16,693,711 $12,022,774 $ 4,670,937 NA s 441 224,267 189,635 3,709 30,923 * 152 $243,412 s 1,583 209,343 195,770 1,908 11,665 9,836 12,660 $45,132,000 $36,287,000 S 8,845,000 NA 1,458 166 $293,853 $ 1,701 217,231 208,633 2,019 6,579 9,945 18,518 $62,064,000 $47,929,000 $14,136,000 NA * Woodland Acreage includes acreage in pasture NA - not available or not tabulated that year SOURCE : U.S . Census of Agriculture Table 3 CROPS HARVESTED 1982 CROP ACRES Corn for grain or seed Corn for s i 1age Wheat Oats Soybeans Irish potatoes Hay Vegetables Orchards Nursery and greenhouse products, mushrooms and sod SOURCE : 75,234 3,217 11,519 6,560 99,056 3,187 5,399 3,893 441 701 WEIGHT 7,878,926 67,462 386,068 421,362 2,968,551 742,045 9,380 bushels tons (green) bushels bushels bushels cwt tons (Dry) ------------------------- U. S. Bureau of Census, "1982 Census of Agriculture " AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•14 �(Lenawee, 78 percent and Monroe, 67 percent) experience less pressure from large urban areas and have physical characteristics which are well suited for agriculture. Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties face perhaps the most intense development pressure in southeast Michigan and have less than one-third of their total land areas being used for agricultural production (Macomb - 29.6 percent, Oakland - 12.3 percent, and Wayne - 9.6 percent). Livingston, St. Clair and Washtenaw have 37.7 percent, 43.4 percent and 48.8 percent of their land being used for farming respectively (Figure 7). Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties exhibit other characteristics typically found in urban areas. Average farm size in Wayne is 85 acres, Oakland 100 acres and Macomb 111 acres. In the other, more rural counties, average farm size is somewhat larger ranging from 158 acres in St. Clair to 262 acres in Lenawee. The average value of farmland per acre is higher in the more densely populated southeast Michigan counties than in the out-lying counties. Wayne, the most densely populated county, has a average farmland value of $2,647 per acre, followed by Oakland with a value of $2,592 per acre and Macomb at $1,952 per acre. In the remaining, less densely developed counties, physical and economic factors may be more important in determining land values. For example, Monroe County is less urbanized than Washtenaw County, both have average farm size of 166 acres, yet the average value per acre of farmland is $1,701 in Monroe County and $1,669 in Washtenaw. Lenawee County, the most agricultural of all eight counties, has a higher agricultural land value ($1,479 per acre) than either Livingston or St. Clair counties. Soil conditions and production factors are likely important influences in determining land values in these counties (See Figure 8). Reflecting a continuing trend, the number of farms in the region decreased between 1978 ' and 1982 from 8,760 to 8,527 or 2.7 percent. Livingston and Oakland Counties actually experienced an increase in the number of farms (See Figure 9). A corresponding increase in acreage occurred in Livingston County; however, Oakland County lost 8,027 acres of agricultural land. The largest losses in the number of farms occurred in the two most agricultural counties: Monroe and Lenawee. The number of farms dropped by 101 in Monroe and 221 in Lenawee. Despite these losses, the total amount of acreage being used for farming actually increased in the region. Total agricultural acreage increased in Monroe, Lenawee, Livingston. Macomb and Wayne Counties. The largest decrease, 11,804 acres, occurred in Washtenaw County during the four year period. The overall gain in agricultural land in the eight county southeast Michigan region was 33,230 acres. 4 . Con cl usions The 1982 increase in total agricultural acreage is a reversal of trends that occurred between previous Agricuitural Censuses. Why did the decline in agricultural land reverse during the 1982 Census 15•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT �Figure 6 TOTAL CROPLAND ACREAGE 1964-1982 Monroe County. Michigan jJ ,.__ <D . C\I 230 "It" C\I C\I <D ... 0) ,.... ('I) C\I C\I ,.__ ('I) 220 . C\I ... ('I) 210 -0 0 0 ('I) ,... "It" C\I . ('I) ,.__ 0) "It" 0 C\I 0 C\I 200 )( Q) 0) 190 ."' CD () c( 180 ...-"' 170 0 160 1964 1969 1974 1978 1982 SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•l6 �........ • > C') -n ::0 C: Figure 7 I""' ~ C: = > PERCENTAGE OF FARMLAND Southeast Michigan 1982 C"" n 0 3: "'ti 0 2 rr, 2 ~ ,., ,., • ,. ,., ,., ♦ X YI ·-· ,., : ~ ,., . ,.. . . . . . .. ~ I 1 m~11i1~1i1}1i~I~i~1 MONROE LENAWEE f ~ MI CHIG AN o'i➔to- - -1----·~ l Less Than 10% 10- 29% 30-49% More Than 50% l SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE .,..,, �'., \1 ___ • Figure 8 AVERAGE VALUE PER FARM ACRE Southeast Michigan 1982 30 0 0 ~ 28 X 24 w => ..J 20 < > w C, 2647 2592 1952 1701 16 1669 1479 < a: 12 > < 8 1392 1151 w > ::a C) - 4 .., 0 n C: r"' C: ' ::a > r"' n 0 3: ~ 0 o<v ~Q!- ~o ~<v<v ~~ v«; 0~ ~"' ~~ 0 V' ~<Q cP ~~ ~Q ~v~ 0~ ~q;. c,V c.,~. ~ <v~~ ~ ~~<v ~~ ~t:o ~ 2! m ..,2! ....00• SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE �~ '°>• G') -= Figure 9 ( ') NUMBER OF FARMS C: I"" 1978-1982 -t Southeast Michigan C: = > ... ....... I"" (') 0 ...,3: 18 0 - -t - :z ITI :z 0 0,... X a: w al ~ :J z :E a: < u. 0 al CIO (I) --~ 1978 ~ 1982 1111 ~ 16 al CD ....... (II -= (II IO 14 - Regional To tal - ....__ \ ~ '-- ) ) ---- - 6 - ... ... a> i-- - _ CD 2 ) ----- )) L-- - - "- - . o<v ~~ ~o ~<v<v <v~,.. ) i-- V (II al U) (I) ) - ) vN~ (I) (I) ) --- )..J', ) ) ) ) - y )) - )) _)) ~<o c,O ~~ ~q;. ~Q ~'v~ 0~ c,'v ~- c_, (I) - ~ ~ i-- a> ... ... ~ ~ 0~ ~,<;. C> ) ,__)) 0 ) "V 0 CD - - )) - - (I) (I) - ) a> CD M: ) ) l i-- CD CD - 4 (') - ,__ ~ ) - .... .-- '-- (I) 0 )) (II - (II (I) (I) -- - 8 0 (I) .... )) 1978-876 0 1982-85~ 7 2.7% ...... (II 12 10 - -== ~ <v~,.. ~ ,..<?, )) ~,. ..J..~<v ~ sornce: U.S. CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE ... �of Agriculture? A number of factors may partially explain this. The region experienced a significant increase in the total housing stock after World War II until 1979. Land was needed to meet this demand for housing, and agricultural land near urban areas was both convenient and inexpensive. Construction of the interstate, state and local highway systems made commuting easier and funding for public water and sewer systems more easily obtained than today. These factors all contributed to the increase in the number of shopping centers and subdivisions that were developed during this period. The development of neighboring land for residential and commercial purposes affected the assessment of agricultural land causing real estate taxes to increase in many instances. For many farmers, this trend towards more development coupled with the rising costs of machinery, seeds, pesticides and fertilizer forced them to question the cost of farming as compared to other alternatives. In the face of these trends, many farmers sold their land to developers or sold small parcels to former urban residents as future home sites. Residential property tax assessments increased land values even higher and the cycle continued. The mid-70's brought some changes which influenced this trend. As a result of the oil embargo, energy prices skyrocketed and it became more expensive to commute to the outlying suburbs. Recessions in 1974-75 and the early 1980's brought high levels of unemployment. Tied with high inflation rates, building new homes and shopping centers was an expense that few people could afford. Federal funding for water and sewer line extensions became less available during this period. The cumulative effect of these changes appears to be that the demand for agricultural land for urban development may be decreasing. The increasing costs of farming without a corresponding increase in the prices received for agricultural products has cut into the profit margin for farmers, forcing them to increase the amount of acreage in cultivation in order to increase profits. Improved management practices have also enabled farmers to cultivate acreage previously considered marginal, further improving existing crop yields. These factors may help partially account for the increase in the amount of land being farmed between 1978 and 1982. It is probably premature to speculate whether or not the 1982 increase in total farm and total cultivated acreage are exceptions to an overall decline in agriculture or whether they represent the start of a new trend. The statistics are, however, encouraging as they represent a positive indicator of the stability of agriculture in Monroe County. It is equally clear that agriculture is an extremely important part of both the state and local economy and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. AGRJCUL TURAL COMPONE N T• 20 �The State of Michigan, for example, has identified food processing as one of the target industries which are being sought by Michigan industrial developers. Michigan currently imports over one-half of its entire food supply. Many farm commodities are grown in the state and shipped to other states for processing and then imported to the state as retail products. This situation creates a potential for more fully developing the food processing industry in Michigan. A second factor which could influence farming in this state is the increasing demand for U.S. agricultural products worldwide. This demand could be a considerable advantage for a state like Michigan, which has a well developed agricultural industry. Monroe County, as one of the most productive agricultural counties in southeast Michigan, is well situated to participate in the future growth of agriculture in Michigan, thereby making preservation of the county's productive agricultural land even more important. r 21 •AGRICULTURAL CO MPO N EN T �METHODOLOGY CHAPTER3 �ft • • The purpose of this methodology is to identify Monroe County's best farmland which should be retained for continued agricultural production during the time frame of this comprehensive plan. Monroe County is not the first community to attempt such a project. Similar studies have been undertaken by other communities throughout the country at varying levels of sophistication. A common denominator of all these studies, however, is an identification of those key factors which have an influence on whether or not a given parcel of land is well suited for farming. The methodology used here was borrowed from the Washtenaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission , which under t ook a similar study in 1981. The basis of this methodology is an analysis of six fundamental factors which have a direct influence on the ability of a parcel to support farming. It can also be applied to other communities across the state since the information sources used in this study are readily available and easy to use. This methodology is described in more detail below. A. Physical Criteria The suitability of land for farming is obviously highly dependent on the physical characteristics of the land. namely soil conditions. Soil characteristics have perhaps the most significant influence on whether or not a parcel can support large scale agricultural production. Three physical characteristics have been taken into consideration in an attempt to identify highly productive agricultural land within Monroe County. These include prime agricultural soils, Class II soils, and soils that are capable of producing over 100 bushels of corn per acre. These three physical characteristics were selected because they could be easily measured, defended, and were not subject to change. While the following three physical characteristics are not meant to be exhaustive, they do represent important factors that have a direct influence on the suitability of land for farming. All three of these physical criteria utilize soil data available through the Soil Survey of Monroe County which was completed in 1981 by the United States Department of Agriculture. Each of these three physical factors is discussed in more detail below. 1. " Prime Agricultural Soils The soil survey identifies 25 individual soil types which are considered very well suited for farming. The U.S. Department of Agriculture discusses the characteristics of these prime agricultural soils in the following narrative : AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•22 �"Prime agricult u ral soils . . are t hose soils that are best s u ited to producing food, forage, fiber and oilseed crops. Su ch soils have soil properties that are favorable for the economic production of sustained high yields of crops. The soils need to be treated an d managed u sing acceptable farming methods. The moisture supply, of course, mu st be adequate, and the growing season has to be sufficiently long. Prime farmland soils may presently be used as cropland, pasture, or woodland, or they may be in other land uses. Urban and built-up land or water areas cannot be considered prime farmland. Prime farmland soils usually get an adequate and dependable supply of moisture from precipitation or irrigation. The temperature and growing season are favorable. The soils have few or no rocks and are permeable to water and air. They are not excessively ero d ible or saturated with water for long periods and are not fre quently flooded during the growing season. The slope ranges mainly from Oto 6 percent. Soils that have limitations - highwater table, subject to flooding, or dro u ghtiness - may qu alify as prime farmland soils if the limitations are overcome by such measures as drainage, flood control, or irrigation. Onsite evaluation is necessary to determine the effectiveness of corrective measures". (prime agricultural soils are illustrated on map 1) 2. Class II Soils This land classification indicates the suitability of soil types for field crops . The classes are gro u ped I th r o u gh VIII with the first category having the fewest limitations for farming and the latter having the most. The highest soil capability classification in Monroe County is Class II. Class II soils are those that have "moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants or that require moderate conservation practices" . The major limitations of these soils are erosion, wetness, s h allowness or the presence of stones. Corrective measures on the part of the farmer may be necessary to mitigate these problems. Class II soils in Monroe County are capable of producing corn yields of 90 bushels or more per acre and are also included in the prime agricultural classification identified earlier. See Map 2. 23•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT 1 1 ] J �3. High Yield Soils A third physical characteristic that was considered is soils that are capable of producing high crop yields. The criteria that was chosen for this study were soils that are capable of producing 100 bushels of corn or more per acre. Most of the soils that were included in this criteria are also considered prime agricultural soils and/or Class II soils. Several high yielding soils, however, were not included in either category. Approximately 65 percent of the county's soils are capable of producing 100 bushels of corn or more per acre. See Map 3 . ..., B. Social & Economic Criteria The capability of soils to support agriculture is obviously very important for determining the suitability of a given parcel for supporting large scale farming. Soil factors, however, should not be the sole determinant in the identification of prime agricultural land. Other social and economic factors also have an influence on whether or not a parcel will be used for agriculture or converted to another use. The three factors that were selected as the relevant social and economic factors include parcels enrolled in Public Act 116, parcels over 40 acres in size and existing farm operations. These factors are useful indicators of valuable farmlands since they demonstrate a committment on the part of a landowner to continue to use his property for agricultural purposes. 1. Parcels Enrolled in Public Act 116 In 1974, the governor signed into law Public Act 116, the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Act. Act 116 enables a landowner to enter into a development rights agreement with the state. The landowner receives specific tax benefits in return for agreeing to maintain his land for either agricultural or· open space purposes for a specified period of time (minimum ten years). In order to qualify, the farm must be 40 or more acres in size, have a gross annual income of $200 or more per tillable acre, or be a designated specialty farm. See Map 4. Over 20 percent of the county's total acreage is enrolled in the Farmland and Open Space Program. The western Monroe County communities of Milan Township, Summerfield Township and Whiteford Township each had over one-third of their total land area enrolled in this program. This particular factor is considered important because it indicates a commitment on the part of the land owner to maintain his property for farming for at least ten years. 2. Large Parcels Parcel size and shape has an important influence on the viability of a given area for long term agricultural production. Large parcels with regular shapes lend themselves more readily to farming than smaller parcels that have been split up for non-agricultural purposes. Larger parcels are also more likely to remain as active farms than smaller parcels. Those parcels that are 40 acres in size or larger were considered highly suited for farming. This data was obtained through the property tax maps available through the Monroe County Equalization Department. See Map 5. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 24 �3. Existing Farms Land that is currently being used for farming was the final factor that was considered as part of this study. This criteria was selected because it also demonstrated an obvious commitment to farming. A large percentage of the county is being actively farmed, as shown on Map 6. This information was obtained by reviewing 1980 aerial photography. Composite maps for each one of these factors were prepared using 1:2000 scale county base maps. A grid composed of cells approximating 160 acres was constructed. This grid was placed over each of the six criteria maps individually. When one-half of the grid cell was covered by the criteria, the entire 160 acre area was coded as meeting that criteria and marked accordingly. The results for all six criteria were tabulated for each grid square. Next, definitions of essential (Class A), secondary (Class B) and reserve (Class C) farmland were tabulated based on the results of the coding. The definitions for each of these three categories are included below. (To be classified as A, B, or C, the parcel had to be an existing farm.) • Class A Farmland - This category includes land with strong physTcal-and-socio-economic characteristics. Farmland within this category meets 2 or 3 physical characteristics and 2 or 3 socio-economic characteristics. These include farms with very productive soils that remain part of large acreage holdings and/or had been enrolled in the P.A. 116 program. • Class B Farmland - Included in this category is land with very-strong physical characteristics and moderately good socio-economic characteristics. Land within this classification meets 2 or 3 physical characteristics and only one socio-economic characteristic. Typically, farms that meet this definition were located on very productive soils, but the size of the parcel was small and no steps had been taken to enroll the property in the P.A. 116 program. • Class C Farmland - The final category includes land with only-moderately good soils but strong socio-economic characteristics. This classification met one physical criteria and 2 or 3 socio-economic criteria. These are areas with farms that may not have the best soils, but are either large farms or are enrolled in the Farmland and Open Space Program. C. Citizen Participation Process The preceding methodology provided a good first step towards identifying Monroe County's best farmlands. This system did, however, leave several important gaps in the preliminary agricultural map. 25•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT l I 1 �... r MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT MAP 1 [I§] PRIME AGRICULTURAL SOILS ,,,,,-:.• > '!t>• ...,• C'} -n::a t C: r-t C: ::a > r- n 0 ~ "O 0 z z ITI -i • ~ °' ~ 0 I 1 I ;;;; 2 3 I I ~ • I Scale In Mlleo I I MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT l COMMISSION �~ -.J • )> G") c::: ::io (") MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: r- -t C: ::io )> r- AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT e") 0 3: MAP 2 "ti [§IT] 0 :z m :z CLASS II SOILS -t :-.• '<;.. ... ...,• -- 0 1 I I 2 I S I t ' I I I liiiiiiil Scale In MIi•• MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMMISSION ~ ] �! MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT MAP 3 '.•.• [filfilill HIGH YIELD SOILS (100 plus bu.lac re corn) '<,~· ~· > ..,,• C) = - t (j C r- -1 C = > r- (j 0 :: "'O 0 2 rr, 2 -I • N 00 ::, ,:.: 9J -- 0 1 2 3 I I I I 4 I S eal• In MIi•• a I MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMMISSION �~ \0 >• ::a C) - ( ') C: MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: r- -f C: ::a MILAN > r- El 0 c::e3ETON (') AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT 0 ~ A~WNSHP -a 0 2 0 .. MAP 4 □ r-{:};~ @]fil] tTI FARMLAND AGREEMENTS (P.A. 116) 2 -f :-.• «t' i ~· ..,,• □ CJ 0 t 2 3 4 I I I I I I I c;;;; ~ Scale In Mlle ■ ~ ~ MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMMISSION ......, ~ M .,,..., ,M �1 MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT MAP 5 t::=:::=:::::q LARGE PARCELS (40 plus acre lots) <t}~• ! ~· > ..,• C') = -r, C: r- -I C: = > r- r, 0 ~ ,:, 0 2! ITI 2! -I • c,,-, 0 w~ :::: ,::: . D D□ D 0 1 2 I I I I I 4 I II I iiiiiiii Scale In MIi•• MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMM1SSION �.... ~ >• ::a C, -n C MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: r- -f C ::a > rn AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT 3: MAP 6 0 "O 0 brtn :z m :z EXISTING FARMLANDS -f l• )~1SW>1'◊~1 i ... !l!llill!::1:1::1:::11::::1:::iit ;;:,;,>•·· ..,• 0 2 :S 4 I I I I I I !iiiiiiiiiiil Scale 1ft MU•• MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT I. COMMISSION �~ ' MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: r~:wi ~;:f~ AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT MAP 7 §a CLASS A FARMLANDS 8]]] CLASS B FARMLANDS 1111 CLASS C FARMLANDS • I()" ~· 'y. > G"> - t ::i::, ("') C: BEDFOROo r- -1 C ::i::, > r("') 0 ~ "O 0 z z !'Tl -I • w N) ■ 0 2 3 4 I I I I I I liiiiiiii Scala In MIia• MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMMISSION �Some very productive farmland in the county was omitted from the preliminary agricultural map because of some minor flaws in the original methodology. The first flaw involved the level of generalization required by the methodology. A minimum land area of 160 acres was used in the preparation of the map. While some level of generalization is necessary when designating land uses on a county-wide basis, it does create a situation where the unique characteristics of some parcels may be overlooked. Conversely, some land that was originally identified as good farmland in the original methodology is currently being used for some obvious non-farm uses and has subsequently been omitted from the final agricultural map. Examples of this include Pointe Mouillee Game area, the Dundee Cement Company property and those portions of the county that are within existing public water and sanitary sewer service areas. The second problem with the methodology is that the soil survey data that was used to measure the suitability of an area for farming contained a bias in favor of field crops, namely corn, soybeans, wheat, etc. Soils that are highly suitable for crops such as potatoes or other vegetables were overlooked. To compensate for these omissions, a second major step was undertaken for the purpose of identifying those additional agricultural lands within the county that should be included on the final agricultural map. This second step involved the participation of key members of the county's agricultural community. Representatives from the following organizations were given an opportunity to comment on the preliminary agricultural map: Monroe County Cooperative Extension Service, Monroe County Soil and Water Conservation Service, Agricultural Conservation and Stabilization Service, and the Michigan Farm Bureau. The preliminary map was also reviewed by 14 of the 15 township planning commissions in Monroe County. Each of these groups were asked to consider the following criteria in revising the preliminary map: • Existing farms that have been farmed for a long period of time and will likely remain in agricultural use in the near future. • Farmland that is characterized by particularily high crop yields. • Vegetable or specialty farms. • Farms where significant improvements and/or investments were made (drainage, erosion controls, animal waste systems, etc.). • Other unique factors that otherwise may not have been taken into consideration as part of the original methodology. 33 • AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �Based upon the comments and suggestions that were received during the public participation process, a final farmland map was prepared. This map includes a two level agricultural land designation: Class A farmland and Class B farmland. This final map is a composite map which reflects the original methodology as well as the suggested additions and deletions that were identified during the citizen participation process. The final results of this process are illustrated on Map 8. This map is described on a township-by-township basis in the following narrative. -- i • Ash Township Approximately one-half of Ash Township has been designated as being highly suited for farming. These areas are confined largely to the western and southern perimeters of the township plus small portions of northern and eastern Ash Township. Large sections of central and northern Ash Township have been excluded from the agricultural designation. This area extends from the Village of Carleton east to Telegraph Road, and north along Interstate 275 to the Wayne County line. This area has been excluded from serious consideration as future agricultural land because of the existing urban development patterns which characterize the area and because of the availability of public water and sanitary sewer lines. The area adjacent to Telegraph Road in the northern two-thirds of Ash Township has been excluded from the agricultural classification because of the township's adopted policy of encouraging growth along this corridor. • Bedford Township Nearly-the-entire township has been excluded from designation as prime agricultural land. A major reason for this is the fact that large portions of the township are heavily urbanized and are served by public water and sanitary sewers. Bedford's best farmland is confined primarily to the extreme northern and eastern portions of the township including the six sections along the Ida Township boundary and some land along the Erie Township boundary. The northwest corner of the township outside of the public utility service area and south of Samaria Road/M-151 has been excluded from either agricultural classification for two reasons: 1) this area is characterized by soils that are considered only marginal for farming; and 2) this area has experienced considerable residential development along the frontage of the township road network. Large woodlots are also located in this area of the township further restricting the use of the land for farming. AGRICULTURAL CO M PONEN T•34 �• Berlin Township Large portions-of Berlin Township have been designated as being highly suited for continued agricultural production. The only large areas excluded from this classification are the Villages of South Rockwood and Estral Beach, Pointe Mouillee State Game Area and the area that is currently being served by the Berlin Township wastewater collection and treatment system. This latter area is confined to the extreme southern end of the township along Swan Creek Road and Trombley Road. The only other portions of the township that were omitted from the agricultural designation include small areas where existing development patterns realistically precluded the land from being used for agricultural purposes. Public water service areas within Berlin Township have largely been ignored in considering whether or not particular areas should be designated as prime agricultural land. Public water lines currently serve nearly the entire townshop. These water lines do not accurately reflect either existing development patterns or planned township growth. • Dundee Township Dundee-Township's best agricultural land is confined primarily to that area of the township lying west of U.S. 23. Another area of prime agricultural land is located north of the Village Dundee and south of Dundee Cement. The remainder of the township was excluded from being designated as prime agricultural land for a number of reasons. Nearly the entire southeast corner of the township, south of Dixon Road, was excluded from the agricultural classification because the existing soils are only marginal for supporting farming. The existing soils are either too san d y or too wet to support large scale agricultural operations . The River Raisin and Saline River flood plains were also excluded for similar reasons. All of the property owned by Dundee Cement was excluded because the long term use of this property is not agricultural. • Erie Township Large portions of Erie Township have been included in the agricultural designation. Several developed areas have, however, been excluded from the classification. The City of Luna Pier and the unincorporated Village of Erie have both been excluded because existing development patterns have largely precluded the use of this land for farming in the near future . The more urbanized areas adjacent to the City of Toledo have also been excluded for similar reasons. The flood prone areas of the township along the Lake Erie shoreline were not included in the agricultural classification because of a flooding hazard. 35•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �• Exeter Township Exeter-Township is characterized by large areas of land that are considered highly suited for farming. These agricultural areas cover the township fairly uniformly with two major exceptions. The first exception is the Village of Maybee, located in the southwest corner of the township. The entire village area has been excluded from the agricultural classification. This was done to provide some room for future village growth even though several parcels of land within the village are currently being farmed. The excluded areas was also extended to the north and west of the village to encompass other non-farming land uses. To the north, the excluded area includes a quarry located just outside of the village limits. To the west, this area extends into London Township to include a residential subdivision which will shortly be provided with sanitary sewer lines from the Village of Maybee. The other large area that was excluded from the agricultural classification is located in the northwest portion of the township along the Wayne County line. This area was excluded because of poor soil conditions for farming and small parcel sizes. Several other small areas in the east and central portions of the township have been excluded because existing development patterns and/or parcel sizes were not considered suitable for farming. Among these areas is the unincorporated village of Scofield, located at the intersection of Sumpter Road and Scofield Road. • Frenchtown Township Frenchtown Township is fairly equally divided between areas that are suitable for agricultural production and areas that are better suited for urban growth. These latter areas are very extensive, the largest of which is located adjacent to the City of Monroe. This area extends north along Telegraph Road and northeast along North Dixie Highway. Most of the area that has been excluded from the agricultural classification is currently served by public water and sanitary sewer lines. Frenchtown's prime agricultural acreage is located outside of the existing public utility service areas in the northwest and northeast portions of the township. These areas are characterized by reasonably productive agricultural soils that are largely being used for agricultural purposes. • Ida Township lda Townsh1p 1 s best farmland is largely confined to the eastern two-thirds of the township. east of Ann Arbor Railroad line which runs through the township. West of the railroad tracks the soil is only marginal for farming. This area is also characterized by large woodlots, smaller parcel sizes and single family development along the frontages of the township road system. AGRJCUL TUR A L COMPONENT•36 �The remainder of the township, east of the railroad tracks is very highly suited for agricultural production. The only exceptions to this pattern are the established communities of Ida and Lulu as well as two other small concentrations of residential development located in the southeast portion of the township. • LaSalle Township LaSalle Townsh1p is fairly evenly divided between areas that are highly suited for farming and areas that are better suited for other land uses. The prime agricultural areas are confined largely to the western one-third of the township and along the northern boundary of the township between Woodchuck Creek and North Otter Creek Road. Another small agricultural area is located in the southeast corner of the township adjacent to Erie Township. The central portion of LaSalle including the more developed portion of the township and land adjacent to South Dixie Highway and Telegraph Road has been excluded from the agricultural designation. This excluded area is nearly identical to that portion of the township that is currently being served by the south county water distribution system. • London Township Large portTons-of London Township have been identified as being highly suited for farming. The largest such areas are located in the eastern one-third and western one-third of the township respectively. These areas are separated from each other by a broad band of wooded wetlands that are not considered very well suited for farming. Also excluded from the agricultural classification are the Saline River flood plain, the Milan Dragway property, the settlement of Oakville and an extractive operation located in the northeast corner of the township. • Milan Township Extensive portions of Milan Township are considered highly suited for farming. Nearly the entire township has been included in the proposed agricultural classification. There are only several small exceptions to this general pattern. A small area south of the City of Milan extending south along U.S. 23 has been excluded from the agricultural designation. Also excluded is the property owned by Dundee Cement in the southeast corner of the township, the settlements of Cone and Azalia, and Milan Airfield, • Monroe Township Only-small-sections of Monroe Township have been designated as prime agricultural land. The largest of these areas is located in the southwest portion of the township west of Telegraph Road and south of Dunbar Road. The other area is located between South Dixie Highway and Interstate 75 south of LaPlaisance Road. The remainder of the township is clearly more suited for urban development given the availability of public utilities. 37•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �• Raisinville Township Extensive portions of Raisinville Township have been included in the agricultural classification. The township is characterized by highly productive soils which are being used largely for agricultural production. Several exceptions to this general pattern are evident at various locations throughout Raisinville. The most notable exception is the flood plain of the River Raisin extending from the eastern boundary of the township to the western boundary. The remaining areas that have been excluded include small concentrations of urban uses, primarily residential development located in the northeast portion of the township. • Summerfield Township Approximately one-half of Summerfield Township's land area is considered highly suited for farming. These areas are located in the northwest corner of the township, north of the River Raisin and in the southwest portion of the township, south of the City of Petersburg and south of Teal Road. These prime agricultural lands are consistent with the agricultural areas that have been designated as part of the Summerfield Township plan. The eastern half of the township has been excluded from the agricultural category for a number of reasons. The soils in this area are less capable of supporting farming than are the soils in the western portion of the township. This area is also characterized by small lot sizes and considerably more residential development than the other half of the community. The flood plain of the River Raisin has been omitted from the agricultural classification as the soils along the river are not ideally suited for farming. • Whiteford Township Large portions of Whiteford Township have been included in the agricultural designation. Most of the township is characterized by very productive agricultural soils which are currently being used for farming. The only major areas that have been excluded from this classification are located along the eastern and southern boundaries of the township, adjacent to the more urbanized communities of Bedford Township and the City of Sylvania, Ohio. In the western half of the township, the only areas that have been excluded from the agricultural classification are Whiteford Valley Golf Course, the small community of Ottawa Lake and the Dana Corporation property. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•38 �~ \,0 • > C, = ( ') C MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: I"' ~ C = > AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT I"' n .. 0 3: -a 0 2 m r·:::.1 2 ~ ""'. PRIMARY FARMLAND SECONDARY FARMLAND ! '.t-. ,! 0 1 2 3 4 5 I I I I I I liiiiiiiii MAP 8 liiiiiiiii Scale In Mlle• MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT & COMMISSION �- .. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY CHAPTER 4 �r • f l, Identifying the cou nty's most i mpo r ta n t far mlands represents only t h e first step towards retaining t h ese esse n tial resources . The next step involves developing programs to effectively preserve these areas. Most farmland preservation programs, h owever, i n volve t h e imposition of some restrictions on how lan d can b e u se d . In t h e case of agricu l tural preservation, this usually involves some restrictions on the amount of non-farm development that is permitted in an agricultural area. Preserving land for a particular p u rpose, however, runs contrary to some long accepted attitudes about the use of land in this country. Many property owners resist the imposition on any restrictions relating to their ability to use their land for whatever use they feel is most appropriate, or most profitable . This attit u de is firmly rooted in the "laissez-faire" attitude towards o u r land resources that significantly influenced the manner in which this coun try was settled and developed. This attitude has undergone a significant transformation during this century with the introduction of zoning and the imposition of other related land use restrictions. Despite these changes, some of the original "laissez-faire" attit ud e towards the land still exists and mu st be considered in the development of any restrictions on the use of agri cultural land. These attit udes, which are constantly evolving and in a state of flux, represent the context with in wh ich any agricultural preser vatio n effort mu s t functio n. This concl u ding chapter provides a brief summary of the major farmland preservation programs that have been attempted across the United States with particular emphasis on those programs that have been implemented in the State of Michigan. The report will conclude by making some recommendations on how a successf u l agricultural preservation program could be implemented in Monroe County. 1. Inventory of Existing Agricultural Preservation Programs Agricu ltural preservation is not a new concept. Different types of agric ul tural preservation programs have been around for a number of years . These programs may differ in their approach to preserving farmland, but they share one common feature in that they all attempt to prevent or discourage the conversion of farmland to other uses thro u gh the imposition of some controls or by offering some incentives. Incl u ded below is a brief description of the major types of programs that are currently being used to preserve farmland. This is followed by an assessment on the effectiveness of these programs and their applicability to Monroe County. • Tax Relief_Programs Maintaining the economic viability of farming represents a significant incentive to keep land in agricultural production, thereby preventing the conversion of this land to urban uses. To the extent that property taxes affect the economics of farming, tax relief programs are useful tools to preserve farmland. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•40 �Farmland has two values which need to be considered in the development of tax incentives: 1) the value of land for agriculture and 2) the value of farmland for other forms of development. Tax relief programs have two primary benefits; the first is to reduce taxes and the second is to reduce the rate of farmland conversions by curtailing the number of tax motivated sales. One of the most popular forms of tax relief for farmland involves the differential assessment of agricultural property. Differential assessment refers to the assessment for property tax purposes based on the agricultural use of the land rather than its fair market value. Another tax relief program involves the use of tax credits. This type of program allows a farmer to apply some or all of his property taxes as dollar-for-dollar credits against his state income tax. This type of program is based on a farmers net income, and is fairly effective in assisting farmers in urbanizing areas. A third common form of tax relief for agricultural land owners involve estate tax benefits. Federal tax laws were modified in 1976 effectively raising the threshold at which estates are liable for estate taxation and increasing the marital deduction so that at least 70 percent of farm estates are exempted from estate tax liability. Some states have also enacted similar tax reform pro grams. While these programs are useful in helping to deal with farmland conversion, by themselves they do not represent a comprehensive solution to the problem. They are most effective when combined with other types of programs and used as part of a comprehensive farmland preservation strategy. • Agricultural_Districts Agricultural districts involve the designation of a specific geographic area to be used for agricultural purposes. The designation of agricultural districts is normally combined with other programs which are designed to protect the integrity of farming. The concept of agricultural districts is based on the premise that if farmers are given an incentive to farm a district where farming is the principal activity, they may effectively protect themselves from those influences which affect the viability of farming. Agricultural districts provide a geographical and organizational framework within which certain incentives and safeguards can be made available to farmers. Their effectiveness as a way to reduce the rate of farmland conversion depends on the particular combination of elements that they include. • Right-to-Farm Legislation Right-to-farm legislation protects farmers from bejng subject to nuisance suits from neighboring non-farm land owners who find certain aspects of farming offensive. This type of legislation 4 l•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �can be effective in protecting farmers who live near urbanized areas and are subject to increasing pressures because of the close proximity of non-farm uses. Such legislation effectively serves notice to the non-farm land owner, typically a residential property, that the farmer was there first and that he is entitled to use his land for agricultural purposes without fear of nuisance litigation from adjoining property owners. Right-to-farm legislation does not, however, give the farmer exclusive rights to annoy his neighbor. Most legislation of this variety requires the farmer to follow accepted farming practices. To the extent that a farmer threatens public health or safety through his actions, his neighbors have a legal recourse to object and btain relief. • Agricultural_Zonin~ Zoning represents perhaps the most common form of development control in this county. It is not surprising therefore that zoning has been used extensively for the purpose of preserving farmland. The most important characteristic of agricultural zoning is the extent to which it limits the intrusion of nonagricultural uses into agricultural areas. - - Two basic types of agricultural zoning are being practiced today: 1) non-exclusive agricultural zoning, and 2) exclusive agricultural zoning. Non-exclusive agricultural zoning is the most common of these two forms. Non-farm dwellings are permitted in non-exclusive agricultural zoning districts, usually with some restrictions, however. Larger lot sizes may also be required. Exclusive agricultural districts, on the other hand, prohibit non-farm uses and establish performance criteria for defining a farm, rather than simply using large lot sizes. Any request to develop non-farm related buildings are subject to individual review. This form of zoning is more effective in limiting the intrusion of urban uses into agricultural areas than is nonexclusive agricultural zoning. • Purchase or Transfer of Development ~i~h!S This concept refers to either the purchase or the transfer of the right to develop a parcel of land which in turn may be used in conjunction with another parcel of land. Both of these programs recognize the value of farmland for non-farm development and attempt to deal with this reality in a way that benefits the landowner without losing farmland. With the purchase of development rights, these rights are actually acquired by a public body for a specific cost. The transfer of development rights also involves the acquisition of the rights to develop a parcel, in this case by a private developer, and the subsequent assignments of those rights to another parcel outside of the agricultural area. Each program provides the farmer with some monetary benefits that he would derive if his property were sold for development purposes wh.ile at the same time allowing him to continue farming. A G R ICULT UR AL C OM P ONENT• 42 �While these two concepts are theoretically good responses to the farmland conversion problem, neither one has been successfully implemented to a great extent. The problem with the purchase of development rights is obvious. It is extremely expensive to implement and only a limited number of communities are willing to ~llocate scarce governmental funds that are required for a successful program. A transfer of development rights program must be organized so that it can operate effectively with the private market system relative to land development. This is not easy to accomplish, however, which explains the fact this programs has not been successfully implemented on a large scale basis. • Comprehensive Planning Comprehensive planning is a process leading to the adoption of policies regarding land use, transportation, housing, public facilities, and economic and social issues. It may include a land use plan designating locations for particular uses and a program for providing transportation, utilities and other public facilities. In most states, the plan is not legally binding on governments or individuals. A few states, however, require that zoning and other major facility plans be consistent with comprehensive plans. The plan may also be used to designate a community's most important agricultural resources. In this way, a comprehensive plan serves as the foundation upon which other agricultural preservation programs may be based. No discussion of farmland preservation could be complete without some discussion of the role of the federal government in this process. State and local governments clearly are the main actors in the development and implementation of agricultural preservation programs. Actions at the federal level, however, have a clear, albeit an indirect, influence on the conversion of agricultural land. Federal funding programs for many public works projects, including highway, utility and water development projects, for example, have had a significant impact on the use of land for agriculture. Many of these programs have, in fact, resulted in the loss of many acres of prime agricultural land. ·while some federal agencies, notably the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U. S . Environmental Protection Agency, have taken steps to determine the impacts of their programs on agricultural land and have taken steps to mitigate these impacts, no comprehensive federal approach to this issue has yet been implemented. In the late 1970's, a bill was introduced in Congress to begin to focus federal attention on this issue. This measure failed to pass Congress, however, in large part because of a concern that it was thought that this legislation would give the federal government a role in regulating land use at the state and local levels, thereby usurping existing lines of authority. This reluctance on the part of the federal government to become a direct partner in the agricultural preservation process means that any future farmland preservation efforts will be determined at the local level. 43•AGRICUL TURA L C OMPONENT �2. Agricultural Preservation in Michigan Several programs have been developed within the State of Michigan at both the state and the local level for the purpose of preserving prime agricultural land . On a state-wide basis, the most significant program is the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Program, commonly referred to act Public Act 116. This program provides agricultural property owners with tax advantages for agreeing to continue to use their property for specified agricultural purposes for a given period of time. Michigan also recently enacted rightto-farm legislation which gives farmers protection from litigation by adjacent non-farm land owners who find particular aspects of farming either annoying or a nuisance. At the local level, farmland preservation efforts consist largely of the development of agricultural zoning districts. Each of these programs are discussed in more detail below. - • Far~laE_<!_and Open Space Preservation Program (P.A. _116) Concerned about the alarming rate of farmland conversion, the State of Michigan enacted this program in 1974. In order to be eligible for inclusion in this program, the property under consideration must meet certain requirements. The farm must have a minimum total size of 40 acres. Farms between 5 and 40 acres may also qualify, provided that they have a gross annual income of $200 per tillable acre. Specialty farms which meet the requirements of the Michigan Department of Agriculture may also qualify for the program if their gross income is $2,000 or more. As the name of the program implies, open space areas may also qualify for the benefits available through P.A. 116. Open space areas, like farmland, however, must meet specific eligibility requirements. Historic riverfront and shoreline areas, for example, must be undeveloped. In addition, the riverfront or shoreline must be located along a river that has been recognized by the Natural Rivers Act of 1970 or designated as an environ mental area by the Shorelands Protection and Management Act of 1970. Historic properties must be recognized by appropriate state or federal laws. Open space areas, according to the text of the legislation, may also include lands which ''conserve natural or scenic resources, enhance recreational opportunities, promotes the conservation of soils, wetlands and beaches, or preserves historic sites and idle farmland . " These agreements run for a minimum of ten years and entitle the landowner to several benefits. Parcels enrolled in the P.A. 116 program may be exempted from special assessments for sanitary sewers, water or street lights. The property owner may also claim the amount by which the property taxes on the enrolled acreage exceed seven percent of his household income on his Michigan income tax. For those parcels enrolled in the open space program, the property is reappraised and the difference between the current market value of the unrestricted property and the value of the property is used to calculate the direct tax saving. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT•44 �The Farmland and Open Space Preservation program has proven to be fairly successful among property owners and a direct result of that popularity has been a reasonably successful tool for minimizing the extent of farmland conversion throughout the State of Michigan. Since its inception in 1974, a total of 17,500 property owners have entered into contracts with the State of Michigan effectively enrolling approximately 3,550,000 acres in the program. In Monroe County, a total of 70,042 acres have been enrolled in the program representing nearly 20 percent of the county's total land area. The greatest participation in the program within the county is in the four western townships of Milan, Dundee, Summerfield and Whiteford. Each township has over 30 percent of their respective land areas enrolled in the P.A. 116 program. • ~i~h!-!o=F~r~ !c! In 1981, the Michigan legislature passed "right-to-farm" legislation, the intent of which is to give farmers some protection against nuisance suits filed by adjoining non-farm property owners. The legislation itself is meant to be non-regulatory in nature and is intended to establish a general policy regarding the relationship of agricultural land to non-agricultural land. The intent of this bill is clearly expressed in the following passages taken directly from the legislation. Sec.3(1) A farm or farm operation shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance if the farm or farm operation alleged to be a nuisance conforms to generally accepted agricultural and management practices according to policy as determined by the director of the Department of Agriculture. (2) A farm or farm operation shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance if the farm or farm operation existed before a change in land use or occupancy of land within one mile of the boundaries of the farmland and before such change in land use or occupancy of land the farm operation would not have been a nuisance. The Michigan Department of Agriculture has subsequently developed guidelines for different categories of agricultural operations for the purpose of assisting in the interpretation of this legislation. Included below is a policy statement developed by the Department of Agriculture relative to this legislation. It is the policy of the Director of the Department of of Agriculture that a "farm operation" shall be conducted with due consideration to noise, dust, odors and fumes normally associated with such an operation. A farm operation shall not be restricted to a time of day or days of the week but shall be conducted according to generally accepted agricultural and management practices. Agricultural and management practices are in turn subject to varying conditions, which include but are not limited to: geographical location, weather; soil type and conditions, type of crop or livestock and management system. 45•AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT �• l r r [ -- The ultimate impact and overall effectiveness of this legislation will depend on court interpretation of the act, especially the concept of "generally accepted agricultural practices". This legislation does, however, represent another positive step towards the development of a comprehensive agricultural preservation program for the State of Michigan. • Agricultural_ZoninK State actions not withstanding, the real battle for the preservation of farmland is being determined at the local level. Any attempt to preserve farmland requires the ability to control the use of land, especially the encroachment of urban uses into existing agricultural areas. Within the State of Michigan, the authority to control land use has been allocated to local units of government in the form of zoning. The ability of a local unit of government to preserve farmland, therefore, rests heavily on the requirements of their local zoning ordinances. For all its potential as a useful agricultural preservation technique, zoning more often than not falls far short of its expectations. Many agricultural zoning districts are agricultural in name only and represent little more than holding zones for future urban development. Also, somewhat ironically, farmers themselves often represent obstacles to the establishment of effective agricultural zoning districts. A farmer may not wish to preclude an opportunity to sell his property for non-farm development at a future date through the imposition of strict land use controls. Finally, zoning changes at the local level are often relatively easy to obtain, thereby diluting the intended effectiveness of an agricultural zoning district. The ability of a local community to restrict development through the establishment of agricultural zoning districts rest largely on two major factors: 1) the exclusion or near exclusion of nonfarm land uses within agricultural districts; and 2) the establishment of sufficiently large minimum lot sizes to discourage the development of single family homes in agricultural areas. Large lots, however, also take away more land per house which can contribute to the loss of farmland unless lot sizes are set sufficiently high enough to effectively discourage non-farm residential development. Fourteen of the fifteen townships in Monroe County have developed agricultural zoning districts (Exeter Township is currently in the process of developing a zoning ordinance). The characteristics of these ordinances are displayed in Table 4. Minimum lot sizes with these agricultural districts range from 0.69 acres in Raisinville Township to 40 acres in Milan Township. Each township permits the development of non-farm single family dwellings in agricultural districts with the exception of London Township and Summerfield Township which prohibit this form of development in their respective Prime Agricultural Districts. The 40 acre minimum lot size requirement in Milan Township is also effective in limiting nonfarm residential development in the agricultural district. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 46 �Minimum acreage requirements of five or ten acres are not effective in limiting the amount of non-farm development that may occur in an agricultural area. These minimum requirements may, in fact, be more wasteful of land than one or two acre minimums. Many non-farmers who develop single family homes in agricultural districts, actually prefer five or ten acre estates to smaller lots. The placement of a single family home on these parcels, however, only occupies a small portion of the lot with most of the remaining acreage not being used for any productive purpose. This particular problem is compounded by the State of Michigan's current subdivision regulations which do not regulate the division of land into parcels exceeding ten acres in size. This results in a proliferation of parcels which barely exceed the ten acre limit and are often long and narrow. Such parcels frequently have unsuitable access, may have limited useage, or result in misuse of prime agricultural land. Any attempt to develop an effective agricultural zoning district needs to recognize the dynamics and realities of the private land development market and the interest of many farmers to split off several acres of his property for the eventual development of non-farm related single family homes. The integrity of the agricultural zoning district and the needs of the property owner can be balanced by allowing for a limited single family residential development. This can be effectively accomplished by developing a sliding scale whereby the number of permitted single family units is based on the size of the existing agricultural parcels. Larger parcels are allowed more lot splits than smaller parcels. The sliding scale technique is made more effective when it is accompanied by a requirement that these non-farm residential units be clustered together in a specific portion of the original parcel. This helps maintain the integrity of the agricultural district. Conc lus ions The importance of Michigan's prime agricultural acreage to the economic well being of the entire state in general and to Monroe County in particular is a well established fact. Given this importance, the development of programs to preserve this agricultural land should be apparent. The State of Michigan recognizes the importance of agriculture to the state and has developed a number of programs which are intended to help maintain the viability of agriculture. The Farmland and Open Space Program, the Right-to-Farm Act and the identification of food processing as a target industry by the Michigan Department of Commerce each represent positive steps forward in the maintenance and preservation of Michigan's most productive agricultural land. These existing state policies could be enhanced by the revision of the state's subdivision regulations to modify existing land subdivision practices which help promote the conversion of prime agricultural land to non-farm uses. 4 7•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �Table 4 CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICTS Monroe County, Michigan ZONING DISTRICT LOT SIZE (Acree) FRONT AGE (Feet) Ash Agricultural Preservation and Rural Estates 1.5(1) 330 Bedford Agricultural 5 330 Berlin Agricultural 1 150 Dundee Agricultural 10 300/660/190(2) Erie Agricultural 5(3) 100 Frenchtown Agricultural 5 300 Ida Agricultural 1.43 300 LaSalle Restricted Agricultural Agricultural 1. 7 1.4 300 250 London Prime Agricultural Reserve Agricultural 20 5 660 330 ~Ii lan Prime Agricultural 40 660 '!!!" Monroe Agricultural 5 250 - Raisinville Agricultural 0.69 150 Summerfield Prime Agricultural District 2.3 Acres (100,000 sq. ft.) 500 Reserve Agricultural District 1.4 Acres (60,000 sq. ft.) 300 TOWNSHIP l - Whiteford i1 fl General Agricultural Reserve Agricultural 5 5 (1) A 5 acre minimum lot size is required for non-farm residential uses in this district. All general agricultural uses require a minimum lot size of 10 acres. (2) 300 feet of frontage is required for parcels 10 acres or larger, 660 feet is required for parcels less than 10 acres; 190 feet is required for residential homesteads . (3) Some uses may be permitted on lots with a minimum area of 20,000 square feet and a minimum width of 100 feet . 330 330 AG R ICULTURAL C OM PO NE N T •48 �Within Monroe County, the importance of preserving prime agricultural land is well recognized also. The important role of agriculture is recognized in both township land use plans and zoning ordinances; many of which have established agricultural districts for the expressed purpose of preserving prime agricultural land. Several of these plans and ordinances are more effective than others in accomplishing this objective. Other zoning ordinances and plans need to be modified in order to be more effective tools for preserving farmland. Local units of government should be encouraged to consider making these necessary revisions. Monroe County is also fortunate to have a well organized and informed agricultural community which represents a natural constituency to support the development of more effective farmland preservation programs. Many local farmers are members of local planning commissions and are therefore in a position to help establish agricultural preservation policies at the local level. There is also a great deal of cooperation among existing agricultural service organizations in promoting and encouraging agriculture in the county. The Cooperative Extension Service, Soil and Water Conservation District and the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service are important components of any successful agricultural preservation program. Some consideration was also given to the extent to which other agricultural preservation programs should be introduced to Monroe County. Many of the programs that have been implemented in other areas of the country require action by state legislatures, and are therefore beyond the scope of this plan in terms of implementation. Other, more unique farmland preservation programs, such as transfer of development rights or purchase of development rights, are either too expensive or too complicated to administer to be given serious consideration for implementation in Monroe County. These techniques are also better suited for use in agricultural areas that are experiencing extensive urban development pressures. This is not the case in Monroe County with the exception of some agricultural areas adjacent to the county's more urbanized communities. To be successful, any agricultural preservation progr~m has to consider the social, political and economic context within which it must function. Existing state legislation relative to farmland preservation establishes the larger context within which local programs will operate. Local communities are left to determine the exact nature of the farmland preservation programs that are best suited for their individual communities. Establishing a county-wide policy is difficult considering the fact that land use controls are administered at the township, city or village level. Given these factors, the most appropriate strategy is to continue nurturing the positive attitude that already exists on the part of local units of government relative to agricultural preservation. This can be accomplished by encouraging local units of government to continue modifying their land use plans and zoning ordinances to discourage the conversion of farmland to urban uses, and to discourage the premature extension of public utilities into prime agricultural areas. These activities can be important in maintaining the stability and viability of agriculture in Monroe County. 49•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT �The Monroe County Planning Commission can help facilitate the preservation of farming through the following actions: • Encouraging local units of government to adopt more effective agricultural zoning districts that discourage the development of nonfarm single family residential units. This can be done through the Partners-in-Planning Program. • Work with local communities to revise their existing land use plans to give a more prominent place to agricultural land. This can also be accomplished through the Partners-in-Planning Program. • Discourage the premature extension of public water and sanitary sewer lines into those areas of the county that are characterized by prime agricultural land. The regional clearinghouse review process is one tool that can be used to accomplish this objective. • Discourage the rezoning of agricultural land to non-farm uses. • Encourage property owners to enroll prime agricultural land into the P.A. 116 Farmland and Open Space Preservation Program, and continue monitoring the amount of farmland in Monroe County that is enrolled in the program. • Continue working with the Monroe County Industrial Development Corporation and the Monroe County Chamber of Commerce on the expansion of existing agricultural-related businesses and the development of new agribusinesses. • Work with the Monroe County Cooperative Extension Service and the Monroe County Soil and Water Conservation District on farmland preservation issues. -n AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 50 �n ffl n -n BIBLIOGRAPHY �A number of definitive texts have been published in the last several years regarding the issue of farmland preservation. Several of these publications were used extensively in the preparation of this study. Without these publications, the completion of this study would not have been possible. A complete list of these reference materials is included below. 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture. National Agricultural Lands Study Final Report. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. January, 1981 2. Coughlin, Robert E., and Keene, John C., National Agricultural Lands Study. The Protection of Farmland: A Reference Guidebook for State and Local Governments. U.S. Government Printing Office. 3. Fletcher, W. Wendell, and Little, Charles E., The American Cropland Crisis, Bethesda, Maryland. The American Land Forum, 1982. 4. Kestenbaum, Martha J., Food Processing Opportunities in Southeast Michigan, Detroit, Michigan. Detroit Edison Company - Market Development. January, 1983. 5. U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Survey of Monroe County, Michigan. · November, 1981. 6. U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Agriculture 1982. 7. Michigan Department of Agriculture Guidelines on the Right to Farm Act. Soil A few comments regarding the use of these reference materials is also appropriate. In several instances, direct passages from these sources have been included in the text. The use of footnotes, however, has been eschewed to facilitate the easier reading of the report. Since this report is not intended to have an academic orientation, we felt that this approach of citing references at the end of the report was justified. Acknowledging references, however, is obviously important. For this reason, the following list has been prepared which highlights on a chapter-by-chapter basis those publications that were used to prepare each section of the report. • Chapter One Two primary sources were used in preparing this overview of agriculture: the final report of the National Agricultural Lands Study and the American Cropland Crisis. Each publication provides a lucid and incisive explanation of those factors that have a direct influence on agriculture in the United States today. AGRICULTURAL COMPONENT• 51 �• Chapter Two The primary source used to prepare this chapter was the U.S. Census of Agriculture. Data for each census between 1959 to 1982 represents the primary data source for agricultural information relating to Monroe County and the surrounding counties of southeast Michigan. Another useful source was the market development report on food processing prepared by the Detroit Edison Company. This particular report was used to help describe the economic importance of agriculture to the State of Michigan. • Chapter Three The Monroe County Soil Survey was used to describe the characteristics of the different soil types that are considered highly suitable for agriculture. • Chapter Four The National Agricultural Lands Study, specifically the publication entitled The Protection of Farmlands: A Reference Guide for State and Local Governments, was used extensively in the preparation of this final chapter. Many of the descriptions of the different farmland preservation programs that are being used throughout the country were taken directly from this publication. Descriptions of the Michigan Farmland and Open Space Preservation Program, and the Right to Farm legislation were taken from printed descriptions of each program which have been developed by the State of Michigan. Existing zoning ordinances for each township were also used for information on the requirements of their respective agricultural zoning districts. f f 52•AGRICUL TURAL COMPONENT - �MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Richard Petticrew, Chairman Frank Kuron, Vice-Chairman Dwight DuRocher, Member Richard Reed, Member Dorothy Navarre, Member Jerry McKart, Member Frank DeSloover, Member Neil Blakeman, Member Donald Arnold, Member MONROE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Bernard Felder, Chairman Robert Weiss, Vice-Chairman William R. Terry, Secretary Neil Blakeman, Member Harry Benson, Member Robert Meiring, Sr., Member Larry Rutledge, Member Kenneth Swick, Member James Eads, Member Jack McDonald, Member John Britton, Member MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Royce R. Maniko, AICP, Director Dennis A. Ahonen, AICP, Principal Planner Glenn Wynn, AICP, Planner Frank J. Nagy, Planner Lee Markham, Planner Leslie Walter, Assistant Planner Roger Storm, Assistant Planner R. B. Williamson, Graphic Arts Supervisor P. K. Hauser, Drafting Specialist Jerry Oley, Printer Crystal Reed, Secretary Pat Lewis, Secretary � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Wyckoff Planning and Zoning Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Planning & Zoning Center (Lansing, Mich.) (Organization) Wyckoff, Mark A. Description An account of the resource Municipal master plans and zoning ordinances from across the state of Michigan, spanning from the 1960s to the early 2020s. The bulk of the collection was compiled by urban planner Mark Wyckoff over the course of his career as the founder and principal planner of the Planning and Zoning Center in Lansing, Michigan. Some additions have been made to the collection by municipalities since it was transferred to Grand Valley State University. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960/2023 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Comprehensive plan publications Master plan reports Zoning--Michigan Zoning--Maps Maps Land use--planning Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-240 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Monroe-County_Comprehensive-Agricultural-Plan-Update_1985 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Monroe County Planning Department, Monroe County, Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1985-05 Title A name given to the resource Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Agricultural Component Description An account of the resource The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update, Agricultural Component was prepared in May 1985 by the Monroe County Planning Department. Subject The topic of the resource Comprehensive plan publications Monroe County (Mich.) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/76c0d20b1005a156c6e4b505e3e73d35.jpg ee3f36d5fd19fceb99b7fd75e865733c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource GVSU Concert & Event Posters Subject The topic of the resource Posters Events Michigan Universities & colleges--Michigan Description An account of the resource Division of Student Services provides programs, services, and environments that enhance the personal, social, and intellectual growth of undergraduate and graduate students at the University. Events including concerts were managed by the office of Student Life. Posters for music, speakers, poetry readings and other campuswide events are included. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. Division of Student Services Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/106">Student Services concerts, events, and posters files, (GV028-06)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-07-17 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context GV028-06 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1963 – 1981 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context GV028-06_monroe Title A name given to the resource Monroe Doctrine and Chuck Mitchell, April 13 and 15, 1973 Subject The topic of the resource Grand Valley State University Grand Valley State College Michigan Allendale (Mich.) Universities & colleges--Michigan Events Posters Description An account of the resource Monroe Doctrine and Chuck Mitchell, Grand Valley State Colleges upstairs commons, April 13 and 15, 1973. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1973 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/106">Student Services concerts, events, and posters files, (GV028-06)</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/c9780f149bdf08b8b64a41f2cc06504f.mp4 5d4974a7d45c06ae802e9f3b1d792b16 https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/7766bf419342c25cb6f45ca4ccbee2ea.pdf e71fc46439db6b31a150f2d54e25afe6 PDF Text Text Grand Valley State University Veterans History Project Wayne Monroe (00:38:30) (00:00) Personal Background • Born in Byron Center, MI • Describes his parents’ employment o Father was a teacher (01:20) The outbreak of the War and the bombing of Pearl Harbor • Was in school when he heard about it o Too young to be drafted o Teacher was drafted • Learned most of what he knew about the war from newspapers (02:52) Enlisting in the Navy • Joined when he was still in high school in 1944 • Physical performed in Detroit • Describes Great Lakes Naval Station o What it looked like o Basic training (10 weeks long) o Required courses (6 weeks of classroom work) (05:25) Shipped to San Francisco • Placed on an oilier named Kaskaskia (06:50) Pacific Theater in 1945 (08:15) War Duties • Provided fuel for other ships • Lived on the boat – did not set foot on land for six months (10:52) Encounters with Japanese forces • The closer to Japan he got, the more kamikazes he saw o Kamikazes were mostly hit fighters o Many kamikaze pilots jumped ship before the plane exploded o Describes an instance where his ship almost got hit � A different US ship got hit o Describes a scenario where kamikazes interrupted the fueling of two ships • Most of the larger battles were over by the time he got to the Pacific Theater • Describes an encounter with a Japanese submarine (16:57) The Ship • One of five of its class; from Boston �• • • • • Able to stay with fleet – refueled at 30 knots Took injured people o Able to board injured onto other ships o Brought in replacements for injured soldiers Large cooler inside stored food Ship had128 men; was 552 feet long Describes a scenario where a carrier once came too close and hit his ship (20:25) Okinawa Mission • Describes encounters with “suicide swimmers” • Mentions that he was below deck most of the time, and couldn’t actually see most of the action (23:18) Other Missions • Went to Northern Japan following the battle at Okinawa o Involved in bombarding • Describes hearing about the atomic bomb dropping and Japan’s surrender • Went to Tokyo after the end of the war o Mentions that there was still some activity following the war’s end o Treated well by the Japanese, but once witnessed a man who fell on his sword (28:20) Life After Japan • Watched the signing of the armistice • Ship fueled in Shanghai o Describes Shanghai o Stayed until Christmas • Went to Taiwan for one week, then Hong Kong o Describes Hong Kong • Went to Saudi Arabia for fuel o Mentions and describes a stop in Singapore o Describes Saudi Arabia (32:55) Return to the United States • Returned to San Francisco on 1 July 1946 o Went to GLNS from there o Returned to Byron Center from GLNS • Accepted a job with his father at Reynolds Aluminum (35:12) Reflections on the Navy • A “nice experience,” but would not do it again • Got very little sleep, due to the busy schedule • Tells a story about being fired at while entering the mess hall • Tells a story about a young officer who learned to shoot at anything that moved �(38:30) The Crew • Some members were experienced, yet others were not o The ship was under repair when he joined � Many older members were transferred � Many new recruits were placed on the ship • Many fellow crew members earned enough points to leave o Many soldiers had “frozen” points – were not allowed to leave o Older soldiers had skills that were needed • Describes the upward mobility within the Navy o Was offered promotions, but did not take them � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Veterans History Project Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. History Department Description An account of the resource The Library of Congress established the Veterans History Project in 2001 to collect memories, accounts, and documents of U.S. war veterans from World War II and the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to preserve these stories for future generations. The GVSU History Department interviews are part of this work-in-progress, and may contain videos and audio recordings, transcripts and interview outlines, and related documents and photographs. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1914- Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Afghan War, 2001--Personal narratives, American Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-1981--Personal narratives, American Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American Michigan--History, Military Oral history Persian Gulf War, 1991--Personal narratives, American United States--History, Military United States. Air Force United States. Army United States. Navy Veterans Video recordings Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Personal narratives, American World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James Boring, Frank Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project interviews (RHC-27)</a> Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MonroeW Title A name given to the resource Monroe, Wayne S. (Interview outline and video), 2007 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Monroe, Wayne S. Description An account of the resource Wayne Monroe served in the US Navy between 1944 and 1946. Her served as a crewman on USS Kaskaskia, a large oiler, and saw action at Okinawa, where he witnessed kamikaze attacks. After the war, he sailed to Japan, China and Arabia before returning home to be discharged. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James (Interviewer) Byron Area Historic Museum (Byron Center, Mich.) BCTV Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Veterans History Project (U.S.) United States--History, Military Michigan--History, Military Veterans United States. Navy World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Video recordings Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2007-10-23 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project Collection, (RHC-27)</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf video/mp4 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b94b02533027019a3276b8062be578a4.pdf a6658fd69b552b9b8e598eb1ef352c5e PDF Text Text Young Lords In Lincoln Park Interviewee: Father Leo T. Mahon Interviewers: José “Cha-Cha” Jiménez Location: Grand Valley State University Special Collections Date: 8/21/2012 Biography and Description In the early 1950s, Monsignor Leo T. Mahon, an Irish American priest who was then head of the Hispanic apostolate in the Chicago Diocese, organized the Caballeros de San Juan (Knights of San Juan), as a religiously inspired community action group among Puerto Rican men. The group was tremendously successful and soon became a model that other dioceses strove to replicate around the country, including in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. Monsignor Mahon developed the program based on the idea that religious development takes place best where social stability and self-confidence prevail. The Caballeros provided both for Puerto Rican immigrants in Chicago.In 1963 Msgr. Mahon was sent by the Archdiocese of Chicago to San Miguelitos, Panama. The mission was an experimental parish, based on the practice of liberation theology, organized by the Archdiocese of Chicago in 1962. He remained there until 1975. By 1980, when the project was terminated by the Archdiocese amidst controversy involving questions of theology and liturgy, the mission had assumed control over 53 parishes and base communities. Msgr. Mahon wrote about this experience in his autobiography, Fire Under My Feet: A Memoir of God’s Power in Panama (2007). After returning from Panama, Msgr. Mahon became pastor at St. Victor in Calumet, Indiana. During his tenure at St. Victor, he introduced Jubilee Retreat weekends, College of Ministry, Young Adult Ministry, and Operation Summer, an innovative program for teens in the parish and surrounding area. He also instituted a range of social service projects, instituted an �overhaul of the church sanctuary, as well as a Lay Diaconate program that brought more than 12 men of the parish into direct service within the church. In 1987, Msgr. Mahon left St. Victor and returned to Chicago, where he currently lives in St. Mary’s of the Woods Faith Community. He was made a bishop in 2010. �Transcript JOSE JIMENEZ: Okay, so Father Mahon you said is suffering from what? M: What? JJ: Father Mahone is suffering from what? M: He has a neuropathy which is -- it’s like -- it would be something like ALS but not quite. It’s not the same thing. It’s more it kills the nerve or one at a time and that shuts down the muscles, too. But he’s gradually losing all the movement in his body. I came here 10 years ago. He was still driving his car but he can’t drive it now. And this young man is, the, José, this person who is taking care of him, completely wonderful. Wonderful caregiver. And there’s a -- this young woman is a nurse who’s visiting. But that’s -- Leo just has to be careful. (break in video) LEO MAHON: And after two or three evenings, I discovered that [00:01:00] it was going right over their heads. There was no reaction, no excitement. And I thought to myself of the gospel. “What doesn’t produce them excites them, excites some enthusiasm.” And this is really the good news. So we began all over again and I asked him questions. JJ: Do you remember what year this was that the Puerto Ricans came to you or...? LM: Yes, 1950, early 1950s. JJ: Early 1950? And then went to 63rd Street. Is that...? LM: Yeah. 1 �JJ: Okay. And so [00:02:00] the people you went to did not -- they said they were there to treat the elite? Is that the words that you’re saying? LM: Yeah. JJ: And you had to do it yourself? LM: Yeah. JJ: Okay. And then what happened after that, Father? LM: Well, we built up a system when I would explain some of the articles of faith and if it struck them as being good, exciting, they would tell me. If they say, “No, that won’t work at all,” then I’d skip that. And so a whole [00:03:00] series of instructions began to evolve and it was taken down by a nun and actually published in the book. And then we had an office at 13th and Wabash and our men are all over the communities. The Caballeros were establishing communities where in the 12 different places where Puerto Ricans were living. JJ: Twelve different churches? LM: Yeah. [00:04:00] Well, sometimes they were in church and sometimes, they weren’t. JJ: So sometimes they were like homes or storefronts or...? LM: Yeah. Yes. They always managed to get a clubhouse where they could read. Sometimes, if they were welcome into a church but they weren’t always. There was a prejudice against many Catholic parishes. JJ: You said there was some prejudice, Father? LM: Oh, yes. JJ: Against the Puerto Ricans or...? 2 �LM: Yes. JJ: Okay. But they were able to just work through that or...? LM: In many cases, yes. JJ: Okay. Okay. But in the beginning -- okay, we did talk about the [00:05:00] -that’s in the -- I got a book. I just want to make sure it’s okay. There’s a couple pictures in there. I want to make sure it’s okay by you if I can use those pictures. LM: All right? JJ: Is it okay? LM: Yes. JJ: Okay. I just want to make sure. Okay, any -- do you remember at all like the parade, the first parade that they had or...? LM: Yeah. JJ: In 1953, I believe? LM: Yeah. JJ: What do you remember about that? LM: Well, we brought a lamb into the mayor’s office. JJ: Into (laughs) mayor Daley’s office at that time? LM: Yeah. And -- JJ: What did the lamb represent? LM: Well, the lamb -- JJ: I know it’s a symbol of Puerto Rico, too, the lamb. LM: Yeah. JJ: Is that why they brought that or...? 3 �LM: [00:06:00] Yeah. JJ: And also it’s -- has to do with the church, I think. LM: Yeah. JJ: Okay. LM: And so the mayor responded by allowing the parade. JJ: By allowing the parade to take place? LM: Yeah. JJ: Okay. And this was in 1953 so it’s not -- and do you remember where it was? I think -- was it the Holy Name Cathedral or...? LM: No, I don’t remember. JJ: All right. You don’t remember. Okay, okay. Oh no, well you -- but you did go to - you were in downtown with the mayor so that’s what you recall. LM: Yeah. JJ: Okay. Anything else that you want to -- that you think we should -- [00:07:00] that you want -- that’s important of that time? With the Caballeros that you feel we should take -- of your work because you did a lot of work. LM: Yeah, we formed the Hermanos but I think Father [Don?] told you about that. JJ: Yeah, we were talking about the Hermano. LM: Yeah. JJ: And you also went to Panama, too. LM: Yes. JJ: We were talking about that. LM: Yes, when Cardinal Meyer came in after Cardinal Stritch died. 4 �JJ: That’s Cardinal Strich, okay. LM: He was very interested in the work and he -- at first, he -- [00:08:00] there was a call from the Pope to send help, especially personnel from the established churches in the world, in the Western World. You know, in Europe and in North America, Canada. And at first he said you just knew. At first he said, “I have too much on my plate. I can’t do that.” So we waited and then he went to the council as one of the Council Fathers, second Vatican, [00:09:00] and he came back a very changed man. And he said -- JJ: Can you hold on one second, Father? I’m sorry. (break in video) LM: -- cardinal said. JJ: But the cardinal -- coming back, you were telling me -- okay, we’ll start. LM: From Rome. And saying that even though he thought we needed priests here, there was more need in other places. And that we should sacrifice and send them to Latin America. And then he asked me where I thought we should go and I said, “Well, either [00:10:00] Panama or Puerto Rico itself.” JJ: And why did you choose those locations? LM: Why? JJ: Yeah, why did you choose them? LM: Well, both were close to the Puerto Rican community. Well, the -- Puerto Rico was. And Panama, there was a new, young bishop there who we thought would be very welcoming. And then he came. I said, “Well, you’ll have to see the cardinal. [00:11:00] I can’t begin any mission until you see him.” And the 5 �cardinal asked him to come up and talk to him. And he agreed to send priests there, set three priests aside. And the cardinal had asked me for a plan. And one plan was to just send the priest down to serve in the diocese. The second was to join [Mary Null?] or the [St. James Society?]. And the fourth was to begin [00:12:00] an experimental parish. To try different methods of missionary work especially explaining the way to people. First of all, to accept their own dignity and worth. And then to, as part of the message, that the human being, especially the believer, is a masterpiece of God’s creation and they shouldn’t think -because they always [00:13:00] had this notion of the upper class telling them what to do. And so that was one of their enslavements as you might call it. The other one was their attitude towards women which was really, really poor. Their women were things. And the most sacred things, but never persons. And it was only when we broke that by retreats and [00:14:00] that they decided that they had to include the women with them in a whole new life, a whole new way of doing things. JJ: You started at that time? LM: Yeah. JJ: So with a lot of movement, a lot of people involved, getting involved? Is that what took place or how did -- did you -- or how did you see the developments taking place? LM: Well, first of all, we had no right, direct participation with the men. [00:15:00] There was a division. The women went to church and handled all the church affairs and the men didn’t go at all, didn’t participate. So when the women met 6 �with me, I said to them -- they asked what I -- they could do. And I said, “Could you give me a year or two to work with the men only?” And they were quite amused and they said good luck. But it turned out to be a very [00:16:00] good thing. And the men especially, they had notions of virgin that were very, very anti-clerical. And it was only when we brought some six-packs of beer and met with some of the leaders in the community -- we thought were leaders or could be -- and they asked what we were there for. And I said, “What do you think we’re here for?” “Oh, we’re here -- you’re here to take the kids to catechism.” I said, “I have no intention [00:17:00] of taking kids to that catechism.” “Oh, well, then you’re going to build a church.” I said, “Well, if I build a church, would you come to mass?” “No.” “Well, I’m not going to do it.” “Well, what are you going to do?” I said, “Start a revolution.” And that’s when they got interested. The word meant a lot to them. JJ: The word revolution meant a lot to them? LM: Yeah. Not a -- they didn’t think of it as an arms revolution. JJ: Okay. Spiritual. LM: A spiritual revolution. A whole change of order for them in the social scheme of things. And that [00:18:00] began the movement in Puerto Rico. Father Don -- JJ: You mean in Panama. LM: Panama, yeah. Father Don probably explained more of that to you. JJ: He explained it, he explained it. What about your work here before you left there? I know you left early with the Caballeros and that. But what was some of the work that you were doing then? 7 �LM: I thought I explained that. JJ: Oh, you did. Okay, okay, you did. Okay, but you came back here and did you do any work before you were being sick or...? LM: When I came back? JJ: Yes. LM: (laughs) That’s an interesting story. I was [00:19:00] really overworked and overstressed. I was the vicar episcopal for the whole east part of Panama which meant that I -- or had almost the powers of a bishop to organize communities. And I did that with lay people, of course. But it provoked a lot of problems with the government and with the church hierarchy. So finally, I was tired and I had fought with the government especially. [00:20:00] But they were -- both authorities were glad to see me go. So I wired Cardinal Cody who was in office by that time that I was coming home. And he wired back, “Due to peculiar circumstances here in Chicago, you may not return.” And I answer once again, “I belong in Chicago more than you do and I’m coming home as of this date.” So then when I met with him, it took [00:21:00] two years to get any notice from him at all. And finally, I met with him and he said, “Well, you did a good job.” And I said, “That’s the first kind word you have said about me or about the work in Panama.” “Well, it’s true,” he said. “Now,” he said, “I want you -- you may have any parish in the diocese.” That’s 400 parishes. “You may have any one. Except where there are Spanish-speaking or Blacks.” And I said, “Well, [00:22:00] if that’s your wish, I’ll obey it but I’d like to know the reason.” And he said, “If I -- if you go to one of those parishes, that’ll be your movement to make 8 �you a bishop. And I’m not naming you a bishop. Never, never, never.” So there was a parish open in working people in a steel mill district in Calumet City. And I took that one. I had a wonderful experience. The same methods worked with them. JJ: But this was not Black or Spanish or [00:23:00] Latino. LM: No, no, they were almost all -- JJ: They were all what? LM: Slavik. JJ: Slavik? Okay. LM: Yeah. Mostly Polish. JJ: Mostly Polish, okay. LM: Working in the mills and making very good money. JJ: Okay. LM: And then the steel mill fell apart as you know. JJ: I don’t know. It fell apart? I’m not -- LM: Yeah. JJ: You mean the industry fell apart. LM: Yeah. JJ: Okay. So how long were you there, Father, in Calumet? LM: I was there 12 years. JJ: Twelve years, okay. LM: And then I decided -- it might’ve been 11, but anyway. I decided that [00:24:00] I had done my job there. 9 �JJ: But yeah, before that, Father, you said you had a wonderful experience there. Can you describe what you mean or...? LM: Well, there was a convent there that was occupied by five or six nuns of an order that would -- but they weren’t working in the parish at all. So I asked them to leave and we ended up with a beautiful building, 16 rooms and a chapel. And we put two beds in each room so we could put 32 men or women [00:25:00] on retreat what we called a cursillo. And they were different cursillo from the one that came from Spain. And it ended up with a -- all of them sitting around a table and celebrating the Eucharist together. Even it was an upper-room experience. And they were tremendously moved. And they became the heart of the movement and then we did that, I don’t know, maybe [00:26:00] 30 more of those retreats. So a good num- -- a good percentage of the parish had been instructed in that manner. And then the liturgies changed with music and with preaching and participation of the lady. So people began to come from other parishes and from Indiana which was close. So much so that the bishop of Gary complained to our bishop in Chicago [00:27:00] that we were stealing his people. Which amused the cardinal very much, the archbishop of Chicago. JJ: It amused the archbishop, you said? LM: Yeah. He had no intention. He just said to the bishop there, “Maybe you ought to do what they’re doing if it’s that successful.” So then, I took a year of sabbatical after I left there and I wrote my memoir part of which were published. It amounted to an autobiography [00:28:00] but the publisher said it’s a very good book. But unless you have a name like Eisenhower or something like that, 10 �nobody would buy that book. We can’t sell it. So it was never published and I still have it in manuscript. But a friend of mine showed it to a professor at Columbia College and she said, “Oh, my. We’ve got to publish this.” And I explained the difficulties and she tried with her contacts [00:29:00] to get it published. So no go. So then she took some material out of there, especially the Panamanian experience, and wrote a book or edited the book. It was my writing. JJ: Is that Nancy? Is that that book that I have or...? LM: Yes. JJ: Okay. All right. LM: Yeah, that’s the one. Fire Under My Feet. JJ: Right, right, that’s the one. LM: Yeah. Okay? JJ: Okay. I appreciate very much, Father. LM: You’re very welcome. END OF VIDEO FILE 11 � https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6bd60ea9e993985bb8a64cc069a3a3c8.mp4 254a5c19779f31e4247e69d231cffa3e Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Young Lords in Lincoln Park Collection Subject The topic of the resource Young Lords (Organization) Puerto Ricans--United States Civil Rights--United States--History Lincoln Park (Chicago, Ill.) Personal narratives Social justice Community activists--Illinois--Chicago Description An account of the resource Collection of oral history interviews and digitized materials documenting the history of the Young Lords Organization in Lincoln Park, Chicago. Interviews were conducted by Young Lords' founder, José “Cha-Cha” Jiménez, and documents were digitized from Mr. Jiménez' archives. The Young Lords in Lincoln Park collection grows out of the ongoing struggle for fair housing, self-determination, and human rights that was launched by Mr. José “Cha-Cha” Jiménez, founder of the Young Lords Movement. This project is dedicated to documenting the history of the displacement of Puerto Ricans, Mejicanos, other Latinos, and the poor from Lincoln Park, as well as the history of the Young Lords nationwide. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Jiménez, José, 1948- Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/491">Young Lords in Lincoln Park collection (RHC-65)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-04-25 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng spa Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-65 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 2012-2017 Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Título Spanish language Title entry Monsignor Leo T. Mahon vídeo entrevista y biografía Sujetos Spanish language Subject terms Young Lords (Organización) Puertorriqueños--Estados Unidos Derechos civiles--Estados Unidos--Historia Lincoln Park (Chicago, Ill.) Narrativas personales Justicia social Activistas comunitarios--Illinois--Chicago Iglesia Católica. Arquidiócesis de Chicago (Ill.) Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/491">Young Lords in Lincoln Park (RHC-65)</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-65_Mahon_Leo Title A name given to the resource Monsignor Leo T. Mahon interview and transcript Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Mahon, Leo Description An account of the resource In the early 1950s, Monsignor Leo T. Mahon, an Irish American priest who was then head of the Hispanic apostolate in the Chicago Diocese, organized the (Knights of San Juan), as a religiously inspired community action group among Puerto Rican men. The group was tremendously successful and soon became a model that other dioceses strove to replicate around the country, including in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston. Monsignor Mahon developed the program based on the idea that religious development takes place best where social stability and self-confidence prevail. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Jiménez, José, 1948- Subject The topic of the resource Young Lords (Organization) Puerto Ricans--United States Civil Rights--United States--History Lincoln Park (Chicago, Ill.) Personal narratives Social justice Community activists--Illinois--Chicago Catholic Church. Archdiocese of Chicago (Ill.) Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource video/mp4 application/pdf Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2012-08-21 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9f664da5b8e861c7e3825628c4716ed3.m4v b9454dcbadc446d4cc50c5ad3b6ba2da https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/2228515ed2071d3bc85e6d424c0dab6a.pdf 106dbe849d45e53b145db2b24d0c4ce5 PDF Text Text Grand Valley State University Veterans History Project Interview Interviewee’s Name: Walter M. Monson Name of War: Korean War Length of Interview: (00:28:45) Pre-Enlistment Enlisted in the US Army (1:20) Completed college in January of 1953 (1:40) Waited to be drafted, but since he was married, he decided to enlist on April 10, 1952 (2:15) Went to Detroit, MI to be inducted, and was sent to Fort Custer, MI (2:30) Grew up in Saginaw, MI (13:00) Married during Senior year of college, 1951 (21:30) Enlistment/Training Trained at Ft. Custer for 2-3 months (2:40) Was trained in Training, Information and Education (2:50) Stayed there until basic training at Breckinridge, KY (3:00) Trained in heavy weapons: machine guns, mortars (4:20) Went into Counter-Intelligence after basic training was over (4:45) Trained for that at Fort Halliburt (5:00) Had courses in Communism, typing, writing (5:30) During the interview for the Corps, was asked many questions he did not know (7:30) Had a second interview by three Colonels, very laid-back interview (9:20) If he failed the interviews, he would be sent back to heavy weapons unit and shipped to Korea (11:45) Active Duty Discharged at Corporal rank (0:27) Served in Baltimore, MD (0:30) Lived at Ft. Halliburt (1:10) Was in charge of top-secret files in the Counter Intelligence Corps (6:00) Was an analyst in the Corps (6:15) Kept in touch with family by letter (12:00) Wife came to Baltimore after he completed training, but moved back to Saginaw shortly after (12:50) Food was not too bad in Baltimore, always hungry though (13:30) Always went out for pizza and beer on Friday nights (13:50) Had weekends off most of the time, unless they had KP duty (13:55) His job was to analyze intelligence reports (15:00) For fun, went to Washington, D.C, went to the movies, took some vacations (15:20) When on base, stayed in the barracks with 40 other men (16:50) Worked under a Major, had a very professional relationship (19:00) �After the Service Was discharged early because of a new Army regulation regarding seasonal jobs (22: 15) He had a teaching contract in Grand Rapids, MI, and was released early (22:30) Taught woodworking at South High School for 10 years, then went into administration (23:00) Had many friends, but never kept in touch with them after his discharge (23:50) Had a debriefing interview upon discharge (24:30) Received college training, his masters degree, through the GI Bill (26:45) Did not think the Army was a good experience at the time, but eventually came to see it that way (27:20) � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Veterans History Project Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Grand Valley State University. History Department Description An account of the resource The Library of Congress established the Veterans History Project in 2001 to collect memories, accounts, and documents of U.S. war veterans from World War II and the Korean War, Vietnam War, and conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to preserve these stories for future generations. The GVSU History Department interviews are part of this work-in-progress, and may contain videos and audio recordings, transcripts and interview outlines, and related documents and photographs. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1914- Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Subject The topic of the resource Afghan War, 2001--Personal narratives, American Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-1981--Personal narratives, American Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American Michigan--History, Military Oral history Persian Gulf War, 1991--Personal narratives, American United States--History, Military United States. Air Force United States. Army United States. Navy Veterans Video recordings Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Personal narratives, American World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Smither, James Boring, Frank Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-27 Language A language of the resource eng Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project interviews (RHC-27)</a> Oral History A resource containing historical information obtained in interviews with persons having firsthand knowledge. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context MonsonW Title A name given to the resource Monson, Walter M. (Interview outline and video), 2005 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Monson, Walter M. Description An account of the resource Walter Monson entered the US Army in April of 1952. Upon completion of Basic Training at Forts Custer in Michigan and Breckinridge, Kentucky, Walter was stationed at Fort Halliburt in Baltimore, Maryland. After several interviews, he became an intelligence analyst for the Army. Upon completion of his service, Walter moved back to Michigan and taught with Grand Rapids Public Schools. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Justin Monson (Interviewer) Subject The topic of the resource Oral history Veterans History Project (U.S.) United States--History, Military Michigan--History, Military Veterans Video recordings Korean War, 1950-1953--Personal narratives, American United States. Army Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Moving Image Text Relation A related resource Veterans History Project (U.S.) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2005-05-19 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/455">Veterans History Project Collection, (RHC-27)</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf video/mp4 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/bf3dbbd0b3310fbc01dc602c484760a4.jpg 811abe26c872d7ae4969b42e99a7e5ab Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource D.J. Angus Photographs Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography—United States Mexico Engineering Indiana Michigan Description An account of the resource An extensive photographic record of Angus’ work and travels throughout the U.S. and Mexico. The images of manmade and natural phenomenon often reflect his interest in engineering projects that include dams, bridges, mines, power plants, cliff dwellings, and quarries. Indiana resident and entrepreneur, D. J. Angus produced an extensive photographic record of his work and travels throughout the U.S. and Mexico, during the late 1920s -1940s. The images of manmade and natural phenomenon often reflect his interest in engineering projects that include dams, bridges, mines, power plants, cliff dwellings, and quarries. Over 10,000 still images from 1903-1966 document Angus’ family, friends, business, and travels. Over 12,000 ft. of 16mm movie film complete this collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Angus, Donald James (D.J.) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/437">D.J. Angus Photographs (RHC-04)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-04 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1900-1960 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-03-21 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/437">D.J. Angus photographs and films, RHC-04</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-04-A1-440A Title A name given to the resource Montana. Bitterroot Mountain tunnel Description An account of the resource Tunnel in the Bitterroot Mountain range of the Rocky Mountains in western Montana. Subject The topic of the resource Montana Photographs Photography Railroad tunnels Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Angus, Donald James (D. J.) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1914 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/9d26ac84bbb2535cd6fd16b8d1fabb47.jpg 4548c861bfdb2e899fbdb88e8473b10d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource D.J. Angus Photographs Subject The topic of the resource Photographs Photography—United States Mexico Engineering Indiana Michigan Description An account of the resource An extensive photographic record of Angus’ work and travels throughout the U.S. and Mexico. The images of manmade and natural phenomenon often reflect his interest in engineering projects that include dams, bridges, mines, power plants, cliff dwellings, and quarries. Indiana resident and entrepreneur, D. J. Angus produced an extensive photographic record of his work and travels throughout the U.S. and Mexico, during the late 1920s -1940s. The images of manmade and natural phenomenon often reflect his interest in engineering projects that include dams, bridges, mines, power plants, cliff dwellings, and quarries. Over 10,000 still images from 1903-1966 document Angus’ family, friends, business, and travels. Over 12,000 ft. of 16mm movie film complete this collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Angus, Donald James (D.J.) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/437">D.J. Angus Photographs (RHC-04)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-04 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1900-1960 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-03-21 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Source <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/437">D.J. Angus photographs and films, RHC-04</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-04-A1-440B Title A name given to the resource Montana. Bitterroot Mountains bridge Description An account of the resource Bridge in the Bitterroot Mountains range of the Rocky Mountains in western Montana. Subject The topic of the resource Montana Photographs Photography Bridges Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Angus, Donald James (D. J.) Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=en">In Copyright</a> Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University Libraries, Special Collections and University Archives Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1914 Type The nature or genre of the resource Image https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/cb05ad15fe98caf902da3f54f81169a8.jpg c7feaea321ee76e675a7912119565111 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00846 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1939-08-31 Title A name given to the resource Montana. Pompeys Pillar Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of inscriptions made by William Clark on Pompeys Pillar on July 25, 1806. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Pompeys Pillar (Mont.) Clark, William, 1770-1838 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b9790768d8a0129aa0ec0e06496feefc.pdf 07bbcf3722b46087bf9071ca92b7cecc PDF Text Text �Montcalm County GENERAL PLAN Prepared Under the Direction of the Montcalm County Planning Commission By the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. 715 N. Cedar Street, Suite 2 Lansing, Ml 48906-5275 517/886-0555 Ph. 517/886-0564 Fax www.pzcenter.com July 2006 �MONTCALM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Franz Mogdis, Chairman (Business & Industry, Stanton) Pete Haines (Education, Greenville) John M. Johansen (County Commission, Gowen) Phil Lund (Citizen-at-Large, Sheridan) Bruce Noll (Agriculture, Carson City) S. Michael Scott (Village & Cities, Howard City) Lonnie Smith (Environment & Human Services, Sand Lake) Don Smucker (Townships, Stanton) Lisa Lund, Recording Secretary PLANNING & ZONING CENTER, INC. ASSOCIATES Mark A. Wyckoff, FAICP, President John Warbach, Ph.D., Principal Carolyn A. Freebury, Vice President Evan Cunningham, Research Associate Andrea Hoag, Research Associate �TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................... ........................................ 1-1 Introd uction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 Overview of the Plan and its Uses .............................................................................. 1-2 Specific Purposes of the Montcalm County General Plan ........................................... 1-3 Vision-Based Plan ...................................................................................................... 1-5 Legal Basis ........... ...................................................................................................... 1-5 Overview of the Planning Process .................................................................................... 1-6 How to Use the Plan ........................................................................................................ 1-7 Chapter 2: Vision, Goals, Objectives and Strategies ................................................... 2-1 Vision Statement .............................................................................................................. 2-1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 2-1 Goals, Objectives and Strateg ies ..................................................................................... 2-5 Chapter 3: Best Practices .............................................................................................. 3-1 Introduction ........................... ........................................................................................... 3-1 Ten Best Practices ........................................................................................................... 3-1 Protection of Ground and Surface Water Quality ........................................................ 3-1 Protection of Natural Character .................................................................................. 3-4 Protection of Agricultural Land and Agricultural Character .......................................... 3-5 Promote Very Low Density Residential Development ................................................. 3-9 Protect Rural Character along Rural Roads ................................................................ 3-12 Pursue a Compact Development Pattern in and around Existing Cities and Villages ............ ........................ ............................................... 3-14 Provide a Wide Range of Affordable Housing Opportunities and Choices .................. 3-15 Create Walkable Communities with a Strong Sense of Place ..................................... 3-17 Increase the Range of Transportation Choices ........................................................... 3-18 Keep Local Plans and Zoning Ordinances Up to Date ................................................ 3-19 Chapter 4: Economic Development ........... .................................................................. 4-1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4-1 Economic Development Based on Smart Growth Principles ............................................. 4-2 Develop a Common, Countywide Vision of a Sustainable Future ............................... 4-2 Protect the Natural Resource Base and Quality of the Natural Environment. .............. 4-2 Protect Existing Income Sources, Wealth Generators, and the Existing Tax Base ..... 4-2 Maintain Quality Physical Infrastructure ...................................................................... 4-3 Provide Land Properly Planned , Zoned and Serviced with Utilities and Quality Roads to Accommodate New Businesses and Affordable Housing .......... 4-4 Provide a Quality Education and Wide Variety of Cultural Opportunities .................... 4-4 Protect and Enhance Unique Aspects of Each Community ........................................ 4-4 Better Understand the Relationship Between Public Service Costs and New Development and be Careful What Local Governments Subsidize ............... 4-5 Do Not Let Proposed Increases to the Tax Base Drive New Development Approvals 4-5 Consider the Impacts of all Plans and Incremental Land Use Decisions on Adjacent Jurisdictions and on Future Generations ................................................ 4-6 Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 �TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Chapter 5: Future Land Use ......................................................................................... 5-1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5-1 Existing Planning and Zoning ........................................................................................... 5-1 Existing Local Plans ................................................................................................... 5-1 Existing Zoning ........................................................................................................... 5-1 Plans and Zoning Ordinances of Communities Abutting Montcalm County ................. 5-3 Future Land Use and Policies .......................................................................................... 5-5 Future Land Use Policy ............................................................................................. 5-5 Key Future Land Use Policies Map ............................................................................ 5-5 Land Use by Sub-Area of the County ............................................................................... 5-10 Sub-Area One ............................................................................................................ 5-1O Sub-Area Two ............................................................................................................ 5- 12 Sub-Area Three .......................................................................................................... 5-13 Sub-Area Four ............................................................................................................ 5-14 Sub-Area Five ............................................................................................................ 5-15 Sub-Area Six .............................................................................................................. 5-16 The Management of Different Land Uses in the Future .................................................... 5-17 Agricultural , Forest and Rura l Land Conservation ...................................................... 5-17 Rural Residential ........................................................................................................ 5-18 Residential ................................................................................................................. 5-18 Commercial ................................................................................................................ 5-19 Industrial .................................................................................................................... 5-19 Waterfront Residential ................................................................................................ 5- 19 Sensitive Lands and Water Quality Protection ............................................................ 5-19 Parks and Recreation ................................................................................................. 5-20 Community Services Area & Future Land Use .... ....................................................... 5-20 Chapter 6: Transportation & Other Infrastructure ....................................................... 6-1 Introduction .......................................... ............................................................................ 6-1 Transportation .................................................................................................................. 6- 1 Countywide Transportation Plan ................................................................................. 6-1 Roads ......................................................................................................................... 6-1 Airports ....................................................................................................................... 6-3 Public Transit ............................................................................................................. 6-3 Non-Motorized Transportation .................................................................................... 6-3 Public Sewer and Water ................................................................................................... 6-4 Communications .............................................................................................................. 6-4 Natural Gas & Electric ...................................................................................................... 6-5 Schools ............................................................................................................................ 6-5 Medical Facilities .............................................................................................................. 6-5 Police and Fire Facilities .................................................................................................. 6-5 Local Government Facilities ............................................................................................. 6-6 Parks & Recreation Facilities ............................................................................................ 6-6 Chapter 7: lnterjurisdictional Coordination & Plan Implementation .......................... 7-1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7- 1 Focusing on Priorities .................... ................................................................................... 7- 1 Annual Tasks ............................................................................................................. 7-2 Top Priorities .............................................................................................................. 7-2 Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 ii �TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Addressing Issues of Greater than Local Concern .................. .......... .................... ........... 7-4 Role of Key Players ............................ ...................... ................... ....... .............................. 7-6 Conclud ing Thought ......................................................................................................... 7-9 LIST OF MAPS 1-1 3-1 3-2 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 5-5 Montcalm County Location and Local Jurisdictions .................................................. 1-1 Montcalm County Watersheds ....................... ......................................................... 3-3 Green Infrastructure of the Grand Rapids Metro Reg ion .......................................... 3-5 Montcalm County Composite Zoning ........................................................................ 5-2 Existing Land Use/Land Cover ................................................................................. 5-6 Key Future Land Use Policies .................................................................................. 5-7 Montcalm County Sensitive Lands ........................................................................... 5-8 Montcalm County Sub-Areas ............ ........................................................................ 5-11 LIST OF TABLES 7-1 Issues of Greater than Local Concern .....................................................................7-5 7-2 Traditional Responsibilities of the Local Government Decision-makers ................... 7-7 LIST OF FIGURES 1-1 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 3-7 3-8 4-1 4-2 4-3 7-1 7-2 A Notice of Three Futuring Meetings ..... ............. .............................................. ........ 1-6 Lake or River Overlay Zone ..................................................................................... 3-2 Before and After Buildout in Three Montcalm County Townships ............................. 3-6 The Bundle of Rights Associated with Land ............................................................. 3-7 Quarter-quarter Zoning ............................................................................................. 3-9 Cluster Development in a Conservation Subdivision Compared to Strip Residential and Conventional Subdivision ................................................... 3-10 Protection of Roadside Vegetation ..................... ...................................................... 3-1 3 Encourage Compact Settlement Pattern in and near Existing Cities and Villages .... 3-15 Plans and Ordinances Should be Updated Regularly ............................................... 3-20 Quality Infrastructure is Essential to Economic Development.. ................................. 4-3 Planned Compact Settlement Patterns Cost Less in Public Services ....................... 4-6 Smart Growth Techniques to Build Sustainable Communities .................................. 4-7 Education is the Top Implementation Priority of the Montcalm County General Plan ............. ............................................................. 7-2 Examples of Issues of Greater than Local Concern .................................................. 7-4 LIST OF PHOTOS 1-1 3-1 3-2 3-3 Flat River in Montcalm County ................................................................................. 1-3 Older, Existing Neighborhoods can be a Source of Affordable Housing ................... 3-16 Fred Meijer Heartland Trail ....................................................................................... 3-18 More Sidewalk Connections such as This One are Needed in Montcalm County ..... 3-19 John f:/winword/Montcalm/plan feb 06/Plan Table of Contents .doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 iii �I I I Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Montcalm County is in the heart of mid-Michigan. It is located just north of the Grand Rapids and Lansing metropolitan areas, and south of the Big Rapids and Mt. Pleasant economic areas. Montcalm County is one-quarter larger than an average courty and has 20 townships and 9 incorporated cities and villages. See Map 1-1 . Montcalm County has long been the home of farms and 5 state game areas, traditional Michigan small towns and the refrigeration capital of the world. While recent global economic changes have resulted in the closure of Electrolux, a refrigeration factory in Greenville, putting more than 4,500 people out of work (including supporting industries), the people of the county are resilient and looking for guidance on how to begin building a new future for the county. This Plan can be one of the foundation stones to that new future. Map 1-1 Montcalm County Location and Local Jurisdictions Lakeview M-46 Home Township M-46 Winfield Township Township McBride M-91 □ Maple Valley Township Douglas Township Day Township Ferris Township Stanton M-66 Sidney Township Montcalm County ~ ......._____ ,-- Crystal Township Sheridan ,- I Soutx. \4"ic.b1~ Ccn\4.'t' lllf Ctt.-ographM: lnfonrwtson. °'-"Pl ur lnfurm,H1un To..:hoobJg\Map Pre-pared by th,.• Land lnfor.n.itton AettS~ A")OCUltion, Januar1 JOO~ Evergreen Township M-57 Fairplains Township Bushnell Township Bloomer Township This chapter explains the purpose of the Montcalm County General Plan and describes the process by which the Plan was prepared. It also explains the relationship of the Plan to supplemental studies such as the Montcalm County Fact Book, the 2003-2008 Montcalm County Recreational Plan and other related studies. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-1 �This is the first County Plan addressing land use and infrastructure on a countywide basis since 1971. Montcalm County is now in transition, economically, politically and from a land use perspective. This Plan explains the importance of protecting the small town and rural character of Montcalm County as well as its agricultural economic base and gives guidance on how to do that. This Plan is based on the Ten Smart Growth Tenets and the Community Planning Principles of the Michigan Association of Planning (see Appendix A). These principles focus on conservation of renewable resources for their economic development and rural character values, and contiguous compact development around small towns because of the economic efficiency of public services, and social benefits a compact land use pattern offers. This Plan has a key policies map in Chapter Five with a description of generalized future land use. The Plan largely relies on the informed action of the local units of government and property owners in the county for its effective implementation. This Plan is based on the authority granted to County Planning Commissions in P.A. 282 of 1945, as amended. Generally, the purpose of this General Plan is to provide policy that guides decision making for future land and infrastructure development within Montcalm County. Specifically, a vision, goals, objectives and strategies are outlined; key planning issues in the context of best practices and economic development are identified; community character, existing and future land uses are described; transportation and other public infrastructure policies are identified and specific implementation measures are recommended. Overview of the Plan and its Uses This Plan is of the General Plan variety. That is because Montcalm County does not have county zoning and this Plan does not recommend that the County adopt zoning. However, this Plan encourages units of government to work cooperatively to achieve the common vision for Montcalm County described in this Plan. This General Plan takes a county-wide view, in contrast to local plans which tend to only look inward. As a result, this Plan looks at the whole county from the standpoint of land use, economic development, infrastructure and intergovernmental cooperation. It proposes compatible land uses along jurisdiction borders. Local governments are encouraged to prepare local plans and zoning ordinances consistent with this Plan. Detailed local plans and local zoning should guide site specific decisions in every local unit of government in the County. This Plan is adopted by the Montcalm County Planning Commission to promote public health, safety, and welfare through planning for the appropriate use of land and water resources and the provision of adequate public facilities and services. Although this Plan states specific land use and development policy and proposes specific land use arrangements, it has no regulatory power. It will be implemented by local zoning decisions, public facility and infrastructure improvements and the actions of private property owners acting consistent with the Plan. The land area covered by this Plan includes the entire area of Montcalm County and all 29 incorporated units of local government in the county. It is intended to promote sensible and sustainable interjurisdictional land use planning. It is hoped that this Plan will guide the formation of township, city and village plans consistent with it and that subsequent local zoning and infrastructure decisions will also be made consistent with it. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-2 �This Plan has a time orientation of twenty years into the future (through 2025). It is heavily influenced by the "Concept of Sustainability" that a community should make decisions today that meet the needs of the present without undermining the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Photo 1-1 Flat River in Montcalm County Photo provided by the Montcalm Alliance Specific Purposes of the Montcalm County General Plan • To prepare a plan that is consistent with the County Planning Act, P.A. 282 of 1945, as amended; To provide the framework for the Montcalm County Planning Commission to serve in • a proactive, coordinating capacity for all land use and infrastructure planning committees and commissions within the county; • To prepare a plan that is technically sound, internally consistent, and that focuses on current issues and future needs; To provide a legal basis for County Planning Commission review of local master • plans, and county park and recreation plans (a mandatory responsibility); • To provide a legal basis for County Planning Commission review of township zoning ordinances and zoning amendments (a mandatory responsibility); • To provide a legal basis for County Planning Commission review of proposed PA 116 (Farmland and Open Space Preservation) contracts (a mandatory responsibility); • To provide a basis for County Planning Commission review of future County infrastructure proposals (a mandatory responsibility); • To provide a basis for future county grant requests; • To provide a countywide economic development/infrastructure development framework for local planning (a valuable asset when seeking grant assistance and encouraging new business development in the county); Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-3 �• • • • • • • • To provide an incentive for joint local planning; To serve as an educational tool to assist with education of local government officials and citizens on smart growth; To provide a basis for provision of technical assistance to local governments on contemporary local planning and zoning tools (such as those related to farmland protection and provision of affordable housing); To provide a means for county residents to participate in determining the future of their county; To provide a broad framework for the county's decision-makers to assist them in both long-term and day-to-day matters; To minimize land use conflicts and inappropriate uses of land; To designate areas of land for uses in keeping with the natural soil properties, vegetation, terrain and availability of public sewer and water in anticipation of future development; To provide for an improved system of public services according to current and projected needs. In early 2003, Michigan's Governor, with the assistance of the head of the House and Senate appointed a 30+ member Michigan Land Use Leadership Council comprised of heads of all the major state departments and representatives of the major stakeholder groups. Their challenge was to prepare a set of recommendations on ways to improve land use policy and decisions in Michigan. Early in the process, the Council settled on the following Ten Smart Growth Tenets as critical to guiding future land use in Michigan. Those tenets are incorporated into this Plan as important to guiding future land use in Montcalm County. Ten Smart Growth Tenets 1. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration; 2. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place; 3. Preserve farmland, open space, natural beauty and critical environmental areas; 4. Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost-effective; 5. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities; 6. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices; 7. Provide a variety of transportation choices; 8. Create walkable neighborhoods; 9. Mix land uses; 10. Take advantage of compact development design. Source: Michigan Land Use Leadersh ip Council Final Report, Aug. 2003 Smart Growth Definition Smart Growth is a term that may not be familiar to all readers. Smart Growth means using comprehensive planning to guide, design, develop, revitalize and build communities for all that: • have a unique sense of community and place; • preserve and enhance valuable natural and cultural resources; • equitably distribute the costs and benefits of development; • expand the range of transportation, employment and housing choices in a fiscally responsible manner; Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-4 �• • value long-range, regional considerations of sustainability over short term incremental geographically isolated actions; and promotes public health and healthy communities. Smart Growth is characterized by compact, transit accessible, pedestrianoriented, mixed use development patterns and land (re)use which epitomizes the application of the principles of smart growth. In contrast to prevalent development practices, Smart Growth refocuses a larger share of regional growth within central cities, urbanized areas, inner suburbs,[small towns], and areas that are already served by infrastructure. Smart Growth reduces the share of growth that occurs on newly urbanizing land, existing farmlands, and in environmentally sensitive areas. In areas with intense growth pressure, development in newly urbanizing areas should be planned and developed according to Smart Growth principles. Adapted from American Planning Association Smart Growth Policy 2002 http://www.planning.org/policyguides/smartgrowth.htm Vision-Based Plan This Plan is vision-based, with strategies intended to guide future county actions and decisions. It is not intended to establish precise boundaries of land use areas or exact locations of future types of developments. Maps should be considered as general guides, and the Plan's function is to guide growth toward long-range, broad-based goals, and only generally indicate the location of future development. Site specific decisions are left to local units of government. A primary challenge of a vision-based General Plan is to combine the needs and desires of the citizenry with the land's suitability and capability for sustaining those needs and desires, as matched by the ability of a municipality to provide public services throughout its jurisdiction. Such planning will minimize the potential for land use conflicts and inappropriate uses of land, for the long term betterment of all residents. This is a very substantial challenge given the over zoning for low density residential development revealed in the buildout analysis of existing zoning ordinances and published in the Montcalm County Fact Book. Most local units of government in the County have zoned land at a density far greater then current use, and far beyond the ability of existing public services to meet the need inherent in the thousands of new dwellings permitted by existing zoning. It is hoped the alternative future vision and land use pattern in this Plan will help guide changes to local zoning that are more realistic than existing zoning as reflected in the buildout analysis. Legal Basis The County Planning Act (Act 282 of the Public Acts of 1945), states, in part, that: • "Sec. 1. Any county is hereby authorized and empowered to make, adopt, amend, extend, add to, or carry out a county plan as provided by this act and create by ordinance a planning commission with the powers and duties herein set forth." • "Sec. 4. It shall be a function of the county planning commission to make a plan for the development of the county, which plan may include planning in cooperation with the constituted authorities for incorporated areas in whole or to the extent which, in the commission's judgment, they are related to the planning of the unincorporated territory or of the county as a whole. The county planning commission may serve as Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-5 �a coordinating agency for all planning committees and commissions within the county." OVERVIEW OF PLANNING PROCESS The planning process followed to prepare this Plan carried on a Montcalm County tradition of providing broad public input opportunities. Stratified random sample opinion surveys of residents were conducted in 1999 and 2002. A survey of local leaders was conducted in 2004 and three "visioning" town meetings were held in 2005 at the TriCounty High School outside Howard City, at the Community Room in the Central Services Facility of the Greenville Public Schools, and at the Montalm Communi'~Y College. Notices of each meeting were announced in the Greenville Daily News, and posted locally (see Figure 1-1 ). These town meetings allowed citizens an opportunity to identify prouds, sorries and images of the future that they would like to see become a reality. The planning process also included many meetings of the County Planning Commission, presentations to the Montcalm County Townships Association and to the Montcalm County Board of Commissioners. Figure 1-1 A Notice of Three Futuring Town Meetings A "Visioning" Session TOWN MEETING "Creating a Common Vision for The Future of Montcalm County" ATTEND ANY OF THE FOLLOWING SESSIONS: April 18, 2005, 7:00 PM Media Center, Tri-County High School 21338 Kendavllle Road, Howard City April 25, 2005, 7:00 PM Community Room, Central Services Facility Greenville Public Schools, 1414 Chase Road, Greenville April 28, 2005, 7:00 PM Room 305 Doser Building, Montcalm Community College 2800 College Drive, Sidney The citizens of Montcalm County are invited to attend a town meeting to help chart the future of Montcalm County. Input will be used to prepare the County Comprehensive Plan. The meeting is an opportunity for area citizens to help guide future land use planning and development related decisions in Montcalm County. THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE! JOIN IN THIS INTERESTING AND EXCITING EFFORT! As part of the planning process, the Montcalm County Fact Book was prepared in order to update demographic, economic, natural resources, transportation, and public facilities information. The Montcalm County Fact Book includes data, tables, charts and maps that provide a snapshot view of the county in 2005 that serves as the basis for formulating goals, policy and strategies for the future. It is available on the County website at www.montcalm.org. HOW TO USE THE PLAN There are seven critical components to using this Plan as a decision making guide. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-6 �• • • • • • • First is the background information in the Montcalm County Fact Book, as a separate document that provides basic information and trends in demographic, economic, land use, natural resources, tax base, transportation and public facilities of the county. The second component is the vision, goals, objectives and strategies in Chapter Two. These are based on public input, and reflect where citizens want their county to be over the next twenty years. Third are the best practices available to local governments to implement the Plan in Chapter Three. Fourth are the ten guidelines for effective county economic development in Chapter Four. Fifth are the future land use policies in Chapter Five necessary to achieve coordinated land use decisions in Montcalm County. Sixth is the discussion of transportation and other infrastructure in Chapter Six. The importance of improving roads, sewer, water and other infrastructure over the next 20 years is emphasized. Seventh are the implementation strategies and interjurisdictional coordination steps found in Chapter Seven. They outline the roles and responsibilities of the county, townships, cities and villages in carrying out the recommendations of this Plan. This Plan is a statement by the County Planning Commission regarding the present and desired future character of the county and strategies to assure that character. As a formal and tangible document, this Plan is intended to instill a sense of stability and direction for county, city, village and township officials, and for Montcalm County citizens and businesses. Every effort has been made to present factually correct and up-to-date information in this Plan and the accompanying Montcalm County Fact Book. Information was obtained from local, state and federal sources. Ultimately though, this Plan is a general document, and any site-specific decisions should be thoroughly investigated with original research materials before proceeding. The Plan is not regulatory like zoning. It is a policy guide to give direction to many future actions, including changes to local plans and zoning ordinances. MW:E:\word\montcalm\Plan feb 06/Chapter 1 Introduction.doc CAF:C:\G-Drive\W INWORD\PROJECTS\Montca lm County\Final General Plan March 2006\Chapter 1 Introducti on (3 06). doc CAF C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan July 2006\Chapter 1 Introduction (7 06) .doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 1-7 �Chapter 2 VISION, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & STRATEGIES VISION STATEMENT Introduction Montcalm County residents, businesses, and visitors have diverse needs, wishes, and dreams, and satisfying them is a big challenge for any community. This chapter describes those needs, wishes, and dreams in a vision for the future of Montcalm County, and includes goals, objectives, and strategies to reach that vision . The vision statement that follows describes Montcalm County as residents at several town meetings held in 2005 countywide wanted it to be in the year 2025. The results of the 1999 Montcalm County Citizen Survey and a follow-up 2002 survey were also considered . The vision is organized into topic areas that separately focus on key elements of the county . What emerges when all sections are read together, is a complete image of Montcalm County, as residents would like it to be in 2025 and beyond . The vision statement was the basis for goals, objectives, and strategies of this Plan . When reading this vision , it is necessary to mentally "transport" yourself into the future to the year 2025. Thus, there are references "back" to the early 2000's. 21st Century Montcalm County Montcalm County residents and businesses enjoy a high quality of life and are reaping the benefits of commitments to future generations made years ago. Beginning in the early 2000s, proactive policies and initiatives, economic development plans, and resource preservation plans were undertaken which went well beyond common practice of the day. These initiatives improved the quality of life, and retained and attracted people and businesses to the county. The results of this hard work are obvious to visitors and residents alike. Montcalm County has become a true reflection of sustainability (meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to me,e t their own needs). Businesses, neighborhoods, parks, schools, local government, agricultural and natural resources are healthy and self-sustaining in 2025. When asked about Montcalm County, residents use terms like "prosperous," "successful, "safe," "rural, "clean, "healthy, and "well-educated. Residents are also quick to say that Montcalm County is an outdoor recreation paradise and a great place to raise families or retire. 11 11 11 11 11 Economic Development - A County of Opportunity The cities, villages, townships and county continue to work together on an aggressive economic development program aimed at retention, expansion, and attraction of business and industry within the county. The primary Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-1 �objective is to create and maintain a healthy and growing economy in Montcalm County with high paying jobs. To appreciate the success of this initiative one needs only to visit the county's clean, harmonious, and compact industrial and business districts, and successful farms. A high quality-of-life, a sense of security, and strong community values are part of the attraction of new jobs to the county. By continually reinvesting in schools, transportation, health care, police and emergency services, compact and efficient sewer and water systems, and utilities, communities within the county satisfy basic industry requirements rivaling any community in Michigan. A marketing program which proactively solicits business and industry, is a significant factor in the economic success of the county. Revitalized older neighborhoods provide affordable housing opportunities for families of various sizes and ages. This is due to significant reinvestment by owners, but also to strict enforcement of the local building, housing, and rental codes. Many of the county's least expensive neighborhoods are some of the most popular for first time homebuyers. New subdivisions are located close to existing cities and villages and, through clustering and conservation principles, protect sensitive environments, natural scenery and prime agricultural lands. Where the visual character, sounds, dust, smells, and level of activity of commercial and industrial development are not compatible with residential neighborhoods or other noise sensitive land uses, they are separated or buffered. Where commercial development can serve residential needs, it is built adjacent to residential neighborhoods with an architectural design and layout that fits the character of the neighborhoods. Scenic Natural and Agricultural Landscape Character Preserved The most common landscape view in Montcalm County continues to be a mix of farm fields, meadows, wetlands, river and lakeshores, and woods. Rather than succumbing to sprawl and the attendant loss of natural visual character that is occurring throughout the rest of the State, the alluring characteristics that initially attracted residents and businesses to the county have been maintained, and in some cases enhanced. (The visual character of a community is set by the style, size and upkeep of its homes, businesses and civic places such as parks, stores, schools and government buildings. It is also set by the presence or absence of water and vegetation, hills and highways.) The rural landscape does more than simply provide scenery. The benefits of nature to residents ' mental well-being and the attraction for visitors are important. Montcalm County is recognized as having a unique combination of soils, climate, and water resources that enable its innovative farmers to grow diverse, high quality, high-yielding crops which are managed in a sustainable manner that continues to make agriculture a vital sector of the economy. Woods and fields help with water infiltration, maintaining biological diversity, and providing habitat for wildlife. Property owners have coordinated the retention of green space connections to create ecological corridors, enhance Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-2 �recreation, and provide a more continuous natural scenic view. Streams and lakes have buffer plantings that help protect water quality. New growth and development have occurred in compact form and in locations that retain ample open space throughout the county, reinforcing the scenic visual character rather than detracting from it. In Montcalm County, large-scale changes to the landscape (especially of vegetation, views, open spaces, and the water's edge), are minimized by encouraging thoughtfully designed and buffered new development, and redevelopment, in select locations. Places that were unattractive or lacked scenic character in 2005 were improved. This philosophy was applied to both residential and nonresidential development. Existing and new development, particularly along transportation and scenic corridors is screened with buffer plantings in character with a rural, nature-oriented landscape. Parking lots, big buildings, and outside storage areas are buffered by landscaping and natural vegetation. The number of signs has been reduced and remaining signs are well designed to enhance commerce and direction-finding without detracting from scenic views. A public well-versed in land and water protection approaches is deeply involved in making decisions about preservation. Working with conservancies and the State Purchase of Development Rights Program, key parcels are preserved through development rights purchases, donations, and other approaches over the past two decades. As a result, wetlands, forests, farmland (particularly prime farmland), and green spaces that comprise the rural character and ecosystem of the county are permanently protected. City and Village Centers Montcalm County citizens and officials long ago recognized that for a city or village to remain "economically viable," it must be a vital place for citizens and businesses. Structures and places of historical and architectural significance are protected and renewed and serve as reinforcing elements of visual character. City and village sidewalks are lined with shops and amenities and as a result are full of people. Community events make these centers the place to be on a regular basis. Parks and streets lined with stately trees welcome visitors and residents alike. Strip commercial corridors are attractive and fit into the rural setting. New developments complement existing transportation systems and serve the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, and automobile drivers safely and efficiently. The cities of Greenville, Stanton and Carson City, as well as the villages in the county are known as walkable communities, providing safe connections, separate from roads when practical, between residential areas and the many types of destinations within the community: shops, businesses, public buildings, churches, schools, parks and restaurants. As a result of its increased walkability, more active residents enjoy a greater level of health than in 2005. Links continue to be established between residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial development to provide safe, attractive and low cost pedestrian and bike routes as alternatives to automobile circulation. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-3 - - - ---- -- --- --- --- - - �There are also links to greenways with trails that extend beyond Montcalm County into the surrounding region. These greenways serve both as recreational opportunities in themselves and to connect destinations such as communities, parks, and schools. Quality of Life - A County of Education and Stimulation The county has long held education as a critical element of quality of life. The public and private school systems including pre-school, K-12 plus the Montcalm Community College, provide excellent educational opportunities. Students are well disciplined, computer literate, and ready to pursue any endeavor. Citizens can continue higher education, obtain technical, jobrelated training, and can take adult enrichment courses in a wide variety of subjects. Lifelong learning is a way of life in Montcalm County. Music, art, and museum events in many civic and private facilities continue to provide entertainment for all generations of Montcalm County citizens. Quality of Life - Recreation The county has long held recreational opportunities as an important aspect of quality of life. Montcalm County residents enjoy a variety of recreation opportunities at local and county parks, National Forest lands, State Game Areas, public access sites, golf courses, and other facilities. Trails link many parts of the county, extend beyond the county and provide opportunities for fitness and enjoyment of the outdoors. Boating, fishing and swimming on the inland lakes continues to be a popular pastimes. Montcalm County has established one of the most comprehensive regional recreation programs found in the State. The public schools provide ample indoor recreation opportunities during the winter months. Friendly, Cooperative Community County business and government leaders long ago recognized that working together is critical to the long-term economic and cultural vitality of the county. Civic groups also play an important role, assisting in keeping Montcalm County clean, attractive, and healthy with a sustainable environment and positive community spirit. Participation in community events, music concerts, and festivals is high. Montcalm County is a friendly and caring place to live and visitors feel the hospitality. The community is supportive of its citizens and helps provide mentoring and constructive guidance. Members of all generations of the community share in its identity. Both cultural and natural resources are preserved through wide community support by citizens who understand the value and principles of preservation. Leaders work to encourage a high level of citizen involvement from both residents and nonresident property owners. In return, leadership is responsive to the direction expressed by citizens. Leaders hold the public's trust when enforcing regulations that protect the environment, implement the County General Plan, and otherwise ensure protection of public health, safety, and welfare. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-4 �Intergovernmental Cooperation/Coordination A shared set of policies structured around a common vision of the future serves as a framework for decision making between all governmental entities in Montcalm County. The common vision and related policies recognizes the autonomy of each unit of local government, but also establishes a mechanism for addressing issues of greater than local concern. Communities apply the dual principles of respect and cooperation on issues of mutual interest. Cooperation promotes achievement of area-wide interests and the uniqueness of each local government is celebrated. Coordination of costs, timetables, responsibilities, and resources to continue upgrading the quality of life of the area are all included as an integral part of these cooperative policies. All county and local public services and facilities are coordinated, as are state, federal and private services and facilities when appropriate to do so. While local land use decisions are guided by local zoning standards, issues of greater than local concern are subject to input from surrounding local governments both within and outside the county before a final decision is made. Special ad hoc committees aid communication among county and local governments in this process and promote adequate oublic participation. ~ GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES The goals, objectives and policies that follow were based on the results of a survey of local leaders and the visioning sessions held in Montcalm County in 2005. Goal: Goals are broad-based statements of intent and establish the direction for the Montcalm County General Plan . Goals could generally be thought of as the desired "ends" of successful implementation of the County General Plan. Objective: Objectives are the stated "means" of achieving each goal, or the tasks to be carried out in the process of realizing goals. Strategies: Strategies are action statements in order to accomplish the goal and objective. I. GOAL - INCREASE OPPORTUNITIES FOR BUSINESS AND COMPETITION IN THE COUNTY. A. Objective - Ensure land suitable for commercial and industrial development is adequately served with public sewer, water, and other essential public services and facilities. B. Objective - Increase awareness of available land and strengths of area businesses. C. Objective - Promote involvement of county and local governmental units in economic development decisions. D. Objective - Encourage the establishment of businesses that provide yearround employment and offer quality jobs. E. Objective - Promote measures and activities which result in diversification of the economy. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-5 �r 1. Strategy - Encourage the county's Economic Development function to prepare a 5-year countywide economic development plan and update the plan on a regular basis in partnership with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, and the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, and other appropriate entities. 2. Strategy - Allow for publicly funded economic development activity based on the following criteria: a) Development will either preserve or create jobs according to ratios endorsed by the Economic Development Administration , U.S. Department of Commerce. b) Development will accompany or result in a significant amount of private sector leverage using brownfields, renaissance zones, tax abatement and related tools. c) Development will result in a significant return on the investment of public funds . 3. Strategy - Enhance the future viability of agriculture and natural resources enterprises by working toward ensuring that further processing of agricultural and natural resource products harvested from the county will , where feasible , be undertaken within the county. 4. Strategy - Establish a Convention and Visitors Bureau which in cooperation with existing Chambers of Commerce promote Montcalm County tourism attractions for day visitors from the surrounding counties. 11. GOAL-VILLAGE AND CITY CENTERS HAVE AN ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL VITALITY. A. Objective - Create vibrant and bustling villages and cities that are functional, people-oriented, and the center of cultural activity within the county. 1. Strategy - Existing civic and cultural facilities are retained in village and city centers and new or expanded civic and cultural facilities are placed in or very close to village and city centers. 2. Strategy - Maximize existing public infrastructure by utilizing brownfield redevelopment strategies to revitalize areas of the county. 3. Strategy - Encourage revision of city, village and township zoning ordinances, if necessary, to permit mixed use development in city and village downtowns and other important nodes in order to increase the base population near businesses and cultural facilities . 4. Strategy - Encourage the preservation of historic structures through maintenance and renovation that retains historic character. 5. Strategy - Encourage pedestrian activity in cities and villages through the design and construction of sidewalks and small public spaces that are safe and filled with art and other amenities. 6. Strategy - Promote voluntary participation in community and cultural activities. 7. Strategy - Encourage businesses and institutions to install public art, flowers, trees, benches and fountains . 8. Strategy - Expand the number and type of festivals and fairs and participation in community events. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-6 �----... 9. Strategy - Support use of housing programs to assist with new housing or rehabilitation of housing in cities and villages in the county. 10. Strategy - Evaluate and support where appropriate, new tools and incentives to facilitate economic development in cities, villages and townships. Ill. GOAL - GUIDE THE TYPE AND AMOUNT OF GROWTH. A. Objective - Encourage county and citizen understanding of, and involvement in the growth management process. 1. Strategy - Provide educational, opportunities and leadership on planning and zoning techniques to manage growth in general, and the specifics of this Plan as may be available from MSU Extension, the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission, the Michigan Association of Planning and related organizations. 2. Strategy - The County Planning Commission and local jurisdictions meet annually to discuss growth and land use issues. 3. Strategy - Review this General Plan every five years and update as necessary. IV. GOAL - ESTABLISH A SET OF LOCAL REGULATIONS AND A PROGRAM OF LOCAL ENFORCEMENT THAT PROTECTS QUALITY OF LIFE AND IS FAIR AND CONSISTENT FOR PROPERTY OWNERS. A. Objective - Explore the options to ensure that every local jurisdiction which has zoning does so consistent with this County General Plan and any adopted city, village or township plan. 1. Strategy - Educate officials and the public about the benefits, attributes, powers and limitations of zoning. 2. Strategy - Work with local authorities to ensure local zoning in all areas of the county that prevents over-crowding of land, loss of prime agricultural land , overuse of natural resources and promotion of economic development where there are adequate public services as this Plan indicates. 3. Strategy - Through coordination of local authorities with county and state authorities, ensure that areas with limitations for development are protected if they possess any of the following conditions: a) Flooding, as determined by National Flood Hazard maps b) Inadequate drainage as determined by county Drain Commissioner c) Soil formations with contra-indications for development as determined by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) d) Topography with steep slopes as determined by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. e) Inadequate water supply and sewage disposal capabilities as determined by the District Health Department and/or the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). f) Wetlands as determined by the MDEQ . g) Prime and unique farmlands as determined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. 4. Strategy - Encourage the development and maintenance of formal site plan review procedures and standards in city, village and township zoning Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-7 �... r ordinances for environmental protection of each of the environmental features listed above, and for groundwater protection in rural areas of the county. 5. Strategy - Urge adoption where they do not exist and promote fair and effective administration of junk and related ordinances at the township, city and village level. 6. Strategy - Promote the fair and effective administration of the County construction code, junk ordinance, private road ordinance and addressing ordinances. B. Objective - Encourage city, village and township zoning ordinances to be consistent with this Plan, kept up-to-date and enforced in a professional, fair and consistent manner. 1. Strategy - Encourage local officials to stay abreast of changing laws and regulations regarding planning and zoning and implement changes when necessary. 2. Strategy - Provide annual training for city, village and township planning and zoning commissioners on basic and advanced principles, procedures, laws, cases, tools and techniques to guide quality community development. 3. Strategy - More clearly define terms in local zoning ordinances to avoid confusion . 4. Strategy - Encourage city, village, and township zoning ordinances to be enforced in a consistent and fair manner. 5. Strategy - Modernize and utilize clearly defined procedures for granting or denying variances and rezoning efforts in an objective measurable manner consistent with the County General Plan . 6. Strategy - Encourage cities, villages and townships to make zoning variances the exception rather than the rule. 7. Strategy - Educate the public regarding the role of the city, village and township planning commission , zoning board of appeals and the zoning procedures outlined above. V. GOAL - REVIEW EXISTING AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AS THEY RELATE TO NON-FARM RESIDENCES. A. Objective - Preserve Montcalm County's unique agricultural sector and promote mutually healthy relationships between farm and non-farm residential neighbors. 1. Strategy - Encourage farming operations that utilize the Michigan Right-toFarm Act to solicit dialog and input from local communities and governing bodies. 2. Strategy - Encourage those farm practices that minimize odor, noise, and environmental risk and maximize natural resource conservation . 3. Strategy - Encourage farmers to participate in the Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program (MAEAP) . B. Objective -Assure the sustainable use of the unique combination of soils, climate, and water resources that characterize Montcalm County agriculture. 1. Strategy - Encourage the development and use of sustainable cropping systems that preserve and enhance the quality of agricultural soils. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-8 �r 2. Strategy - Manage irrigation systems according to Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices for Irrigation Water Use. 3. Strategy - Encourage continuing sustainable production of the diverse, high quality, high yielding crops in which Montcalm County has a unique position in U.S. agriculture. VI. GOAL - PRESERVE MONTCALM COUNTY'S NATURAL RESOURCES AND THE BEAUTY OF ITS LANDSCAPE. A. Objective - Provide for planning mechanisms and regulatory techniques that will preserve forests, wetlands, and other natural resources as Nell as farms and other vegetated landscapes. 1. Strategy - Encourage city, village, township and the county to support applications of agricultural land owners to enroll in agricultural land preservation programs like PA 116, Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) and Transfer of Development Rights (TOR) programs. 2. Strategy - City, village and township planning commissions are encouraged to work with the County Planning Commission to develop design guidelines for small parcels and large parcel development that promote voluntary approaches to the protection of natural resources and scenic quality. 3. Strategy- The county and local governments encourage the creation of conservancies and land trusts to acquire or obtain development rights to natural resource and scenic parcels that have been identified as important to preserve. 4. Strategy - The county and local governments support the voluntary donation of conservation easements for important natural resources and scenic areas, especially roadside areas along scenic corridors. 5. Strategy - Encourage careful land use management on the part of county officials and landowners alike. 6. Strategy - Encourage cluster zoning and open space preservation techniques in rural areas and compact settlement patterns in villages, cities, and in townships with urbanized areas where the proper infrastructure is available. 7. Strategy - Further develop and refine local greenbelt zoning techniques via maps and other tools to consistently protect and preserve sensitive environmental areas. 8. Strategy - Work with individual jurisdictions to establish uniform floodplain protection ordinances. 9. Strategy - Work with the County Road Commission, Michigan Department of Transportation, and local jurisdictions to refine private road standards to limit construction on steep slopes and to restrict private roads that contribute to erosion . 10. Strategy - Urge cities, villages and townships to adopt ordinances that limit construction clearing on steep slopes and set performance standards for any construction on steeper slopes. 11 . Strategy - Develop design guidelines that illustrate the least damaging building approaches for slopes. ---------~-- - . Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-9 �• B. Objective - A greenspace system of interconnected, undeveloped land, buffers, ecological corridors, forests, floodplains, wetlands, and other open space in private and public ownership is identified and protected in Montcalm County. 1. Strategy - Develop guidelines for property owners, developers, communities, and business owners on how to preserve or sensitively develop near wildlife corridors. 2. Strategy -Adopt conservation subdivision (a subdivision that groups lots together on a portion of a property in order to save large blocks of o:,en space) and cluster ordinances and promote the use of these techniques for new development of both residential and commercial development. 3. Strategy - Develop educational materials and programs for residential and commercial property owners on how to foster wildlife while protecting properties from wildlife damage. C. Objective - The identity and location of threatened and endangered species is documented and plans for their protection are drafted and implemented. 1. Strategy - Urge volunteer groups to document the identity and location of threatened and endangered species and develop protection plans. 2. Strategy - Urge volunteer groups to provide educational programs for the public regarding the value of preserving wildlife habitat and alternative preservation methods. 3. Strategy - Urge volunteer groups to develop and implement preservation plans for areas of threatened and endangered species. 4. Strategy - As the above strategies are implemented, an effort should be made to include the Conservation District, County Farm Bureau and related organizations. VII. GOAL - PROVIDE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL CITIZENS OF THE COUNTY. A. Objective - Ensure a wide range of housing choices. 8. Objective -Allow for reasonable and fair l,ow to moderate-income housing where compatible with other housing types. C. Objective - Priority should be given to meeting the most urg,ent unmet housing needs of the physically and developmentally disabled, those with low and moderate incomes, the elderly, and those who are on public assistance. D. Objective - Continue to provide for compatibility among and between housing types for neighborhood stability. E. Objective - Encourage senior-friendly housing. 1. Strategy - Encourage local governments to allow for mobile home parks and manufactured homes in local zoning districts that are appropriately sited for those uses. 2. Strategy - New housing developments/subdivisions should occur only in areas where soils are suitable for on-site sewage treatment and for adequate and protected on-site water supply; and/or public sewer and water are available or economically feasible. 3. Strategy - New housing developments should be compatible with existing and planned , neighboring land uses. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-10 �4. Strategy - Senior-friendly housing should be available in all cities and villages in the county . 5. Strategy - In the downtown area, encourage development of mixed-use housing , especially above retail establishments. VIII. GOAL- PROVIDE AN ATMOSPHERE WHEREBY AREA YOUTH HAVE A STAKE IN THE COMMUNITY. A. Objective - Develop and promote area recreational and cultural opportunities targeted to meeting the needs of youth. 8 . Objective - Encourage continuation/expansion and better awareness of the local recreational and cultural opportunities. C. Objective - Encourage involvement of youth in their community. 1. Strategy - Provide direction and policy assistance so that entities like Montcalm Community College can attract the best students, faculty, and facilities in conjunction with the state-wide network of 4-year institutions. 2. Strategy - Involve youth , whenever and wherever possible, in local governing , planning and collateral activities. 3. Strategy - Utilize existing recreational centers. 4. Strategy - Utilize existing cultural centers such as Montcalm Community College to expand and enhance the diversity of cultural information available. 5. Strategy - Support Community College/Public School System collaboration on educational initiatives such as the Tech-Prep Partnership. 6. Strategy - Support and expand the activities of Montcalm's 4-H community. IX. GOAL - MAINTAIN THE VIABILITY OF THE PRIMARY LAKE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES IN THE COUNTY. A. Objective - Support local planning and zoning mechanisms to maintain current levels of attractiveness and viability of the inland lakes in the county. 8. Objective - Execute steps necessary to achieve improvement and enhancement of overall water quality for these lakes and connecting waterways. 1. Strategy - Encourage strict enforcement of local lakefront zoning that protects water quality and minimizes risk of overuse of lake resources. 2. Strategy - Utilize and promote lake boards and other forums to educate lake residents regarding fertilizer practices and other actions that could affect water quality. 3. Strategy - Utilize and promote lake boards and property associations to implement best management practices as recommended in lake studies including the importance of watershed management strategies and sanitary sewers. 4. Strategy - Encourage the development of appropriately sited access sites/boat launches for all citizens . 5. Strategy - Develop increased waterfront access opportunities for all of Montcalm residents Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-11 . - �X. GOAL - PROVIDE UPGRADED TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND BETTER MANAGED ACCESS WHERE SUCH FACILITIES WILL PROVIDE THE GREATEST BENEFIT TO THE PEOPLE, BUSINESSES, AND TOURISTS IN THE COUNTY AS A WHOLE. A. Objective - Safe and efficient movement of people and goods with a variety of transportation modes. 1. Strategy - Prepare a countywide transportation plan addressing all transportation modes. 2. Strategy - Encourage the expansion of Greenville's dial-a-ride transit service to a countywide demand responsive transit system utilizing existing resources such as EightCAP. ,e::c--.. 8. Objective - Provide reasonable access by all segments of the population to jobs, services, recreation, and other opportunities. 1. Strategy - Encourage transportation infrastructure development that complements anticipated future land use patterns. 2. Strategy - Encourage MOOT to finance access management plans along each state highway in the county, and promote a uniform approach to access management regulations across the county. 3. Strategy - Pave or improve only those roads where soils and other natural features will support increased development. 4. Strategy - Facilitate a coordinated approach to transportation planning and financing among responsible government units. 5. Strategy - Encourage planning and zoning for only noise compatible land uses along state highways. 6. Strategy - Utilize where feasible , the resources of the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission. XI. GOAL - PROVIDE A RANGE OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES CONSISTENT WITH THE RURAL CHARACTER OF THE COUNTY, WHICH MEETS PRESENT AND FUTURE NEEDS OF EXISTING COMMUNITIES AND SUPPORTS THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF RESIDENTS AND VISITORS. A. Objective - Public sewer and water is provided to businesses and residents efficiently and in locations in which development does not negatively affect natural resources and community character. B. Objective - Public facilities, services, and programs provide for the health and safety needs of Montcalm County citizens, workers, and visitors. C. Objective - Police, fire and emergency services are consistent with public need and the ability to finance improvements in the most cost-effective manner. D. Objective - Solid waste, recyclable and hazardous materials are disposed of safely, effectively, and efficiently according to the adopted County Solid Waste Management Plan. E. Objective -Cities, villages and townships should detail when, and under what circumstances sewer and water service will be extended to new areas consistent with the goals and objectives of this Plan and any relevant local plan. F. Objective - Police, fire, and emergency services respond as rapidly and effectively as possible in a largely rural county. G. Objective - Residential development without public sewer or water service is limited to locations within the county where construction of on-site Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-12 �septic systems or on-site wells is not limited by soils. H. Objective - Review sale of public land for other possible public uses prior to sale. 1. Strategy - Encourage expansion of sewer and water into an area only when consistent with the planned intensity of land use for that area and scheduled as to affordability as determined by the respective city, village or township . 2. Strategy - Encourage county participation in regional management of solid waste and recycling . 3. Strategy - Cities, village and townships in the county should adopt site plan review regulations to protect groundwater and septic system inspecti n programs to protect the quality of groundwater, inland lakes, and streams. 4. Strategy- Expansion of public facilities (especially sewer and water) should be timed to guide future development into particular areas consistent with the demand for additional service. 5. Strategy - Encourage the District Health Department in cooperation with the MDEQ to develop a program to maintain the quality of water wells by establishing wellhead protection zones around municipal water wells. 6. Strategy - A county capital improvement plan should be annually prepared and updated listing proposed public improvements by location, cost and means of financing for the next six years. All proposed county facilities should be reviewed and approved by the County Planning Commission as consistent with this Plan prior to final approval and construction (as is provided by Section 5 of the County Planning Act, P.A. 282 of 1945, as amended). 7. Strategy - Every five years, if feasible, assess the future land use and facility needs of governmental offices, schools, hospitals, parks and cemeteries to provide adequate services without harming the quality of surrounding areas. 8. Strategy- Develop a map for the whole county that indicates the appropriate location of new public facilities , extensions of sewer and water service, and new development. 9. Strategy - Review the county's ability to satisfy long-term solid waste disposal needs in a cost effective manner and expand recycling services through fiveyear reviews of the County Solid Waste Plan. 10. Strategy - Coordinate infrastructure construction , repair, or maintenance with road construction , repair, and maintenance. 11 . Strategy - Cooperate regionally in the provision of public safety and emergency services, community facilities , and programs. 12. Strategy - Provide educational opportunities to residents regarding emergency, social and health services, and self-help actions to reduce risk. 13. Strategy - Coordinate service provision with other interested public agencies such as schools. 14. Strategy - Encourage notification of the County Planning Commission prior to the sale of public land, so the Commission can ensure that local governments have the first opportunity to consider acquiring it. XII.GOAL- ENCOURAGE COOPERATION BETWEEN LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES. A. Objective - Provide for better living conditions and business opportunities for the largest contiguous area possible. 1. Strategy - Encourage the involvement and cooperation of local governments, citizens, businesses, and public educational institutions in the development Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-13 �r and construction of sanitary sewer and water systems as appropriate for future growth . 2. Strategy - Form advisory boards and (where possible) unified operational boards to more cost effectively deliver public services across multiple jurisdictions where feasible . 3. Strategy - Educate local leaders on local land use issues/economic issues/economic development programs. 4. Strategy - Encourage local leaders in jurisdictions that are adjacent to on another to work with each other on planning and zoning issues (to promote continuity between these jurisdictions). XIII. GOAL - PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SERVE PRESENT AND FUTURE NEEDS WHILE CONTRIBUTING TO THE AREA ECONOMY. A. Objective - Maintain and periodically update a County Recreation Plan. B. Objective - Coordinate efforts with local jurisdictions and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to implement the recommendations of the County Recreation Plan. C. Objective -- Identify and explore new opportunities for recreational projects with local jurisdictions as a means of better serving residents and enhancing tourism. D. Objective - Link new and existing recreation facilities with non-motorized trails. E. Objective - Improve youth recreational opportunities throughout the county including indoor and outdoor sports activities. F. Objective - Expand recreation opportunities to include heritage, ecological, and agricultural experiences. G. Objective - The parks and state game areas are protected and expanded where appropriate. 1. Strategy - Support coordinated recreation planning at the state, county, and local level and involve private partners and the schools. 2. Strategy - Develop a funding program for the purchase of recreational lands in planned areas where a need has been determined or where a special opportunity exists. 3. Strategy - Develop a funding program for enhancing recreational programs and facilities throughout the county. 4. Strategy - Give priority to funding recreational projects that utilize existing facilities , underutilized facilities, and those locations that do not generate increased traffic in light traffic areas. 5. Strategy - Support development of a Montcalm County Heritage Trail which links cultural and historic attractions across the county. 6. Strategy - Promote opportunities for eco-tourism and agri-tourism . 7. Strategy - Support trail links throughout the county with a special focus on preservation of abandoned railroad right-of-way. 8. Strategy - The county parks system is expanded and developed to provide quality facilities to all residents in all areas of the county. 9. Strategy - A county trail authority is established as part of the county park system to oversee and maintain the county's trail system . 10. Strategy - A variety of recreational opportunities are made available to all county residents in locations that are accessible in all parts of the county . C:\G-Drive\WI NW ORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan July 2006\Chapter 2 goals_obj ectives (7 06).doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 2-14 - - -__ -- �JI Chapter 3 BEST PRACTICES INTRODUCTION This chapter describes 10 best land use practices and relates them to the Smart Growth Tenets in Chapter One and the Vision, Goals, Objectives and Strategies in Chapter Two. The County Planning Commission will work with local governments in the county to actively pursue use of these best practices over the next five years. 1. Protection of ground and surface water quality: develop watershed management plans for each watershed and promote a uniform set of local zoning standards (including for keyhole development). 2. Protection of the natural character of wetlands, floodplains, and wildlife habitat, especially along lakes, rivers, streams, creeks and drains in the county, and the preservation of public parkland, state game areas, and other special natural landscapes. 3. Protection of agricultural land as well as the agricultural character of the county. 4. Promote very low density residential development or clustering of homes on rural lands not protected for long-term agricultural use with more than 50% of each parcel permanently preserved for open space. 5. Protect rural character along county roads. 6. Pursue a compact settlement pattern in and around existing cities and villages while discouraging new scattered residential development in rural parts of the county. 7. Provide a wide range of affordable housing opportunities and choices, especially in and immediately adjacent to existing cities and villages. 8. Create walkable communities with a strong sense of place, which promote active living and encourage more mixed use development. 9. Increase the range of transportation options within and between cities and villages including the continued construction of non-motorized connections to public places and nearby communities. 10. Keep local plans and zoning ordinances up-to-date, predictable, fair and cost effective, as well as compatible with those in adjoining jurisdictions and with the County Plan. TEN BEST PRACTICES 1. Protection of ground and surface water quality: develop watershed management plans for each watershed and promote a uniform set of local zoning standards (including for keyhole development). Quality ground and surface water (lakes, rivers, streams, drains and wetlands) is critical to attracting and keeping businesses in Montcalm County and to maintaining a high quality of life. A watershed is the land area that drains snow melt and rainfall runoff to the lowest point in the watershed, which may be a lake, wetland, stream or river. Drainage can occur across land or via county drains, creeks, streams and rivers. Generally, overland flow is collected by the drain and stream system and conveys it to larger bodies of water such as rivers and lakes. Water that infiltrates the ground usually reappears as stream flow at a lower elevation. Watershed management plans provide a means for communities to focus attention on surface waters, such as rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands, and direction on how to Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-1 --- - -- - - - --~== �protect or improve the quality of those waters. An important component of a watershed plan is an inventory that describes the location, extent, and quality of waters in a watershed. A watershed plan should also describe threats to water quality and goals, objectives and strategies for overcoming those threats. Map 3-1 shows the watersheds in Montcalm County and a general description of each can be found in Chapter 4 of the Montcalm County Fact Book. Because a watershed may cross many jurisdiction boundaries, a uniform set of standards and related water protection regulations should be adopted by each of the jurisdictions in each watershed. These standards and regulations should address the percent of impervious cover of new development, vegetative buffers along water bodies, building and septic system setbacks from water bodies, larger minimum lot sizes and widths, the disposal of hazardous wastes, fertilizer use, soil erosion and sedimentation control, and other factors affecting water quality. An overlay zone is one regulatory approach to applying standards that apply to specific geographic area, such as those for protecting water quality, to the shoreline area of a water body. Underlying zoning standards in the city, village or township zoning ordinances still apply. Floodplains have long been protected by use of overlay zones . However, a waterfront overlay zone is also a good technique for applying any of the regulations listed in the previous paragraph. The Community Planning Handbook published by the former Michigan Society of Planning (now Michigan Association of Planning) and Filling the Gaps by the DEQ provide clear guidance and sample ordinance language for most of these standards. See Figure 3-1. Figure 3-1 Lake or Overlay River Zone R-4 R-2 OVERLAY ZONE Lake Lake or River Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-2 COM �, ~ ) s: ~ 0 :::, 0 0) I» 3 3 0 :::, ~ ~~ c... 0 s. 0 W"< C C OJ :::, "O IN:::, Wo'< OG) 0) (t) Montcalm County w♦• Major Waters/reds :::, (t) -, ii> :::, :E S- I» ~ -u ~Cf eil :::r Legend CD C. Watersheds - U.S. Highway Streams - State Highway Drains Lower Grand - Roads Jurisdictions Maple Lakes Sections Muskegon u, Pine Source: Michigan Center for Geographic lnfonna1ion, Depl oflnformahon Technology Map Prepared by !he Land Information Access Association. January 2005 MIies 10 ~ �r 2. Protection of the natural character of wetlands. floodplains. and wildlife habitat. especially along lakes. rivers. streams. creeks and drains in the county. and the preservation of public parkland. state game areas. and other special natural landscapes. Montcalm County is rich in lakes, rivers, creeks and streams that provide a sense of naturalness. There are also five state game areas, national forest lands, county and local parks. Although some of these lands and waters are publicly owned, the vast majority are in private ownership. This combination of ownership requires county, state and federal agencies to become partners with private property owners to protect sensitive natural resources. This means that all county residents need to be provided educational opportunities about their role in the management of those resources If they are owners of sensitive natural resource lands, there are best practices they can each implement. If they are not owners, but are park or game area users, or hunt on private lands, they should be provided with educational opportunities on management practices being applied, and how they can participate as stewards as well. The county and local governments within the county can provide a structure for the protection of sensitive natural resources through a linked greenspace system. A greenspace system has two basic parts. One is a system of linked recreation facilities, such as greenway trails, bike routes, parks, game areas and other preserves. These should also be linked to cultural features such as libraries, schools and shopping nodes. Neighborhoods should also be linked to the system so people can use the greenspace system as an alternative to automobile transportation and for recreation. The second is corridors of linked undeveloped, natural areas. These include drains, creeks, streams, rivers, wetlands and lakes and blocks of natural vegetation such as a vegetative buffer zone along the shores of water bodies, woodlands and vegetative screens along roadways to provide both nature-oriented scenic beauty and wildlife corridors. In addition to protecting these important natural features, a greenspace system adds immeasurably to the quality of life of people near any part of the system. A greenspace system can also be a powerful marketing tool for attracting employers and employees. Montcalm already has an excellent start on a greenspace system with the Fred Meijer Heartland Trail, White Pine State Park (a trail), the five State Game Areas, the Manistee National Forest land, numerous local parks, and abundant natural features. Once completed, the Fred Meijer Heartland Trail will connect walkers and bicyclists from Greenville to Edmore and Vestaburg and on to Alma in Gratiot County. The White Pine Trail already connects Comstock Park to Cadillac. A more extensive trail system that includes other off-road trails and marked bicycle routes along roads should be part of the greenspace system. A greenspace system should be based on a public/private partnership to manage open space for natural resource protection, recreational benefit and the amenity value of connected natural elements such as woodlands, wetlands, other natural vegetation , wildlife habitat, parks and game areas. Public partners can cooperate by linking public parks, game areas and other public facilities to the greenspace system, and by managing county drains as natural corridors. Private partners can cooperate by granting easements for trails, dedicating space along trails and roads to be managed as natural habitat and managing creek, stream, river and lake shores as natural corridors. Map 3-2 illustrates green infrastructure in the Grand Rapids metro region . Mapping green infrastructure is the first step to preparing a plan for a greenspace system. Map 3-2 is from a new publication, entitled West Michigan Tool Kit for Local Green Inventories published by the Land Conservancy of West Michigan. It lays out the initial steps for Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-4 �r preparing a greenspace plan and gives several examples from West Michigan communities. Map 3-2 Green Infrastructure of the Grand Rapids Metro Region Green Infrastructure Grand Rapids Metro Region - ............ ",.• .•.· .. : • ........- .....:.·...... Legend ♦ Hubs & Links Dedicated Open Lands _ existing • :a-.. proposed '• ., "."' .. Regional Recognized Farm lands Potential Hubs or Sites 1. GVSU Campus 2 Am • 11 Park 3 Millennium Park 4 Reeds Lake Area 5. Meijer Garden Area 3. Protection of agricultural land as well as the agricultural character of the county. Agriculture is arguably the most important economic sector in Montcalm County, where as it is #2 in the state as a whole. While there are a number of international threats to the agricultural sector, in order to protect the long term viability of local farming, farmland needs to be protected. Montcalm County farmland is threatened by the rapid development of non-farm residences in farming areas. The division of farmland into 2-20 acre lots results in the rapid loss of farmland. This loss is aided by local zoning which often favors non-farm residences over farming. This is unfortunate since farmland typically generates more tax revenues than public service costs, while non-farm residences are the reverse. A buildout analysis performed by MSU students graphically illustrates this problem. Some illustrated examples from that analysis are presented in Figure 3-2. Go to http://www.rsgis.msu.edu/dmoy/montcalm for the full analysis. One of the best solutions is for local governments to zone farmland for its agricultural value, not for its speculative development value. That is usually accomplished using a combination of quarter-quarter zoning, open space zoning, purchase of development rights and transfer of development rights. These techniques are discussed more fully over the next few pages. Agriculture is also a key component of Montcalm County's quality of life. The low population, low density, farm field characteristic that agriculture provides is enjoyed by Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-5 �r the non-farm population as an amenity. However, farmers essentially provide this amenity for free. In order to continue to enjoy this amenity, Montcalm County communities in cooperation with its farmers will have to take steps to preserve farmland . Figure 3-2 Before and After Buildout in Three Montcalm County Townships As Illustrated by MSU Landscape Arch itecture Students in 2005 Richland Townshi Cato Township Re nolds Township o to http://www.rs is.msu.edu/dmo /montcalm Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-6 �r Over 73,000 acres of farmland in the county is temporarily preserved through the Michigan Farmland Development Rights Agreements Program (formerly the Farmland and Open Space Protection Program or PA 116 Program). This is an area approximately the size of three townships. The Farmland Development Rights Agreement Program enables a landowner to enter into a development rights easement (the owner agrees not to develop the land) in exchange for property tax relief. Development rights are severable, separately conveyable rights in land like an easement, or mineral rights (see Figure 3-3). The landowner can enter into this agreement for a specified length of time (1 Oto 90 years). If the owner decides to develop the land before the agreement expires, he/she is liable for repayment of abated taxes. A standard practice is to place a lien on the land for the amount due the state. Map 4-7 in the Montcalm County Fact Book displays the lands enrolled in the program as of 2003. Figure 3-3 The Bundle of Ri hts Associated with Land A companion state program that is funded by repayment of PA 116 liens is called the Farmland Development Rights Purchase Program. This program permanently protects certain parcels of land from future development. This purchase of development rights (PDR) program involves farmers willing to sell development rights. It provides a payment to the land owner of the value of the development rights on the land. An advantage of the PDR program for the farmer is that he/she captures the development value now without developing the land, and then later can still sell the farmland for its farming value to a nearby farmer. In the meantjme, the property is taxed only on its farmland value. Some land owners donate some or all of the development rights to agricultural land , wh1 ich amounts to he donation of an agricultural easement. This is done in order to gain tax benefits and in some cases, the satisfaction of preserving the land in an undeveloped s ate. The donation could be to a land conservancy or a public entity. In order for Montcalm County farmers to participate in the state PDR program, the county or townships within the oounty will have to have an agricultural protection plan. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-7 �r This could be a separate plan or an amendment to this General Plan. A farmland protection plan would identify the types of land the county wants to protect and a means of prioritizing the selection of that land. A local funding match is required for participation in the state PDR program. This match can come from local general funds, a millage or from participating farmers. Development rights can also be transferred. In a transfer of development rights (TOR) program, development rights are purchased in an area the community has determined should not receive substantial development (called a sending zone), and transferred to an area less sensitive to development (called a receiving zone). In the receiving zone, development on land that has received a transfer of development rights can do so at an increase in density over current zoning. Farmland is usually in the sending zone and land in or adjacent to cities where there is adequate public sewer, water and roads, is usually in the receiving zone. See Figure 4-3 in Chapter 4 for an example. Because a publicly financed PDR program can only preserve a limited number of acres of farmland, and farmers may opt out of PA 116 programs or choose not to participate in a PDR program, and TOR is difficult to do without county zoning, other means to protect farmland will be needed. Zoning for very low density non-farm and cluster developments can protect farmland and limit the number and impact of non-farm residences. These could be especially important tools as it could take more time to design a county PDR program and develop the political backing for it, than for the local application of certain zoning tools. Montcalm County townships interested in protecting farming could rezone areas that are used for agricultural protection, and are presently zoned at densities that range from 1 dwelling unit per acre to one dwelling unit per 10 acres to a much lower density. Communities that are zoned at densities of from 1 dwelling unit per 1-10 acres generally find over time that it is difficult to efficiently and cost effectively provide public services, and the influx of scattered non-farm residences affect the ability of farmers to continue commonly accepted agricultural practices. Quarter-quarter zoning is a well-established farmland protection technique. Quarter-quarter zoning restricts the number of new nonfarm residences to one dwelling per 40 acres and each dwelling is on a lot that is not more than 2-3 acres in size in order to preserve the maximum amount of farmland. Bloomer, Pine, Sidney and parts of Eureka Township use this technique. See Figure 3-4. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 . 3-8 �r Figure 3-4 Quarter-Quarter Zoning Quarter /Quarter Zoning = Section = 640 acres 1 non-farm dwelling per 40 acre s 1/4 section Farmer A 160 acres 160 acres 4 non-fa.rm units Farmer B FarmerC 80 acres 120 acres 2 3 non-fa.rm units non-farm units Fanner D 240 acre ■ 6 non-farm units Farmer E 1 I non-fa.rm unit quarter / quarter sect l on = 40 acres f In determining where Montcalm County and its townships should prioritize its efforts to protect farmland, emphasis should be placed on land already in agriculture. Montcalm County farmers are successfully farming on all types of land, not just the land classified as "prime" farmland by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. Placing farmland protection efforts on an productive farmland will better reflect the investment land owners have made in their farms and help sustain the rural character of the county. 4. Promote very low density residential development or clustering of homes on rural lands not protected for long-term agricultural use with more than 50% of each parcel permanently preserved for open space. Rural lands in Montcalm County communities will not remain rural if they do not encourage very low density residential development and the preservation of open space. Clustering of homes on rural lands that are not protected for long-term agricultural use can preserve undeveloped land for farming or use as amenity open space. All of the units allowed under quarter-quarter zoning could be clustered together, but clustering can also be used to preserve open space as well as it can be used for farmland protection. Clustering is an approach that places residences in a more compact form than in a strip residential or conventional subdivision development pattern. Clustering can be accomplished by means of a "conservation subdivision." See Figure 3-5. For example, in a district zoned at a density of 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres, a 230 acre parcel could accommodate 23 homes. If that 230 acre parcel is developed with a maximum lot size for each dwelling of 2 acres, the 23 homes would require only 46 acres for development and 1;84 acres would remain undeveloped , and if suitable, available for farming. A conservation easement would be placed on the undeveloped portion so that it would never be developed , but it could still be used for farming. The 23 homes on 2 acre lots would have the benefit of 184 acres of surrounding open space. The size of lots should be determined in part on the size needed for an on-site septic system, as determined by the District Health Department. This technique works as well Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-9 �r for farmland protection as forest land or open space protection. Figure 3-5 Cluster Development in a Conservation Subdivision Compared to Strip Residential and a Conventional Subdivision 230 Acre parcel with derisity = 1 dwelling unit per 1O acres. Conventional strip residential development 17 home sites and 14 driveways (some shared) on the public road. No large open spaces. Conventional subdivision development 17 home sites. Three have access to existing public road, rest to a new road. No large open spaces. i j _ _ _ _i, ! i i I ·-··-.. -··-..-·-.. -··-··i··-··--Road - · ...-•-••-•-u-••-U-••-••-••-.-..--•.- -..-•__.. i j Conservation subdivision. 23 home sites. Extensive open spaces, some of which can remain income producing. Meets 10 acre density but with maximum 2 acre lot size. All homes are served from two new cul.de-sac roads. i i ' j i i i i i i i i i i i Reserved Open Space (through conservation easement) Open space that could be used for trails. Can be designated for agriculture or forest management. Can be allowed to grow up as meadow and woods. Can never be used for more houses. lmportant location for open space. i -------··--· - ·- -Road Since 2001 , ctustering is a required option for preservation of open space in communities with zoning (unless they are exempt communities) due to amendments to Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-10 - - -- - -- -- - -- - --- - --- - -- -- �r IT' all three zoning enabling acts (City-Village Zoning Act, PA 207 of 1921 as amended; Township Zoning Act, PA 184 of 1943 as amended); and the County Zoning Act, PA 183 of 1943 as amended . These amendments mandated that every non-exempted community with zoning must permit owners of certain residentially zoned property to have the option of developing all the permitted dwelling units on a portion of the property, if they left the balance of the property undeveloped . The undeveloped portion of the property must be permanently protected with a conservation easement or other legal restriction. In townships, this open space requirement is 50% of the total parcel area and in cities and villages it is 20%. Townships are exempt if their population is under 1,800, which exempts Bushnell, Day, Ferris, and Pine Townships in Mor.tcalm County. See Planning & Zoning News, February 2002 for more detailed information on this law. Montcalm County communities that are not exempt were supposed to adopt open space zoning by 2003, unless they opted out through a referendum. Exempt Montcalm County communities would also benefit by adopting open space zoning. However, the law does not provide many details in how to set standards for an open space ordinance, and certain standards should be adopted by local jurisdictions as part of their ordinance. These standards should include: • A precise definition of "open space." • A standard of what lands should be excluded when meeting the open space percentage requirement, such as wetlands, steep slopes, floodplain and other unbuildable lands • A review process • A description of the submittal process • Standards for permanent maintenance of preserved open space • How open space can be used • Whether density bonuses can apply • Others. MSU Extension offers sample ordinance language for open space zoning on the internet at: http://www.msue.msu.edu/portal/default.cfm?page id=133341 &pageset id=28882. A key consideration when designing clustered open space projects is the design standards for roads in the development. Montcalm County communities should either require all such roads to be public, or adopt private road standards that reflect public road standards. Private roads and driveways built to public road standards will better ensure fire trucks and emergency vehicles can use the roads when needed , and the Road Commission could accept the roads as part of the county road system at some future time if they were adequate ly built to begin with . It is very important that as development occurs in Montca lm County that public health be protected in the disposal of human waste. The conventional approach in areas that are not served by public sewers is to use on-site septic systems. It is the responsibility of the District Health Department to ensure that an adequate space is available on residential lots for a septic drain field as well as for a replacement field in areas where the original drain field is expected to have a limited life span. Often cluster projects are not viable without alternative waste treatment systems that treat the waste of all dwellings in a small community system, rather than individual septic systems. It is important that Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-11 �r r communities work with the Health Department in the implementation of standards for alternative waste treatment systems. 5. Protect rural character along county roads. Montcalm County enjoys a rural visual character because of the extensive farm fields, hedgerows, pastures, meadows, forests, wetlands and long distances between houses in rural areas. Recent development trends and the buildout analysis suggest that the county's rural character will not last very long if those trends continue. Strip residential and commercial development will, over time, obliterate the scenic view of farms and natural vegetation. It is possible to retain rural character along roads even as rural areas develop. In addition, areas that have lost rural character can regain it to an extent. The secret to maintaining or recovering rural character involves two basic approaches. These are: • Maintain natural vegetation along roadsides. By natural vegetation is meant trees, shrubs, wetland, meadow and prairie herbaceous plants and grasses, and groundcovers that are native to the area or naturally occurring (many plant species look like they are native, and grow in the landscape without humans planting them , but are not native to this continent). Herbaceous plants are not woody shrubs and trees, but include wildflowers, sedges, and similar plants. Vegetation that looks natural does not include ornamental vegetation . Ornamental plantings are those the horticulture industry has bred and cultivated for a more uniform, predictable, urban garden appearance. Ornamental plantings include lawns and regularly spaced shrubs and trees. Natural or native vegetation also has the advantage of requiring far less maintenance than ornamental plantings. Figure 3-6 illustrates this concept. • Maintain or establish natural vegetation screening. In areas where development already exists or is anticipated, buffer plantings that effectively screen the development will reduce the visual impact of that development and give the community a more rural appearance. Where a rural character is important, the vegetation screening should utilize naturally occurring plants in a natural looking planting. In cities and villages where a more urban look is desired, ornamental plantings are appropriate. But when used along highways, be sure only salt tolerant species are planted. In most communities, to achieve a natural appearing landscape, the landscaping requirements in the zoning ordinance need to be changed to avoid evenly spaced plantings, and to encourage more natural planting patterns in wider buffers. The retention of existing vegetation should be strongly encouraged. This may take notifying property owners and developers that the community does not want existing vegetation cleared until a site plan can be agreed upon. ~ There is a need for a strong education element regarding the maintenance of rural character. Widely circulated and promoted design guidelines are a helpful tool. One conventional development approach is for commercial land speculators to clear-cut parcels they are trying to market in order for potential buyers to better see the possibilities of the site. The conventional approach is also to clear vegetation from in front of commercial establishments so that business owners can use their facades as advertising . Residential subdivision developers often clear their site in order to showcase their homes. However, continuation of those approaches will lead to the elimination of rural character. Buyers of homes in subdivisions in rural areas may be happy with a Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-12 - -- - - --~--- - - - - �clear-cut site when they first move in, especially when the surrounding properties remain undeveloped. However, when the adjacent developments are also clear-cut, large areas of the county will lose rural character. A better approach is for subdivision developers to leave a vegetative buffer along the road as part of their open space. That open space should also wrap around the subdivision to buffer it from adjacent developments and to provide a vegetative amenity to home owners. Figure 3-6 Protection of Roadside Vegetation /1, Elevation View \ Please leave a strip of nature along the back of your property for wildlife and connect with others on adjacent properties. 100' Buffer Strip ,I Please do not clear a strip of at least 100' along the road. If already cleared plant north woods trees, shrubs and wildflowers or simply let nature take over. I 0 ~ 0::: ___________ MEADOW .___ ,, ---------- Plan View In addition to vegetation management, other visual character factors, such as signs, need to be considered and good design principles encouraged. Signs are important in business and for way-finding. However, signs that are pleasing to the eye and not intrusively large in the landscape should be encouraged. Regulations that deal with visual character need to be clear, reasonable and fairly administered. All property owners should be affected equally. Jurisdictions within the county need to cooperate, so one community with visual quality oriented regulations does not have to compete with adjacent communities without different regulations. Another tool to encourage retention of rural character is the scenic easement. This is an agreement by a landowner to limit visually disruptive activities on the roadside strip of Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-13 �their land. It is a legally-binding, permanent agreement that prevents certain activities such as vegetation clearing, building structures above a small maximum size, building signs above a small, maximum square footage or height and other conditions. If the landowner sells the land, the conditions spelled out in the scenic easement carry with the land. The width of the roadside scenic easement is negotiated and depends on various factors, such as the slope of the land, the view from the road, what is beyond the easement and other factors. 6. Pursue a compact settlement pattern in and around existing cities and villages while discouraging new scattered residential development in rural parts of the county. Communities that accept scattered, strip residential development instead of directing new development in and around existing cities and villages in a compact pattern risk future difficulty in providing public services, a negative fiscal impact on the community and a loss of community character. Strip residential development is characterized by the gradual development of residential lots along rural roads. Lot size will likely vary from one or two acres up to ten or twenty acres. However, these lots are often narrow along the road, and may include "flag lots," which are parcels with narrow road frontage, but an expanded portion away from the road. ,,.--...._ r Strip residential development has many negative impacts on communities. With many closely spaced driveways on roads where people expect to be able to drive fast, conflicts arise from residents turning into and out of driveways. It extends the service area for public safety and emergency response and often makes it difficult for response teams to find people needing help. It increases the number of miles that road maintenance crews need to service quickly. It also dramatically changes the character of a community from rural to suburban. Strip commercial development has many of the same negative impacts as strip residential development. An additional negative impact is that in most cases, strip commercial development requires shoppers to use their cars, as such developments are often located away from residential neighborhoods. This leads to many more trips for families to take and more cars on the road. If new residential and commercial development occurs in a compact pattern, close to where people already live, and close to existing public facilities, the burdens on communities to extend public services and expanded transportation infrastructure will be less. There will also be less rural development pressure that could convert land with rural character to a suburban and urban character. It is important for cities and villages to maintain their unique character and strip commercial development outside of already developed areas is one of the most destructive changes to communities. Compact settlements can still have natural elements, attractive character and recreational opportunities through greenway trails, design guidelines and land preserved as parks. Generally, if residential density is at least 4 dwelling units per acre, and extending as high as 12 units per acre in the most intensively developed residential neighborhoods close to commercial areas, public sewer and water can be cost effectively provided. Figure 3-7 illustrates the basic characteristics of a compact settlement pattern. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-14 �Montcalm County cities and villages should encourage infill development first on land presently served by public sewer and water, then support incremental expansion of public sewer and water around existing cities and villages to accommodate new residential and jobs development (this utilizes the investment already made in public infrastructure and keeps public service costs as low as they can be when accommodating new users). It also promotes a strong sense of community and leads to broader support for a variety of cultural activities which greatly enhance quality of life and improve the attractiveness of communities for economic development. Figure 3-7 Encourage Compact Settlement Pattern in and near Existing Cities and Villages INDUSTRIAL PARK NEW JOBS ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ENCOURAGE NEW BUSINESS ACTIVITY WITHIN EXISTING VILLAGE THAT REFLECTS VILLAGE CHARACTER DISCOURAGE STRIP DEVELOPMENT AT EDGE OF VILLAGE •••••••••• .•..•· ... DNEW OWTHWITHIN PUBLIC SERVICE BOUNDARY ' - ······· ······•· ! ~ : ······ : ·········••..i~ 7. Provide a wide range of affordable housing opportunities and choices, especially in and immediately adjacent to existing cities and villages. Montcalm County communities should be developing ways to ensure a greater provision of affordable housing . This is important in meeting not only the needs of existing residents, but also to let future businesses know that future workers have a wide variety of housing choices in the county. Affordable housing is defined as housing that costs no more than 30% of the occupant's income. There is a range in the price of affordable housing depending on a family's income, but generally, the provision of affordable housing is targeted toward low and moderate income families. Affordable housing types include manufactured and mobile homes, older homes in established neighborhoods, new homes priced to fit the budgets of low and moderate income families, apartments, condominiums and others. Communities should ensure a mix of affordable housing types that includes both older Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-15 �,,,.-- T and newer homes. An effort should also be made to build housing that is elderly-friendly to both allow residents new housing options in the communities they have long lived in as they age, and so that former residents can come home to be with family as they age. Manufactured home parks provide one affordable housing alternative. However, such parks should only be located in or near existing cities and villages where public sewer and water are available and roads are adequate to handle increased traffic. lnterjurisdictional coordination on local planning and zoning is necessary to achieve this result. Older existing neighborhoods can be an excellent source of affordable housing, if gentrification has not occurred on a large scale. To ensure the housing stock, it is important that homes and yards be properly maintained and that housing and blight codes be enforced. According to the Affordable Housing Network (www.nahn.com), new high performance, energy efficient infill housing is a good way to provide affordable housing. Such homes can not only be built within an affordable budget, they remain affordable to heat and cool. Many existing neighborhoods in Montcalm County cities and villages have vacant residential lots where infill housing could be placed. Volunteer groups, such as Habitat for Humanity are also available to help families reach home ownership and self-sufficiency. Support for these valuable organizations should remain strong. Photo 3-1 Older, Existing Neighborhoods can be a Source of Affordable Housing Photo by Franz Mogdis --- The federal government has programs for states and local communities to cost share efforts to provide affordable housing. Many of these programs are most cost effective to administer at the county level. US Housing and Urban Development programs include: Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-16 �• HOME Investments Partnership Program. HOME provides formula grants to States and localities that communities use-often in partnership with local nonprofit groups-to fund a wide range of activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership or provide direct rental assistance to low-income people. • Self-help Home Ownership Program (SHOP). SHOP provides funds for eligible national and regional non-profit organizations and consortia to purchase home sites and develop or improve the infrastructure needed to set the stage for sweat equity and volunteer-based homeownership programs for low-income persons and families. Eligible homebuyers are low-income families that cannot afford to buy homes at market rates but will provide a significant amount of sweat equity or volunteer labor to build one. The only eligible expenses for SHOP funds are land acquisition and infrastructure improvements that, taken together, may not exceed an average of $15,000 in assistanoe per home. Administration, planning and management development costs are eligible expenses, but may not exceed 20% of the grant amount. • The Homeownership Zone Initiative (HOZ). HOZ allows communities to reclaim vacant and blighted properties, increase homeownership, and promote economic revitalization by creating entire neighborhoods of new, single-family homes, called Homeownership Zones. Communities are encouraged to use New Urbanist design principals by providing for a pedestrian-friendly environment, a mix of incomes and compatible uses, defined neighborhood boundaries and access to jobs and mass transit. For more information on these federal programs, go to http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/index.cfm. 8. Create walkable communities with a strong sense of place. which promote active living and encourage more mixed use development. According to Walkable Communities Inc., "Walkability is the cornerstone and key to an urban area's efficient ground transportation. Every trip begins and ends with walking. Walking remains the cheapest form of transport for all people, and the construction of a walkable community provides the most affordable transportation system any community can plan, design, construct and maintain. Walkable communities put urban environments back on a scale for sustainability of resources (both natural and economic) and lead to more social interaction, physical fitness and diminished crime and other social problems. Walkable communities are more liveable communities and lead to whole, happy, healthy lives for the people who live in them." Walkability has become one of the quality of life features that helps attract employers and employees to a community. All the cities and villages in Montcalm County communities would benefit from walkability and bikability in order to elevate the quality of life and economic sustainability of the community. Walkable communities are characterized by convenient, safe and attractive walking and biking connections to the places people live and the destinations they frequent. Typical destinations include schools, libraries, neighborhood shopping, local government buildings, job centers and parks. Sidewalks are appropriate for walking connections if they are located on both sides of the street, are at least 5' wide, kept in good condition, do not have dead ends, are separated from automobile driving lanes by lawn, street trees or other vegetation and can be monitored by the public. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-17 �Bicycle lanes should be in the street, and properly marked by road striping and signs. National accident data indicates that it is safer for cyclists to ride in the street than on sidewalks. If there are very few driveways along a segment of road, or if the pedestrian and bicycling route is completely separate from the automobile route, then a shared use pathway, which should be at least 1O' wide is acceptable. Michigan communities are increasingly concerned about the health of their citizens and more and more are encouraging an active lifestyle. An active lifestyle is facilitated by opportunities to walk and bike both for recreation and for everyday activities, $UCh as commuting to work, or going to lunch from work, returning rental movies, or going to the library. These activities become very difficult or even unsafe if the pedestrian and bicycle connections are incomplete or non-existent, unsafe, indirect or poorly maintained. For more information visit www.walkable.org. Photo 3-2 Fred Meijer Heartland Trail ~ Photo provided by the Montcalm Alliance 9. Increase the range of transportation options within and between cities and villages including the continued construction of non-motorized connections to public places and nearby communities. Montcalm County is primarily served by automobile transportation, although rail freight service, general aviation, limited public transit and two long, but unconnected non-motorized trails are also available. Giving Montcalm County a competitive advantage and giving residents a high quality of life means maintaining existing transportation infrastructure in excellent condition, improving it where needed and enhancing or expanding other, more limited elements of the transportation system. As the population ages, there will be a growing need to improve non-motorized connections between communities, as well as between neighborhoods and places people frequent. All Montcalm County communities should cooperate in the coordination and prioritization Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-18 �of transportation improvements. A coordinated approach can help ensure that citizens get the most "bang for their buck." One of the easiest approaches to increasing non-motorized connections between neighborhoods and popular destinations is for Montcalm County communities to require every new development and redevelopment to include sidewalks and bicycle paths. Over time, the new segments installed incrementally will connect. Where there are gaps, the communities can provide connections as funding permits. Creating a connecting system incrementally requires communities to plan for a system of non-motorized pathways by establishing standards for size and location. Where the communities need to supplement pathways constructed during new development and redevelopment, priority should be given to locations that serve the most dense development, connecting to the most important facilities. The communities need to decide for themselves which are the most important, but facilities that communities typically find important include parks, libraries, schools, churches and neighborhood shopping. Photo 3-3 More Sidewalk Connections such as This One are Needed in Montcalm County ,..-----..,,. Photo by Franz Mogdis 10. Keep local plans and zoning ordinances up-to-date. predictable. fair and cost effective. as well as compatible with those in adjoining jurisdictions and with the County General Plan. Because Montcalm County and the communities within the county are experiencing many changes, the county and individual communities need to be proactive in dealing with that change. This requires the county to review its plan and the communities within the county to review their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances on a regular basis. Failure to do so will result in land use change becoming unmanageable. Local units of government in the county without an up-to-date future land use plan and zoning ordinance should create one, but should first explore the opportunity of doing so jointly using the new joint planning option provided by PA 226 of 2003. The regular review of plans and ordinances should include an evaluation of the impacts Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-19 �on, and compatibility with plans and ordinances of adjoining communities, both within and outside the county. Special attention needs to focus on compatible land uses along jurisdiction borders. There needs to be coordination of permitted land uses from one jurisdiction to the next, so that incompatible land use relationships do not develop. Local comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances and how they are administered are important factors affecting the economy of a county. One of the most important criteria for economic development is that the process for those who invest in development projects is predictable in terms of the regulations to which they must adhere and the time span of the permitting process, and that they will be treated fairly by government. The development community will generally support and follow regulations that promote a high quality of life if governments judge them fairly on their conformance with those regulations. Governments should make sure that their regulations match the community's goals and objectives. Conflicts in the development review process can arise when a community applies a different set of principles than planning and regulatory documents express. One way to make sure that all planning and regulatory documents reflect current community thought is to make sure they are up-to-date, and that all elected and appointed officials are clear on their intent and how they should be applied. Figure 3-8 Plans and Ordinances Should be Updated Regularly John t.Jwinword/Montcalm/plan feb 06/Chapter3 Best Practices.doc CAF : C :\G-Dnve\WINWORD\PROJECTS onlcalm Count.y\Ftnal General Plan March 2006\Cnapter 3 Best Pracoces (3 06).doc CAF C:\G-Dnve\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\F1nal General Plan July 2006\Cnapter 3 Best Practices [I 06).doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 3-20 �Chapter 4 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INTRODUCTION This chapter identifies some of the key elements for successful economic development in the County and the relationship of those elements to other parts of the General Plan. Economic development is a term that means different things to different people. Some of the common definitions are listed below: • "Efforts to increase the number of jobs and income circulating in a community. " The Handbook for Community Economic Development, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 1979, pg . 2. • "The process of intervening in the normal economic cycle in order to achieve a specific goal. Although the goal may vary, it is usually aimed at stimulating private investment within a specific area in order to generate employment, increase the tax base or increase the commercial viability of the area." Encyclopedia of Community Planning and Environmental Management, Facts on File Publications, New York, 1984, pg. 117. • "The preparation of land, tools, and capital required to make an area attractive to new industry and to enhance the capability of existing industry to expand." The Language of Open Space, City of Duluth, MN , 1975, pg. 59 . • "A development that provides a service, produces a good, retails a commodity, or emerges in any other use or activity for the purpose of making financial gain. '1 Or, "Any change in a community that enables greater production, increased employment, and a better distribution of goods and services." A Planners Dictionary. APA PAS #5xx/5xx, 2004 , pg . 157. • "The attempt to attract investment within a government's jurisdiction. " It can include measures "focused on outside business investment exclusively," to "locally initiated projects and efforts to diversify [local] economies," to measures designed to retain existing businesses, or combinations. The Urban Politics Dictionary. 1990, pg .172. Contemporary economic development initiatives usually involve elements of each of the definitions above. All such efforts are ultimately targeted at maintaining and improving the quality of life for residents in the community. Where there are plentiful jobs with wages sufficient to sustain families, communities are not merely viable, they are prosperous. Citizens expect government to do what it can to help ensure plentiful jobs and a sustainable future, but in a democracy like America where capitalism is the basis for the economic system, and where free trade laws permit products to be cheaply prepared by workers in other nations, and sold for low prices elsewhere, it is hard for government to consistently provide the elements for a changing economy that is increasingly defined by global forces. That of course is no reason for the federal , state, county or local government to not do all it can to help support a local sustainable economy. But at the county and local level, opportunities to directly and successfully intervene when a business is in trouble, or closing are often extremely limited-as was amply demonstrated with the recent Electrolux plant closing and job losses in Greenville. That case is an example of global free trade at work. It is much cheaper to pay workers in third world countries. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-1 �ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BASED ON SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES So what can a county and local units of government do help retain businesses and build a sustainable economy? First, the county can continue to take the lead through its economic development arm , the Montcalm Alliance. Second, ten Smart Growth measures are listed below. These are all based on the principles of sustainable development. Sustainable development accommodates needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. 1. Develop a common. countywide vision of a sustainable future that is shared by local governments and widely supported by businesses and citizens in the county. Everyone needs to understand "We are all in this together." Losing jobs in Gr3enville, Edmore and elsewhere in the county hurts quality of life in the whole county, not just in those jurisdictions. lnterjurisdictional coordination and cooperation is essential to successfully implementing a common vision of the future. Recommended actions include: • Understand the county economy better-that includes its strengths, weaknesses and emerging threats. Work together to create a countywide 5-year strategic economic development plan which doles out responsibility for implementation to a wide range of individuals and groups who work cooperatively together. • Link the strategic plan to basic land use and infrastructure considerations as addressed in this Plan. • Set aside parochial considerations and be willing to cooperate night and day when the opportunity is presented for new jobs. That is how the Lansing area got selected for two new General Motors plants four years ago, and why they escaped with just one small plant closing in the recent round of cuts. • Identify and provide incentives for joint local planning and zoning between two or more units of local government. • Consider the benefits of combining local governments, cooperating on more shared services, and/or consolidating more governmental services in the County to improve economic competitiveness by more efficient use of taxes and eliminating duplication of services. 2. Protect the natural resource base and quality of the natural environment. Natural resources serve as the primary basis for the Montcalm County economy. A healthy economy and healthy environment go hand-in-hand. In particular, adopt policies to prevent premature land fragmentation , because that leads to land conversion , especially for single family homes on large lots in the country. Land fragmentation undermines the long-term viability of agriculture in a county that consistently ranks in the top 10 counties in Michigan for at least four agricultural products. Actions to take include adopting local policies and programs to protect: • Farmland (as described in Chapter 3) • Forestland (same approach as for farmland) • Mineral resources • Inland lake/stream water quality (as described in Chapter 3) • Sensitive environments (e.g. wetlands and floodplains) • Groundwater. 3. Protect existing income sources, wealth generators, and the existing tax base through strong business retention and entrepreneurial support policies. The ·n come existing businesses have provided to their workers has supported the local eco omy Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-2 �~ ( I ,,,---....._ for decades. It may well be the actions of budding entrepreneurs in the county today, that provide future support. Actions that could be taken include: • Find out what the needs of existing businesses are and work hard to do what can be done locally to retain existing jobs and businesses. • Better educate the public on the uniqueness and importance of agriculture in Montcalm County, and on the important role that sustainable use of irrigation water resources plays in making this diverse and productive agriculture industry possible. Use available measures to protect existing farms, the use of irrigation water and agricultural support and processing industries. Work to attract valueadded agricultural industries. • Explore the potential economic development benefits of an ethanol plant, biodiesel plant, or other agriculturally based value-added economic development opportunity. • Support entrepreneurial internet based business starts through local zoning that permits home occupations, provided adequate safeguards are in place to prevent incompatibilities with abutting property. 4. Maintain quality physical infrastructure. This is roads, sewer, water, storm drains, fire halls, police stations, schools and similar government buildings. This infrastructure is the skeleton around which businesses can grow new jobs and workers can be gainfully employed . • Maintaining quality physical infrastructure is so important and so directly tied to land use decisions that Chapter 6 focuses on transportation and other infrastructure. But in addition other steps should be taken: • Support high speed internet countywide as way to promote economic development; and • Support expansion of natural gas service and 3 phase electric power to attract new agricultural industry in targeted locations in the county (preferably if it is a factory, within community service areas as described in Chapter 5). Irrigation wells need the 3 phase electric power and natural gas is cheaper than LP gas where available. Figure 4-1 Quality Infrastructure is Essential to Economic Development Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-3 �5. Provide land properly planned, zoned, and serviced with utilities and quality roads to accommodate new businesses and affordable housing. Actions to take include the following: • Economic development should take place only within community service areas where public sewer, water, and paved roads are available, except for certain agricultural industries described above. • Plan and construct industrial parks that meet the certification requirements of the State of Michigan. Greenville has already done so, now it just needs help to fill it. Howard City and Edmore should follow Greenville's example and obtain certification for their industrial parks. • Assist local governments with efforts to improve the availability of and wider choice in affordable housing (ownership and rental). Affordable housing is a key economic development tool in areas with a well skilled workforce. Options are offered in Chapter 3. Intergovernmental cooperation is often critically important when expanding housing opportunities. • Promote development in the Montcalm County Tax Free Renaissance SubZones in Carson City, Stanton, Howard City, Edmore and Pierson and Montcalm Townships. • Reclaim brownfields after cleanup for redevelopment that helps the community achieve sustainability by reusing existing land and infrastructure. • Establish a countywide brownfield development authority . 6. Provide a quality education and wide variety of cultural opportunities. A well-trained workforce has long been a precursor to successful economic development. All local school districts need to focus on producing quality graduates with the skills to join the workforce or go on for further education. No child should be left behind. Actions that could be taken include the following: • Encourage local businesses to take an even greater role in helping shape the quality of education in local schools. • Continue to expand support for Montcalm Community College and the County ISO as tools for economic development. 7. Protect and enhance the unique aspects of each community in the county. Focus on those aspects which define its character and contribute to local quality of life. Protect indigenous visual character and set high standards for the visual and structural quality of all new job producing development. Some techniques are presented in Chapter 3, but the end result should be: • Retain small town and village character (do not turn small towns and villages into suburban looking strips) • Protect agrarian character (do not turn farmfields into large lot farmettes) • Protect scenic character (protect key viewsheds, keep buildings low, protect important open spaces and sensitive natural areas) • Protect lakes, stream and river corridors and link public access to them • Develop/protect/enhance good school systems. • Develop/nurture/protect/enhance cultural facilities (theaters , music and dance schools, museums, etc.) • Fight homogenization. Corporate businesses look the same from one community to the next, and whil,e it is good for that business identity, it robs the local community of its own identity. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-4 �/I 8. Better understand the relationship between public service costs and new development and be careful what local governments subsidize. For example: New development should always pay its own way except where the community consciously decides to subsidize it (as in elderly housing , or for a major new employer) . Otherwise the rest of the community ends out paying for the services to the new development, while also paying for all the services to existing development. • Many Michigan communities have granted long tax abatements only to have the benefited industry go bankrupt or leave before the tax abatemHnt period is up. Tax breaks should be sparingly used, and only when the benefits are clear and do not undermine the integrity of existing businesses. • Beware that when public services are initially installed (or upgraded), new development exploits excess capacity (such as a paved road , or a sewer line) . Once excess capacity is gone, significant new public service costs will appear-who pays then? It is important to stay ahead of public service demands and use infrastructure to guide future development rather than react to it. • The true public costs of new residential development are rarely borne entirely by the development unless it has a very high value relative to the services used . This is often not apparent because not all the public service costs are borne by the local government that has the power to approve the development. Most retail businesses also cost more to service than the revenues they generate when all public service costs are included. In contrast, most office and industrial development does pay its own way, as do 1-2 unit apartments and condominiums. Open space usually is a break-even proposition. • Be sure you know the infrastructure impacts of new development and who is to pay, before adopting new plans or approving new development proposals. • In the late 1990's a SEMCOG/Rutgers/MSU study revealed that compact growth in 18 of Michigan's rapidly growing communities which diverts half of the new development outside of easily serviced areas at only a 10% increase in density in the area expected and desired to attract new growth, will save : 12.7% of developable land (8164 acres) ; 13.2% of the agricultural land (5651 acres) ; 11 .9 % of fragile land (2198 acres) ; 11 .9% on local roads (189 lane miles) ; 15.1% and 18.1% respectively on water and sewer; as well as 6 .4% on housing costs and 3.2% on local government operating costs. See Figure • 4-2. 9. Do not let proposed increases to the tax base drive new development approvals, unless the development is located where all necessary public services are adequate. and the land is planned and zoned for that use. For example: • In many communities, diversification of the tax base is desirable (or even necessary to take some of the burden off existing taxpayers). However, if doing so increases public service costs more than tax revenues to pay for them , there may be a net loss in the community quality of life over time. • Diversification of the tax base in an agricultural townsh ip is almost certain to destroy the resource base and existing rural character, unless it is for a resource-based industry that must site close to the raw materials that feed it. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-5 -~- ~ ---------=--- �• Nonfarm residences in rural areas usually require far more in services than they typically pay for in taxes. In contrast, cornfields usually generate more in tax revenues than they demand in the way of public services. The sustainable option is farms. Figure 4-2 Planned Compact Settlement Patterns Cost Less in Public Services ~ ( Unplanned Growth 10. Planned Growth Consider the impacts of all plans and incremental land use decisions on adjacent jurisdictions and on future generations. Ask yourself: • Is the decision consistent with the golden rule? • What future choices are being limited or future problems would be created? • The decision is not sustainable if it robs future generations of the ability to meet their needs. Many of the ten Smart Growth measures discussed in this chapter are illustrated in Figure 4-3 which is from the Leelanau County General Plan. I' Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-6 �Figure 4-3 Smart Growth Techniques to Build Sustainable Communities LINK OPEN SPACES NEW DEVELOPMENT: Compact Close in to village PROTECT RENEWABLE RESOURCESFARM & FOREST LAND ,, SEPTIC SYSTEM MAINTENANCE ¼/;·1/ IEA::.~~----- - ---· YHOLE DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTED ~--=::::= UFFER TO ROTECT WATER QUALITY E:\word\Montcalm\Plan feb 06\Chapter4 Economic Development2.doc CAF: C:\G -Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm Counly\Final General Plan March 2006\Chapter 4 Economic Development (3 06).doc CAF C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan July 2006\Chapter 4 Economic Development (7 06). doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 4-7 �Chapter 5 FUTURE LAND USE INTRODUCTION This chapter describes a future land use pattern for Montcalm County and key policies to achieve that pattern. It examines existing zoning as shown on Map 5-1 the Composite Zoning Map, future land use plans of jurisdictions in the county and local plans and zoning ordinances of jurisdictions of communities abutting Montcalm County. Compatibility of land uses between jurisdictions is discussed as well as consistency with the Smart Growth Tenets (see Chapter 1), Vision, Goals, Objectives and Strategies (see Chapter 2) and Best Planning Practices (see Chapter 3). The planned overall future arrangement of land use along with a description of those land uses, and the future arrangement of land use by sector of the county are discussed. Policies Montcalm County and communities within the county should follow in order to achieve the desired future vision are discussed in order to sustain the quality of land and water resources, to provide public services in the most efficient and cost effective manner, to provide for the highest quality of life and to grow and sustain the economy. EXISTING PLANNING AND ZONING Eighteen communities in Montcalm County have their own zoning ordinance. Map 5-1 is a composite of those ordinances and shows the effective zoning for Montcalm County. Six townships are shown as blank on the Composite Zoning Map as those communities do not have a zoning ordinance. Montcalm County does not have a zoning ordinance and all cities, villages and townships are encouraged to adopt and maintain local zoning that is consistent with a local master plan and this County General Plan. Existing Local Plans Only three jurisdictions within the county indicated they have a future land use plan (also known as a master plan or comprehensive plan). This suggests that most communities in the county are zoning without planning first (a legal prerequisite), and thus are exposed to unnecessary legal risks if their zoning ordinances were challenged . Existing Zoning Large areas of Montcalm County are zoned for rural residential use, the bright yellow on Map 5-1. The density of this zoning district for most of the county is from one dwelling unit per acre to one dwelling unit per 10 acres. This permits extensive residential development that can result in the loss of the agricultural economy of those townships and of the rural quality of life. Incremental, scattered development, over time, can have a profound negative effect on agricultural businesses, the capacity of the road network, the capacity of communities to efficiently and cost-effectively provide public services , the quality of water resources (such as streams, rivers and lakes), and the extent of woodlands and undeveloped spaces that provide rural character and contribute to a high quality of life. This is evident in the buildout illustrations on Figure 3-2 in Chapter 3. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-1 �) ) 3: 0 :::, s: 0 r+ C') Q) () 3 ::J Q) (") 3 0 :::,C: s: c._() ~o ~ ru o, '< C: I N::J (") '"O 0 CJl No'< OG) 0) (t) ::J Montcalm County ru Composite Zo11illg ~+· (t) '"O ru ::J Legend - U S. Highway - State Highway • Roads Lakes Streams Drains Jurisdictions Sections 0 UI s= S':::, Commercial Industrial MHP-Manufactured Home Park Other (PUD. lnstltutlonal. Public) Residential :::, cc • Resource Protection (allows residences) Resource Protection (does not allcm residences) ' "'1 Rural Residential State Land • Source Michigan Center for Geographic lnfonnation . Dept of lnfommtion Technology Map Prepared by 1he Land lnfomution Access A.ssooi.ltion. January 2005 M~ea ,,3~ ,o �Three townships, Pine, Sidney and Eureka, have large areas zoned for resource protection, a classification that generally permits residences at a density of one dwelling unit per 40 acres. About one third of Eureka Township is zoned resource protection, while the rest of the township is either in public land ownership (Flat River State Game Area) or a residential use in and around the City of Greenville. About 90% of Bloomer Township is zoned Resource Protection, with residences permitted at one dwelling unit per 40 acres. The corridors of several roads are zoned for strip commercial development, such as M46 in Belvidere Township, Cato Township and Reynolds Township, M-82 in Reyrolds Township, M-66 in Belvidere Township, M-91 in Pine, Montcalm and Eureka Townships and M-57 in Eureka and Bloomer Townships. This promotes narrow lot commercial development, as well as a proliferation of driveways, congestion and unsafe driving conditions. Those road segments could develop in a way that is destructive of the economic vitality and character of those existing cities and villages. Strip development can also force communities to extend public services in an inefficient and costly manner. The total buildout population for Montcalm County ranges from 279,458 to 759,476 persons, depending on the density at which each zoning district builds out. Many districts permit a wide range of densities. This is between four and thirteen times the existing population of the county. As discussed in the Montcalm County Fact Book, this represents serious over-zoning and only serves to attract non-farm residences to the county in an unplanned pattern. With so few communities having master plans, there is little planning guidance for communities within the Montcalm County to guide growth and public investment in the future. This Plan will help provide guidance for those communities that choose to follow it, by adopting new plans, or amendments to existing plans and zoning ordinances to reflect the vision of this Plan. Plans and Zoning Ordinances of Communities Abutting Montcalm County How one community develops at its borders affects the communities on the other side of that border and vice verse. It is important for Montcalm County to understand the potential affect of adjacent community plans and ordinances while developing its own plan. The proposed arrangement of future land uses described in this chapter and the policies proposed to support that arrangement are compatible with existing plans in adjoining jurisdictions. Of the adjacent counties that share at least a dozen or more miles of common border, information was obtained from Mecosta County, Gratiot County, and Ionia County, but not from Newaygo County, Isabella County or Kent County. Gratiot County (the county east of Montcalm County), is largely agricultural in the four townships that border Montcalm County (Seville Township, Sumner Township, New Haven Township and North Shade Township). Gratiot County's 2002 Strategic Plan places its focus on economic development rather than land use, but does propose to retain a rural character. However, its 2002 Strategic Plan also proposes to encourage growth away from the highways, which could lead to a conversion of agricultural land to other uses in areas such as along the border with Montcalm County. ~ Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-3 �Gratiot County exercises zoning authority over six townships, only one of which (Sumner Township) is adjacent to Montcalm County. In Sumner Township (which is opposite Ferris Township in Montcalm County), minimum lot size for the agricultural district is 40 acres, which should help preserve agricultural use there. Zoning for the other three Gratiot County townships along the Montcalm County border is unknown. To the extent that agriculture is supported in Gratiot County along the border with Montcalm County, it is a compatible land use. Ionia County (directly south of Montcalm County) has an agricultural area in the eastern part of its border with Montcalm County, and in the western border section a combination of developed area in the city of Belding, undeveloped Flat River State Game Area and agriculture in Otisco Township. Ionia County has a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (2002). A Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 2004 by the Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners, but then rejected by voters in a referendum. Otisco Township, which is opposite Eureka Township in Montcalm County has zoning (2002). While much of the border area in Otisco Township is zoned rural conservation or agricultural conservation, the minimum lot size of these districts is 1 acre. If there is substantial development pressure, which is possible as Otisco Township surrounds Belding, is only about 4 miles south of Greenville and can serve as a bedroom community for Grand Rapids, about 20 miles away, Otisco Township could develop in a sprawling, Iow density pattern. The Flat River State Game Area straddles the Montcalm and Ionia County line south of Greenville and north of Belding in Ionia County. The game area wiU help retain substantial open space in this area, but will also serve as an attraction to rural development, which may substantially fiH the privately owned lands at a density that is not efficient or cost-effective to provide many public services. Mecosta County is directly north of Montcalm County. Mecosta County administers zoning for the four townships directly opposite Montcalm County. The Mecosta County Zoning Ordinance was last updated substantially in 2002. The entire border area on the Mecosta County side is zoned either Agricultural/Forestry (roughly 75%) and Agricultural (25% ). While these districts are intended to preserve agricultural and forestry resource production, minimum lot size is only 1 acre. Thus portions can develop in a sprawling pattern that would be difficult to efficiently and cost effectively provide public services to. It may also over time, serve to create a large population across the border from Montcalm County that will pass through Montcalm County and create demands on its transportation system. Because these counties all have rural populations, incompatible land uses are not common now, nor likely in the next 20 years. However, northeast Kent County is rapidly growing and more incompatibilities are likely there . Unfortunately none of the jurisd ictions in northeast Kent County responded to Montcalm County's request for a copy of the local plan and zoning ordinance. so compatibility of land uses could not be analyzed . Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-4 �FUTURE LAND USE AND POLICIES The future land use pattern envisioned in Chapter 2 is based on a sustainable economy (especially in the agricultural sector), the preservation of rural character, the provision of a variety of residential opportunities, protection of natural, visual and cultural resources, the provision of an efficient and diverse transportation network, and all the key infrastructure needed to support job development in the nine incorporated cities and villages in the county. The text below describes the existing and future land use pattern in Montcalm County. Existing land use/land cover in 2001 is illustrated on Map 5-2. Policies to achieve a desired future land use pattern are illustrated on Map 5-3. Floodplains and wetlands are illustrated on Map 5-4. Future Land Use Policy If the vision, goals, objectives and strategies recommended in this Plan are implemented, then over the next twenty years, the landscape of Montcalm County will change little except in and contiguous to the existing cities and villages in the county. In fact, future land use will look much like Map 5-2, Existing Land Use/Land Cover. More specifically: • Farms and forest land will remain the predominate land use; • Existing cities, villages and parts of adjoining townships will develop within compact community service areas; • Rural character, especially along the major road corridors, will be preserved; • Sensitive resources, especially streams, rivers, lakes, floodplains and wetlands will be protected; • Compact job centers and economic renaissance zones will continue to be developed in appropriate locations; • Commercial centers will be encouraged to expand where existing commercial use is established, and where attractively designed and in a compact pattern; • Single and multiple family development will largely occur in platted subdivisions served by public sewer and water; • Rural residential development will be limited, and not in a pattern that places the agricultural economy at risk; and when it does occur, it will do so consistent with best practices that protect natural resources and rural character. Key Future Land Use Policies Map Map 5-3 summarizes the key land use policies in this Plan. Key features of this map include the following: 1. Community Service Area Boundaries. These areas illustrate the maximum extent of dense residential development at 4-12 units per acre and intense job-based non-residential development. Infill, brownfield redevelopment and incremental expansion of urban services (especially sewer, water, storm drains and paved roads) is the desired primary order of development within these areas. Local planning and zoning that respects compatibility between land uses should guide the specific location and timing of development within these community service area boundaries. _,,.... ~ Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-5 �) ) c;;· 0 ~ ::J :::s C) cc 0) 3 i D) e,_() :::s ~o s: a. ru c;,'< C I ) m >< ~ O> I ' ' I\.) ::J c-o OG) CD I -N o'< O') ('O U) Montcalm County w♦• ::J ., ('O 2001 La11d Use Map ~ i D) :::s a. 0 7J ru ::J 0 < .., CD Legend 2001 Land Use • - U.S . Highway Streams - State Highway Drains Agricultural Roads Jurisdicbons Barren Water Lakes Sections Forested Wetlands • Rangeland Urban Source Michigan Center for Geographic Information, Dept oflnfonnation Technology Map Prepared by the Land Information Access Association, July 2005 M ies 10 (J1 �) " s: ~ 0 :::::, 'Tl g -~ s::: s::: r+ 3 ~ c.... () £.0 01 I o, ru ::I "O C. 01 '< C I\.):::::, -..Jo'< OG) 0) (t) :::::, ~ -0 ru :::::, e ** * - cw Key Policies Map Key (t) -, I ) Special Landscape Corridor - Public Facilities - (Town Halls, Fir• Stations, etc.) (/) Cl) Freeway Primary Road Collector Road or Local Parks Commercial Centers D Employment Centers Farm& Forest Land Conservation Renaissance Zones ["_:-j Community Service Area Boundaries • • • • • Fred Meijer Heartland Trail and White Pine Trall State Game Areas Manistee National Forest Floodplains Map prepared by Plannlng & Zoning Center, Inc:., with asslstanc:e from the Land Information Accen Association and FEMA. 10 hh•\ -0 2. c;· cii' (/) �) '\ s: 0 ::::, ....0 s: 0 ::, I» () 3 0) 3 0 0 c.._ () C: ~ o ()l I ex> ::::, '< C I\.) ::J s: Q) '<°"O o'< CJ) CJ1 OG) (\) I ::::, ~ 0) CD ::, w♦, CD -, Q!. ""O ru ::, V, ;::;: <' City & Village Boundaries (\) Sealoos ~ ::::, Sensitive Lands 0. - V, Streams Drains th• ll<n•llv• I 1110. l.1yn w11 romp°"cd from the followinir 1) 2001 Wdlan~ b) ruv,n .,,d l)flln•l•yn bufl<t'edll lt)Oft r) fllMA ort11d,,.,.,d117.or1tA d) l'11,cdl tlblod II dlhtt A11rlcullur• or"IL, l'.xcmpt that inltt90CCI lakeabulfertd al !()()ti sew~ ,l'ltfd d•I• provl<k(l tOll11")' ot lh• F.,pali1.1tio11 Oq,t ofM011IClllrn c....-,ty, l004 Mid1l)\lt1 t' n,u, lo, OC"t<f 11i1lc lnlom1aU,.,, Dtl( ol l11form&U011 'ltcltnology Map J'1q,eml by lht l-lfld b1fonnfttl011 A<C<lll AosodatiOll, nrc<tttbcr 2005 Miles 10 �2. Farm and Forest Conservation. In contrast, outside of Community Service Areas, future land development should be very limited (the white areas on Map 5-3). In farm and forest areas, the density of future residential development should not exceed 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres, although allowed units are encouraged to be clustered on small lots on a portion of the property, to minimize negative impacts from typical agricultural activities. It may be necessary to site limited agricultural related industrial facilities in this area, but generally speaking , such facilities should only locate in or adjacent to cities or villages with public sewer and water. 3. Commercial Centers. The red asterisk generally represents existing commercial centers in the county. In most cases these are in existing cities and villages or other rural settlements. Some are very small, but important service locations for residents in the area. All new commercial development should take place contiguous to these existing commercial centers and not in new locations as that only contributes to sprawl and strip development. 4. Employment Centers and Renaissance Zones. The purple asterisks and purple shaded locations are the existing home to many jobs, or the planned location for many new jobs. With the possible exception of certain new agricultural related industries, new job producing industries should be located inside Community Service Area boundaries or contiguous to existing employment centers. They should be located so as to not contribute to sprawl or strip development. 5. Roads and Highways. The dark black lines on the map are the state and interstate highways in the county. These are the backbone for efficient commerce and daily life. Every effort should be made to ensure their proper maintenance and improvement. 6. Trails. The Fred Meijer Heartland Trail, the Fred Meijer Flat River Trail and the White Pine State Park Trail are Montcalm County jewels. They provide important recreational opportunities that should be built upon as the recreational part of a greenspace system throughout the county. 7. State Game Areas, National Forest and Local Parks. The other key skeletal pieces to a county greenspace system are the public lands. Lands in dark green are the five State Game Areas, while light green lands are part of the Manistee National Forest. Black asterisks are scattered local parks. The county should initiate preparation of a greenspace plan that over time links these facilities wherever possible by passive and active green spaces, while at the same time expanding the county parks to serve all areas of the county. 8. Special Landscape Corridors. The land alongside all the state highways is designated as special landscape corridors since the visual images most people have of the beautiful rural scenes in the county come almost exclusively from the view from the road . If the primary roads become lined with strip development (residential or commercial), with billboards and poorly maintained property, then the unique rural character of Montcalm County will be eroded , and with it much of what makes the county special to those who live there. 9. Other Public Facilities. While most of the key public facilities in the county are in the cities and villages , there are many township halls and fire barns in the most rural parts of the county that provide essential services and a community centerpiece (for a century or more in some cases). Many of these are historic structures that deserve to be well maintained as part of the history of Montcalm County. 10. Floodplains and wetlands . Map 5-3 includes floodplains in three light orange and Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-9 �yellow patterns. At the scale of the map they are hard to spot, but still very important. As circumstances in other parts of the nation have illustrated several times in the last few years, floodplains are dangerous places to live and they should be protected for the water storage and wildlife habitat benefits they provide. Only a few floodplains in Montcalm County have been mapped. FEMA should be requested to map the floodplains on all rivers and creeks in the county. Wetlands also provide these benefits and should similarly be protected. Map 5-4 illustrates all the "sensitive" lands in Montcalm County. This includes floodplains and wetlands in the county. LAND USE BY SUB-AREA OF THE COUNTY Map 5-5 illustrates six sub-areas of the county with a physical and community character somewhat distinct from the others. Boundaries were purposely selected to coincide with township boundaries and they are not distinct locations on the ground. Following is a brief description of existing and proposed future land use in each of these sub-areas. Readers will want to periodically refer to Maps 5-2, 5-3 and 5-4. All proposed future land use arrangements and policies presented in this chapter were developed based on a blending of: • The natural capacity of the land to sustain certain types of development and the important natural functions played by unique land and water resources in the area. • The relative future need for residential, commercial and industrial uses; as well as the existing land use distribution. • The relationship of agricultural and undeveloped lands to existing community character and the economic base of the county. • The capabilities of the transportation network to sustain different types of development in different areas of the county. • The compatibilities of various land uses when sited adjacent to one another. • The desires of local residents and public officials as expressed through their participation in visioning sessions and public Planning Commission meetings. Sub-Area One Sub-area one is in the far northwestern part of the county, and includes Reynolds, Winfield, Pierson and Maple Valley Townships, as well as Howard City, the village of Pierson and the unincorporated areas of Coral and Trufant. This sub-area is physically diverse. The western part of this sub-area, in Reynolds and Pierson Townships generally has very draughty, sandy soils. Farming in this area was attempted when it was originally settled, but few farms exist today. Forest growth succeeded farming, and there are extensive Manistee National Forest lands in Reynolds Township. US-131 provides excellent access to Grand Rapids and Big Rapids, and has resulted in rapid population growth. Streams and lakes have attracted home construction , and this development pressure places stresses on water quality. The Muskegon River flows through the northwestern part of Reynolds Township. Winfield Township , the township east of Reynolds has more productive soils with active farms, although ponding water can be a problem for both farming and building. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-10 �) s: ~ 0 :::, 0 ::, ..... 0 ru (") 3 e!. 3 c_O C C.11-< I 0 (") ~ C oC: ::J ..... ~'< ~ 01 O') ([) -0 ru '"O ::, C.11 OG) :::, ([) -, ~ -) ) CJ) Montcalm County C: tT Base Map (Shoiviug Property lines) )> ru :::, @ s» ti> 1=M!!fil! - U.S Highway Lakes - State Highway Streams Roads [ I Property Lines Drains Jurisdictions SecliOns Soun.'C M1ch1f;111 Center for Geographic Information, Dept oflnfom1a11on Technology Map l'rop,1rcd by 1hc l.1111d lnfonruu ion !\cress A<:;Ociation, Jamruy 2005 MIies 10 I �I I It is a scenic township, with lakes and rolling hills. Pierson Township, which is south of Reynolds Township also has a number of lakes, making resorts and lakefront living popular. Recreational opportunities are also provided by the White Pine State Park Trail, which extends roughly north-south through the sub-area parallel to and east of US-131 . Associated with several of the lakes in this sub-area are parks, such as Kramp Park and Trufant Petersen Park. Pierson Township also is served by US-131, putting pressure on it as a bedroom community for Grand Rapids. Maple Valley Township, which is south of Winfield Township has highly productive soils and good permeability except in its far western and northwestern parts. In those parts where soils have good permeability, the land is valuable for both agriculture and building homes. Where soils in this sub-area have poor permeability, land is poor for both agriculture and residential building. Homes need to be on very large parcels in order to have a better chance to find an appropriate place for a septic system. Maple Valley Township also has natural lakes and ponds, which provide groundwater storage. However, these are also sensitive and care must be taken to protect groundwater from pollutants. Future land use in this sub-area is expected to include many more single-family residences whose residents commute to jobs north or south of the county. There will be a mix of residential along with some agriculture, highway commercial at freeway interchanges, a small amount of industrial and abundant recreation. It will be important to retain rural character as development occurs. Because of the high development pressure, this will require the application of best planning practices discussed in Chapter 3, such as clustering, and vegetative screening. The village of Howard City, the village of Pierson and the settlement areas of Coral and Trufant are encouraged to develop within compact community service areas. Howard City has public sewer and water, while Pierson has public sewer. The extension of sewer and water should only occur in support of a pattern that retains the capacity of those communities to efficiently utilizes pub.lie investment. Howard City will likely receive the most opportunity for new businesses and should take the opportunity to insist on quality new development that is not only well constructed and looks good, but contributes to improved quality of life in the city and surrounding area. Future land use in the eastern part of this sub-area should stay primarily in agriculture and rural residential development. Townships are encouraged to adopt a density of one dwelling unit per forty acres for agricultural areas in order to help ensure a sustainable agricultural economy. Sub-area Two This sub-area includes Cato, Belvidere and Pine Townships, the village of Lakeview and the unincorporated area of Six Lakes. This is an important farming area, with productive soils distributed throughout the sub-area. Several lakes, such as Townline Lake, Six Lakes, Tamarack Lake and Rainbow Lake attract resort, seasonal and year around residences. The Flat River begins its journey to the Grand River in this area. The Langston State Game Area provides land for hiking, bird watching and hunting. This sub-area is served by M-46, which runs east and west, and M-91, which extends from the Lakeview area south to Greenville and into Ionia County. The M-46 corridor in the Lakeview area is relatively developed with residences, businesses and small Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-12 �industrial uses along a nearly one-mile segment. Most of Cato Township, Belvidere Township and Pine Township have productive soils, and potato, dairy and cash crops are successful there. In south-central Pine Township there is an area of very draughty, sandy soils where the Langston State Game Area is located. There are also oil and gas fields (including a huge underground natural gas storage facility) and gravel pits. Future land use of this area should remain primarily agricultural and rural residential. Lakefront residential and resort uses will continue around the several lakes in this subarea, but overbuilding should be resisted. The townships should encourage agricultural use on the productive soils that are distributed throughout this sub-area. This can be done through 40 acre minimum density zoning, conservation subdivisions, open space zoning, the purchase of development rights and other related techniques. The village of Lakeview is encouraged to continue to develop within a compact community service area, with incremental expansions of public sewer and water. This will be a much more efficient and attractive development pattern than to spread out along M-46. It will also make M-46 safer and less congested. M-46 and M-91 are identified as special landscape corridors. In order for these roads to maintain their rural character, townships and the Village of Lakeview should work with property owners along the corridors to utilize the best practices principles in Chapter 3, such as encouraging them to preserve or establish natural vegetative screening along the roads, limit the number of driveways by clustering new development, designing attractive signs and other steps to preserve rural character. The preservation of agriculture will also contribute greatly to protecting the rural character of this area. Sub-area Three Sub-area Three is in the northeast corner of Montcalm County and includes Home, Richland and Ferris Townships. The villages of Edmore and Vestaburg are in this subarea. This is also a productive farming area, with suitable soils when drained. There are numerous wetlands. The Edmore and Vestaburg State Game Areas are in this sub-area, on lands less suitable for farming. They provide recreational opportunities, such as walking, bird watching and hunting. The planned paving of the Fred Meijer Heartland Trail through this sub-area from Edmore east to Vestaburg and into Gratiot County to the City of Alma, will provide significant new recreational opportunities for many. Productive soils are distributed througout this sub-area, and farming remains very active in much of Sub-area Three. However, here there are more wetlands and poorly drained soils here than in some other areas of Montcalm County. The future land use of this sub-area should be primarily agricultural and rural residential. The townships are encouraged to help sustain the agricultural economy by instituting 40 acre minimum density zoning, open space zoning, clustering, conservation subdivisions and where warranted, purchase of development rights. Areas of eastern Richland and Ferris Townships are more conducive to a rural residential use than to farming. However, due to the lack of public sewers in this area, residential development needs to be on large lots, with a minimum size that should be determined in cooperation with the Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-13 �District Health Department. Sprawling, large-lot rural development can make the provision of public services less efficient and more costly for rural communities, so the application of best practices such as clustering can reduce some negative impacts on the community. The village of Edmore is encouraged to continue to develop in a compact pattern to efficiently utilize its investment in public sewer and water. The village of Vestaburg is encouraged to develop within a compact community service area when public sewer and water can be provided. M-46 runs east and west through this sub-area, and is designated as a special landscape corridor. M-66, which enters this sub-area from the south and ends at M-46 along the western edge of this sub-area, is also a special landscape corridor. In order for these roads to maintain their rural landscape character, townships and villages should work with property owners along the corridors to utilize the principles in Chapter 3 to preserve rural character, such as encouraging them to preserve or establish natural vegetative screening along the roads, limit the number of driveways by clustering new development, designing attractive signs and other steps to preserve rural character. In order to protect agriculture and rural character in Ferris Township, a zoning ordinance should be considered that is consistent with the policies in this Plan, as the township does not currently have zoning. The township should give consideration to entering into an agreement with adjoining townships and creating a joint planning commission with a single zoning ordinance instead of a separate plan and zoning ordinance. Sub-area Four Sub-area four is in the center of the county. It includes Douglas, Day, Sidney and Evergreen Townships, the Villages of Sheridan and McBride, the City of Stanton and the unincorporated area of Sidney. M-66 is the main road serving this sub-area. M-66 runs north and south, connecting M-46 which runs east and west to the north of this sub-area and M-57, which runs east and west to the south of this area, and Ionia County to the south of Montcalm County. Montcalm Community College is in Sidney Township. Soils in the Douglass and Day Townships are generally productive, with artificial draining seldom needed. Sidney and especially Evergreen Townships have extensive areas of poorly drained soils and wetlands, as well as some areas of productive soils. Large areas of these two townships are in the Stanton State Game Area, which provides opportunities for hiking, bird watching, other nature study and hunting. Productivity varies greatly in the southern part of this sub-area, with some pasturing taking place. The terrain is often rolling, and where slopes are steep, the risk of erosion is high. The Fred Meijer Heartland Trail runs diagonally southwest to northeast through this subarea and when completed will link Greenville to Stanton and then it continues on to Edmore. From Lake Road southwest of Sidney to McBride the trail is already paved. Future land use in this sub-area includes agriculture where soil is productive, rural residential where soils are not productive, and developed uses within the Stanton and Sheridan Community Service Areas. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-14 ---~=~------------- -- - �Existing farming can be used as a guide to selecting areas in which to promote agricultural sustainability. Townships should be encouraged to promote the agricultural economic sector by establishing 40 acre minimum density (only Sidney Township already has it), open space zoning, clustering and conservation subdivision design. Where agriculture does not have a history of success, rural residential uses should be permitted. However, due to problems associated with drainage, minimum lot sizes should be set in consultation with the District Health Department. Open space zoning, clustering and conservation subdivision design should also be encouraged in order to preserve rural character, undeveloped open space and wildlife habitat. The City of Stanton and Village of Sheridan should fully develop in an efficient, compact pattern within a defined Community Service Area in order to take advantage of the investment in public sewer and water before any extensions are considered. While the Village of Sheridan has a large capacity water system, it should consider extensions carefully, in order to make the most cost-effective use of its investment, retain its character and protect nearby farmland. In order to protect agriculture and rural character in Day and Evergreen Townships, plans and zoning that are consistent with the policies in this Plan should be considered as these townships do not currently have zoning. However, they are encouraged to consider a joint planning commission with one or more adjoining townships. Sub-area Five Sub-area five includes the City of Greenville, Montcalm Township, Eureka Township and Fairplain Township. It is served by M-57, which runs east and west and connects Greenville with Carson City to the east and Kent County and US-131 to the west. M-91 runs north and south through Greenville and connects it to Lakeview and Mecosta County to the north, and the City of Belding in Ionia County to the south. This is the most densely populated sub-area because of Greenville and the surrounding development associated with Greenville. Development also extends north along M-91 and east and west along M-57. The Greenville Airport is south of the city. This area of the county along with the US-131 corridor in the panhandle area are expected to receive the most new development over the next 20 years. There are productive soils in the area east of Greenville, in northern Fairplains Township, and eastern Montcalm Township. Nearly the entire southern part of this subarea has poor soils for either agriculture or development, and most of it is in the Flat River State Game Area. This State Game Area serves as a partial barrier to development south of Greenville, so any new interest in new development in the rural areas around Greenville will be forced north into Montcalm Township or will skip into Fairplain Township. Eureka Township, which surrounds Greenville, is zoned for resource protection in the areas east of Greenville and to the west and northwest of the city. Future land uses in this sub-area include a wide mixture of agriculture, rural residential, and built uses. Agriculture should be encouraged in those areas where it is productive, which generally is in portions of Montcalm, eastern Eurekaand northern Fairplains townships. Rural residential use should be encouraged in rural areas that are not Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-15 �productive farmland. However, many of the non-productive farmlands are also not suitable for residential use unless the lot size is very large due to soil suitability problems in siting septic systems. New residential, commercial and industrial uses should be developed in a compact pattern within the Community Services Area that encompasses Greenville. This includes existing commercial, industrial and residential areas. Greenville already provides public sewer and water, and it should fully take advantage of its investment in this infrastructure before extending services elsewhere. If the Electrolux factory is ultimately unmarketable, it should be leveled, the site cleaned of any contaminates and reused in a manner planned by Greenville citizens. The existing industrial parks should be filled before new land is committed to that purpose. Agriculture and rural character should be protected by establishing a 40 acre minimum density in the most productive farming areas and in resource protection areas. Open space ordinances, clustering, and conservation subdivision design should be used as appropriate. Immediate efforts to preserve visual character along M-57 and M-91 should be taken as these are important routes that contribute to the collective sense of the rural character of the area, and hence to quality of life. Protecting or enhancing quality of life is important, both for the happiness of existing residents and for the economy-attracting new business and retaining existing businesses. There are many signs, billboards and cluttered properties along these corridors that deserve attention. In order to protect agriculture and rural character in Fairplain Township, a more formal zoning ordinance based on a plan should be adopted that is consistent with the policies in this Plan. Establishing a joint planning commission with one or more neighboring jurisdictions is strongly encouraged. This sub-area is already rich in recreational opportunity. However, providing connections between residential areas and existing parks, the State Game Area and recreation facilities outside the sub-area should be pursued. Sub-area Six Sub-area Six includes Bushnell Township, Bloomer Township, Crystal Township and Carson City and the unincorporated area of Crystal in the southeast corner of the county. M-57 connects this sub-area to Greenville to the west and Gratiot County immediately east of Carson City. M-66 is a north-south route along the western edge of the sub-area. Carson City is at the eastern edge of the study area and the county. The Carson City Correctional Facility is located in Bloomer Township, southwest of Carson City, and serves as a regional job center. Oil production occurs in this sub-area. The soils in this area are generally productive when drained, but are highly diverse. Dairy farming is still active in the area. Large portions of Bushnell, Bloomer and Crystal townships are farmed. ,,,,---....__ Crystal Lake is the largest lake in the county (over 700 acres) , and attracts seasonal and year around residential development. Protection of water quality is especially important Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-16 --------------------------- - -- �~ I as much of the shoreline is sandy and shallow. Best practices for shoreline development should be pursued including limiting use of lawn fertilizers and preservation of a natural vegetative strip along the shore. The primary future land uses are expected to be agriculture and rural residential. Quarter-quarter zoning or 40 acre minimum lot size zoning should be pursed like Bloomer Township to help preserve agricultural land. However, Crystal and Bushnell Townships do not currently have zoning. In order to protect agriculture and rural character, zoning that is consistent with the policies in this Plan should be considered. Establishing a joint planning commission with one or more neighboring jurisdictions is strongly encouraged. THE MANAGEMENT OF DIFFERENT LAND USES IN THE FUTURE This section discusses how different land use/land cover types should be managed in the future in order to meet the vision, goals and objectives of this Plan. This section is intended to expand upon the descriptions in the last section, and help communities within Montcalm County when developing or updating their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances consistent with this Plan. ,,,--,_ j Agricultural, Forest and Rural Land Conservation Map 5-2, Existing Land Use/Land Cover (see also Maps 4-4 and 4-5 in Chapter 4 of the Montcalm County Fact Book) show that agriculture is by far the land use with the largest total area in Montcalm County. It occurs in large blocks and on many scattered parcels throughout the county. The exception to this pattern is in the far northwestern portion of the county, where forest is the dominant land use/cover type. On a county basis, about one-quarter of the land in Montcalm County is forest. Forests contribute to the county's rural character, provide raw materials for forest products, enhance biodiversity, provide wildlife habitat, slow stormwater runoff, improve water quality, and provide recreational opportunities. Much of Montcalm County's forest land is already in public ownership (either the Manistee National Forest or State Game Areas), and thus are protected. Farmland, forestry and related agricultural and forestry businesses should be protected through 2025 and probably far beyond. Together they occupy the largest area of any of the proposed land uses. The principal strategies to protect farms and forest land include: • Quarter-Quarter Zoning. Individual communities with extensive farmland and forests are encouraged to adopt quarter-quarter zoning. This means one dwelling per quarter-quarter section (about 40 acres) would be permitted. The dwelling would be placed on a new separate lot of not more than 1-3 acres in order to leave 37-39 acres still owned by the farmer for continued agriculture. If a farmer owned more than one quarter-quarter section, he could cluster the permitted dwelling units in one place to leave more contiguous land in farming. For example, if a farmer owned 120 acres, that is 3 quarter-quarter sections. Three two-acre lots could be placed in a cluster of lots on six acres leaving 114 acres in agriculture. Quarter-quarter zoning is used in areas where farmers are committed to farming. If a farmer wanted to stop farming, he or she would request rezoning out of the quarter-quarter district and into another zoning district, such as a rural residential district with a lot size of usually 2-10 acres/parcel. A landowner with less than a quarter-quarter section in a quarter-quarter zone, would have a Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-17 �nonconforming parcel that could still be used for a single homesite, but could not be split for other homesites unless it were rezoned into a zoning classification that permitted smaller lots. Adopting a minimum density of one dwelling unit per 40 acres would be especially important in the intensively farmed areas from the middle of Sub-Area 1 through Sub-Area 2, into the wdstern part of Sub-Area 3, the top half of SubArea 4, the southwest part of Sub-Area 4, the upper northeastern and eastern part of Sub-Area 5 and nearly all of Sub-Area 6. Bloomer, Eureka, Pine, and Sidney Townships already have this density for large portions of their townships. Winfield, Cato, Belvidere, Home, Maple Valley, Evergreen, Douglass, Day, Montcalm, Fairplain and Bushnell Townships should adopt one unit per 40 acre minimum density for large portions of their townships. Quarter/quarter zoning is the best way to do this. This would require Day, Evergreen, Fairplain and Bushnell Townships to create their own zoning ordinances or create joint planning commissions with neighboring jurisdictions. • PDR and TOR. Purchase of development rights (PDR) and transfer of development rights (TOR) are two techniques described in Chapter 3 that are even more effective than local zoning at preserving farm and forest land. Each involves paying the landowner for the value of the development rights on the land while ensuring its long term preservation as farm or forest land. Of course this is expensive. In PDR, government or a land conservancy purchases the development rights. In TOR, a developer does in return for the right to build at a higher density inside a Community Service Area. In TOR, the highest quality farm and forest lands in the county would be designated as sending zones and the land that could be served with public sewer and water the receiving area. This is largely land in existing cities and villages in the county, or land adjacent to those communities in abutting townships. In order for farmers to be eligible to participate in the state PDR program or a TOR program, the county would have to adopt a county farmland preservation plan, or every unit of government would have to do so separately and then enter into joint agreements for implementation. Rural Residential This area is intended to provide low density housing opportunities. Conservation subdivision design and zoning would be the governing principle. New development would be clustered on a small portion of the lot in order to preserve the balance for farm, forestry or other open space use. Chapter 3 illustrates how this is done. Development of this type would be limited in farm and forest areas, and on soils not well suited for farms or forest management; otherwise there will be too many dwellings in these sustainable resource areas. Densities would range from about 1 dwelling unit per 10 to 20 acres. There would be no minimum lot size smaller than ¼ acre and there would be maximum lot sizes of 1 to 3 acres, so that open space would be preserved. Homes should be clustered with a single access drive to limit the frequency of driveways on rural roads. Communities with sewer and water would not extend these services into the rural residential district. Design guidelines should be adopted to guide property owners in helping to preserve rural character. This area is not intended for long term agricultural protection, but there would be no overt actions to restrict agriculture. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-18 �Residential These areas would primarily occur within the community service area boundaries of the small towns in the county. This would include manufactured home communities and single family residential development at a density from 3 to 4 dwelling units up to 8 to 12 per acre. Residential development at this density would have an urban character. It is expected that these areas would be served by public sewer and water. There would be limited requirements for open space, relying, instead on public parks, except where the land were a planned unit development, or sensitive lands like wetlands were protected as part of the development. Design guidelines should be adopted to guide the residential development so that it is compatible with adjacent land uses. Commercial Commercial uses include neighborhood and regional stores, gas stations, specialty stores, offices and similar uses. Commercial uses should primarily occur within community service area boundaries and in identified commercial centers or in a few highway service areas. Commercial uses should be clustered in nodes instead of stripped along a highway and their layouts designed in order to manage access for safety and efficiency. Commercial uses should also be attractively designed in order to stimulate business activity and contribute to the quality of life of the county. ,,,.-----.._,., I Industrial Industrial uses include facilities for assembly and fabrication , materials storage, oil and gas processing and storage and agricultural and forestry processing. It also includes mineral extraction and airports. In general these uses should be located within community service areas where public sewer and water are required, in designated job centers and renaissance zones. Care should be taken to adequately protect sensitive natural resources from damage or pollution, and to adequately buffer adjacent uses (especially residential) or establish transitional uses between industries and incompatible land uses. Some agriculture-related industries may need to be established outside of community service areas, and in agriculture areas, but they should have adequate protections for water resources, rural character and adjacent land uses. Waterfront Residential There are many lakes and rivers in Montcalm County that are extensively developed with resorts, seasonal and year around homes. It is important for long term water quality in these lakes and rivers that waterfront home owners be good stewards of those waters. It is likely that waterfront properties will be developed and redeveloped over the next twenty years. The trend for waterfront development in Michigan is for much larger homes to be built. Good stewardship of Montcalm County waters means that land owners need to build on and manage waterfront properties with the least possible impact on water quality. That means keeping impervious area low. The Flat River Natural Country-Scenic River regulations can help guide waterfront protection standards for other rives and lakes in the county, and watershed protection groups identified in Chapter 4 of the Montcalm County Fact Book can also assist townships in adopting standards for water quality protection. Sensitive Lands and Water Quality Protection Drains, streams, rivers, floodplains and wetlands are among the sensitive lands in Montcalm County that should be protected. These are shown on Map 5-4. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 5-19 �Land adjacent to lakes, rivers, streams and drains should receive protection. This would include vegetation buffers, principal structure setbacks, limits on imperviousness, fertilizer limitations, livestock exclusion , restoration of riparian habitat, exclusion of sanitary sewer or septic system connections to storm drains, moderation of input flow rates, restrictions on development in floodpla ins and wetlands, and erosion and sedimentation control. Drains would still have to be managed to provide adequate flow. The primary purpose of county storm drains is to prevent flooding and permit farming of wet fields. Historically this has been accomplished by periodic dredging and vegetation clearing . The measures listed above do not necessarily impede flow, if implemented correctly. Vegetation can be managed on the banks but not in the channel. Trees on the south bank can shade the stream bed to the point that flow impeding vegetation does not grow. These measures would help protect water quality, provide shade for fish and habitat for wildlife as well. Parks and Recreation The recreation system in the county consists of existing national forest land , county and local parks, the state game areas, and linear trails. Continued development of these recreation areas is important to the quality of life and competitive economic advantage of Montcalm County. The Montcalm County Recreational Plan should be updated every five years in a manner consistent with the vision, goals and objectives in this Plan. Community Service Areas & Future Land Use The exact location of the Community Service Area Boundaries on Map 5-3 should be determined by each local jurisdiction as new plans and updates to existing plans are made. A Community Services Area Boundary should be based on the principles and policies in this Plan , such as the Smart Growth Tenets and Best Planning Practices, and should be drawn in a manner compatible with plans of adjoining jurisdictions. Similarly, the specific location of future land uses should be established by the cities, villages and townships in the county consistent with locally adopted master plans and zoning ordinances. Those ordinances should be prepared with active involvement of adjacent units of government, with an eye to ensuring compatibility between land uses within the jurisdiction and between those in neighboring jurisdictions, and in a manner that is consistent with the vision , goals, objectives, strategies , policies and best practices advocated in this Plan. John f:/winword/Montcalm/plan feb 06/Chapter 5 FLU.doc CAF: C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan March 2006\Chapter 5 FLU (3 06).doc C:\G-Dnve\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Flnal General Plan July 2006\Chapter 5 FLU (7 06).doc Montca lm County General Plan July 2006 5-20 �Chapter 6 TRANSPORTATION & OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE INTRODUCTION This chapter briefly examines the infrastructure policy necessary to implement the vision described in Chapter 2, the best practices described in Chapter 3, the economic development recommendations in Chapter 4, and the land use policies in Chapter 5. The word "infrastructure" is used broadly to refer to the large-scale public systems, f,ervices, and facilities within the county that are necessary for economic activity and improved quality of life, including : roads, airports, rail, public transportation , non-motorized transportation , public sewer and water, communications, power, schools, medical facilities, police and fire facilities, local government facilities , and parks and recreation facilities. For a description of existing Montcalm County infrastructure, see Chapter 6 Transportation and Chapter 7 Public Facilities and Services in the Montcalm County Fact Book. TRANSPORTATION Countywide Transportation Plan A coordinated and well-integrated transportation system is the backbone of any economic development program. A quality system of interconnected city streets, county roads and state highways is critical for efficient commerce. Rail and air service are essential for a diverse economy. Alternative transportation options including public transit and an integrated non-motorized system are important options for workers, children and the elderly. These elements should all be carefully considered and addressed in a new county transportation plan. The plan should identify short and long range road connections, bypasses, lane additions, road closures, intersection and bridge improvements. It should focus first on maintenance of the existing paved road system and not on newly paving existing gravel roads, except where necessary to achieve other economic development objectives. It should support the preparation of access management plans for each state highway and necessary transportation improvements for new economic developments. It should be a top priority in 2006. Roads The road system in Montcalm County is well established, and largely in good condition. It is very important that this system be properly maintained and incrementally expanded according to a county transportation plan when the need for such expansion is evident. In most cases, road (as well as sewer and water) expansion costs should be borne by the private sector as each new business, subdivision or condominium development is constructed. It is very important that new commercial development not simply strip along existing state highways and county primary roads. This usurps the road capacity for businesses that is paid for by all travelers. Two, much better alternatives, are commercial node development where commercial development builds back from a highway with its own internal street system. The second is that as each new strip commercial development takes place, it builds an increment of a parallel connecting road system, so that short trips can be taken between businesses without going back onto the major arterial. These alternatives will be most important to pursue on the state highways around Greenville, Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-1 �t Stanton, Edmore, Lakeview and Carson City. It may be necessary for developers to build longer segments of these parallel roads and then enter into payback agreements with abutting property owners, or for the county to bond for some of the segments and be paid back by special assessment of the benefiting properties. These and other financing options should be explored at the appropriate time. Access Management Along the 2-5 lane state trunklines throughout Montcalm County (and in particular on M57, M-91, M-66, and M-46), are hundreds of unnecessary existing driveways, poorly designed driveways, driveways that are too close to intersections and other drivewclys, unconnected parking lots and few service drives. This leads to unnecessary risks of traffic crashes, congestion and reduced traffic flow. Over time, these problems can all be corrected, or at least improved, and future problems can be prevented through a coordinated system of local access management regulations. That means vehicular crashes can be minimized, damage to vehicles reduced, and personal injuries and deaths can be prevented . Such a benefit cannot be readily calculated, but it is huge, well worth doing and well within the ability of local governments in the county to achieve. Montcalm County should work with local governments along M-91 , M-46, M-57 and M66 to lobby the Michigan Department of Transportation (MOOT) to finance access management plans for each of these corridors. MOOT finances 6-8 such projects each year. MOOT requires local governments to agree to adopt uniform access management regulations (based on an MOOT model ordinance) at the completion of the corridor study. These studies are very effective at achieving intergovernmental cooperation and coordination as well as at saving lives and preventing future property damage. However, given the status of local zoning in the county (several townships do not have zoning), this means that only M-91 , M-46 and M-57 from the Kent County line east to Greenville would presently be available for funds for such a project. Unzoned townships do not typically qualify for assistance. Often MOOT funds such studies for 15-30 mile segments, so local governments in adjoining counties may also need to be involved in order for such a project to receive funding priority for access management studies by MOOT. The MOOT Transportation Center in Howard City is the office that would need to initiate a funding request for an access management plan in Montcalm County. The County Planning Commission should be alert to future opportunities to reduce the negative impacts of poorly designed highway access through various land use planning and access management techniques and share these with local governments so they can be incorporated into local zoning ordinances. Highway Noise A little considered , but very important future issue will be the impact of noise that comes from high speed highways-and in particular, the freeway portion of US-131 . Currently, traffic volume on US-131 is fairly high for a rural freeway segment. Existing land use adjacent to the freeway is largely limited to farming , forest management, very low density residential-so few people are negatively affected by highway noise. But highway noise will rise as traffic volumes increase. While existing land uses are not proposed to be changed over the life of this Plan , it will be important to understand that if any new subdivisions are approved within 1/6 mile of the freeway portion of US-131 , that those developments are not eligible for future noise walls or other noise mitigation assistance from MOOT, should highway noise become a problem . This is because both federal and state policies do not cover highway noise mitigation in the situation where a noise sensitive land use (like a residential subdivision) moves in close to the highway noise source-after the highway was constructed . The cost for any future noise Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-2 �mitigation measures would have to be borne by the landowners in the subdivision. Of course such a situation is highly preventable by only allowing noise compatible land uses next to high volume highways. These include land uses like farms, forestry , and open space uses (among others). If noise sensitive land uses like homes, churches and schools are proposed next to the highway, they should be required to be sound proofed and designed to minimize highway noise impacts. MOOT is working on sample zoning regulations and design guidelines to assist local governments with this task. The County Planning Commission should be alert to future opportunities to reduce the negative impacts of highway noise through various noise compatible land use planning and regulatory techniques and share these with local governments so they can be incorporated into local zoning ordinances. Airports Airports are important for attracting some types of economic development. As a result, airports are an important local asset that should be carefully managed and maintained to meet the demand for future air travel and air freight shipment. The Greenville Municipal Airport and the Lakeview Airport are low volume local airports (about 39 aircraft operations/day). Mayes Airport in Carson City has about 48 operations a month. These facilities provide an important opportunity for specialized aircraft and single engine airplanes that is convenient and relatively cheap for the users. These attractive features should be nurtured and used to attract additional users with air service related economic needs. Local zoning ordinances should include airport overlay zones to ensure the height of future structures in the area of the airport (up to ten miles away) do not exceed allowable maximum heights as established by the FAA. Public Transit Presently Greenville has a limited "dial-a-ride" service that provides public transportation to a small clientele in the southwest part of the county with four daily stops in Stanton, Monday through Friday. While few people are served , for many of those served , the bus is an important lifeline to work, medical care, shopping and education. As the existing population ages, and as new jobs develop in the county, the demand for fixed route, short headway, public transit service between the small cities in the county will grow. It is important for the county to stay on top of this rising demand and to take the necessary steps, in cooperation with other benefited parties and jurisdictions, to provide public transit at a level of service necessary to meet the needs of an expanding ridership. t Non-Motorized Transportation A well coordinated and integrated system of pedestrian sidewalks, bicycle trails and pathways that link common destinations is critical to a high quality of life and to active healthy living . The most important livability improvement a city or village can usually make is to add an integrated sidewalk system if it does not already have one. Similar livability benefits can occur in townships-even very rural ones-if the pathways are connected and lead to common destinations like schools, recreation facilities and retail areas. Key parts of such a system are already in place in some parts of the county, with the Fred Meijer Heartland Trail and the White Pine Trail State Park being the skeleton for a much larger system. But expansion is necessary in order to reach critical mass where use levels are high . In rural areas, trails should be designed for bicycle and pedestrian use in the summer and snowshoeing , cross country skiing and snowmobile use in the winter. This is the kind of quality of life improvement that can help attract new jobs and residents to a community. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-3 �rPUBLIC SEWER AND WATER For most new commercial, office or industrial development in Michigan, and for all higher density residential development, the presence of both public sewer and water is an essential element for economic viability. In most rural communities, these public services are either in limited supply, or are not associated with a quality road system that has unutilized capacity. Yet in Greenville, Stanton, Lakeview, Carson City, Edmore, Sheridan, and Howard City, these elements are all in place. Pierson and Crystal Township have public sewer systems but no public water systems and the serviced area is not on a state highway. Rather than spending significant public and private resources to build new sewer and water infrastructure elsewhere in the county, it is most costeffective to wisely use the infrastructure that is already in place. The vision, goals and strategies in Chapter 3 and the future land use pattern presented in Chapter 5 proposes new high density residential and economic development largely in those seven communities in the county that already have existing public sewer and water systems. As each new increment of development takes place, the sewer and water would be extended out from existing lines and linked to create loops with adjacent development. This would occur as the new streets in this area were constructed. It will be necessary to ensure that the site plan review standards in each local zoning ordinance adequately require use of public sewer and water by extending existing public sewer and water infrastructure as each new development occurs in order for this vision to become a reality. It is also important to ensure that new development does not underutilize property. Since property served by both sewer and water is a relatively scarce commodity, and several of the municipal systems are nearing capacity (notably Carson City and Lakeview with 20 and 30% remaining capacity respectively), it is important that as each new development occurs, it is dense and intensely uses these vital urban services so that there is little pressure to develop on rural land elsewhere in the county where there are limited public services. Another important policy is to not extend public sewer or water into any areas not shown as a community service area on Map 5-1. Small settlements and lakefront owners interested in protecting lake water quality that lack sewer or water service and wish solve a contaminated groundwater problem with public sewer and/or water service may need financial assistance from the county in backing sewer or water bonds. These should all be independent facilities, rather than lengthy extensions of existing facilities. COMMUNICATIONS The lines between traditional communication competitors such as television , radio , internet and telephone, are rapidly being obscured. The lines will continue to blur for some time. The important concern for Montcalm County is to not get lost in the transformation. High speed communications are essential to contemporary business models and to a high quality of personal and family life. Any opportunities the county has to assist in upgrading communication options should be seized. A dozen urban communities in Michigan are in the process of offering high speed wireless service to all businesses and citizens. Oakland County is among them . While the resources available to Oakland County far outpace those available to Montcalm County, the benefits to future job and residential growth in the county cannot be overlooked. While no rural county in Michigan has yet gone down this path, some will. When the opportunity is ripe, Montcalm County needs to be ready. The early adaptors will have a significant leg up on the last ones in, and when it comes to attracting new high tech economic development Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-4 �(every community's dream), high speed communications is essential. NATURAL GAS & ELECTRIC The presence of natural gas and 3-phase electric service is another critical component of new job producing development and higher density residential development. Again, these services are already available in the cities and villages of the county, but not in many of the rural parts of the county. Public resources should not be spent to promote improvements to natural gas or electricity service outside existing cities and villages unless there are extenuating benefits (such as an agricultural processing facility needed them and could not locate elsewhere, and the business would generate many jobs for a long time) . SCHOOLS High quality K-12 educational facilities have long been a factor in attracting new businesses to a community, because it is easier to attract employees to an area with a reputation for quality schools. This reason alone (and there are many more) justifies a huge public effort to build and maintain quality schools. It is at least as important to ensure that the Montcalm Community College remain a viable institution which produces graduates with skills that employers need. New businesses are attracted to areas that have a well-trained workforce, and the necessary vehicles (like a community college) to quickly train many more workers. Continuing education opportunities are also of growing interest to retired persons and few sources of local circulating income are more stable than the pensions of retired persons. In short, there is never too much importance placed on building and maintaining a quality educational system in a community. While the county has little ability to influence decisions related to improvements to public schools, it should always help facilitate decisions that improve the economic competitiveness of the county and that help to better meet the educational needs of its citizens. When it comes to siting new school facilities, the county should be an active player and attempt to strongly influence siting decisions so that new school facilities are located in already developed or developing areas and strongly discourage, the location of new schools in rural locations without adequate public roads, sewer and water facilities. MEDICAL FACILITIES Rural communities are often at a significant disadvantage when it comes to attracting new jobs because they have limited medical facilities . However, Montcalm County has a much broader range of medical facilities (and even four hospitals-in Greenville, Lakeview, Carson City and Sheridan) within the county than is typical. Again this is an economic development and quality of life asset that should not be overlooked. As with schools, the county has little direct ability to influence the scope and quality of available medical facilities, but it should always try to facilitate improvements that enhance the ability to attract new jobs and better meet the medical needs of its residents. POLICE AND FIRE FACILITIES Presently the police, firefighting and EMS services within Montcalm County are being adequately met through a series of inter-jurisdictional cooperative agreements. This is a great way to cost-effectively provide the needed services. However, future physical facilities like fire halls and police stations should be located within established developed areas so that these new public facilities do not contribute to sprawl. Continued cooperation in the provision of these services is key to keeping them fiscally viable. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-5 �~ LOCAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES The same can be said about city, village, township and county general government buildings. They should be located within established cities, villages or well developed suburban areas-not in the "middle of nowhere." Where and how the public spends infrastructure dollars greatly influences private sector spending on new development. The public sector should lead by engaging in new facility siting practices that result in locations that are consistent with the policies of this Plan. Similarly, the public should always build buildings using quality materials that last, and use well designed exteriors so as to set the bar on quality design for the private sector to emulate. PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES Last but not least, the number, size, location and characteristics of public parks and recreation facilities in the county has a lot to do with citizen contentment over quality of life. The five state game areas and Huron-Manistee National Forest land in Montcalm County are very important resources in this regard, but alone they cannot meet the daily recreation needs of local citizens. Active living leads to healthy people and high satisfaction over living choices. It also leads to fewer and often less serious medical needs. Thus, it is important that local parks and recreation facilities be constructed and maintained in locations that best meet the needs of the people who will use them. The county has a County Park and Recreation Plan that contains an inventory of existing county park and recreation facilities, needs and a strategy for future improvements. The county owns five recreation areas totaling about 100 acres, but they are concentrated in the northwest part of the county and not all areas of the county are adequately served with park and recreation facilities. The County Park and Recreation Plan is a prerequisite to eligibility for state and federal funds targeted at park and recreation facilities. It is very important for the county to continue to prepare and update the County Park and Recreation Plan at least every five years, and then to pursue state and federal funds to help pay for future parkland acquisition and improvement. Of course some county and local funds will be necessary to meet match requirements on grants, but parks are basic elements of local quality of life which are essential to citizen happiness. This is true, whether you are a local resident, a visitor or a potential new employer eyeing the area for quality of life indicators. Besides, paying for a fraction of a park or recreation facility while another governmental level pays for the rest, is only fiscally sound common sense if the facility is properly designed and located for cost-effective future use. E:\word\Montcalm\Plan feb 06\Chapter6 Trans & Other lnfra2.doc CAF C::\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan March 2006\Chapter 6 Trans & Other Infra (3 06).doc CAF C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan July 2006\Chapter 6 Trans & Other Infra (7 06).doc Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 6-6 �Chapter 7 INTERJURISDICTIONAL COORDINATION & PLAN IMPLEMENTATION INTRODUCTION As important a benchmark as this General Plan represents, the initiatives proposed in this Plan will not implement themselves. It will take the concerted efforts of citizen3, elected officials and local and county administrative officials to bring this Plan from concept into reality. It will take continued support and commitment for many years. However, the goals of this Plan and the strategies proposed to implement it offer the promise of a much better future than that likely to occur if recent trends continue unchanged. Benefits to all groups will be numerous and most visible in terms of an increased quality of life that can attract new businesses and jobs, and greater satisfaction of residents. An increased quality of life comes from new jobs, an enhanced agricultural sector, creation of more distinctive residential neighborhoods and commercial areas and retention of the rural scenic character of the landscape. Many indirect benefits will also occur. These include improved access to information needed for decision-making and better cooperation among units of government. The central ingredients to successful Plan implementation will be: • Commitment by the County Planning Commission, the County Board of Commissioners, citizens and support from local units of government. Implementation of the General Plan will require the county and local governments, businesses and citizens to drop some old habits and adopt some new approaches. This is not always easy to do. However, the desired vision will not be reached without commitment by all involved. • A better educated citizenry and local officials. While many citizens and officials want trends to change, they lack the knowledge to make them change or do not understand the cause and effect link of actions they take on an ongoing basis. Information about more appropriate residential development patterns, the fiscal and land use constraints of extending urban services, modern farming and forestry methods, scenery and open space preservation , natural resource protection and other tools to sustain the quality of life in Montcalm County need to reach citizens and officials or they will not understand why and how local decision-making must change. The Montcalm County Fact Book, the internet based Community Information System and this Plan are important first steps in helping to improve future land use decision making. See Figure 7-1 . FOCUSING ON PRIORITIES It is easy for a Planning Commission at either the county or local level to become distracted with ongoing tasks or ad hoc, controversial issues. Still, the Commission needs to prioritize its tasks. Time needs to be set aside for high priority items. These include the preparation of an annual report and work program for the next year, and when appropriate, the five-year Plan update. These are discussed below. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-1 �Figure 7-1 Education is the Top Implementation Priority of the Montcalm County General Plan Annual Tasks An annual report on all activities undertaken by the County Planning Commission with a special focus on actions taken to implement the Plan should be made to the County Board of Commissioners. A proposed work program that identifies priorities and projected expenses for the next year should also be prepared and submitted in time to be included in the annual budget process. The Planning Commission should begin reviewing all proposed new public facilities in the county for consistency with the Plan. Periodically, and at least once each five years, the General Plan should be thoroughly reviewed and updated by the County Planning Commission. Top Priorities The Planning Commission can not be expected to accomplish all of the strategies listed in the goals, objectives and strategies. Many of these can only be accomplished by other agencies or groups. It is important that discussions begin with those groups so that they understand the goals, find agreeable common ground where there are differences and obtain a commitment to the action. One approach to establishing priorities is to use the following standards: • Make a high priority of those actions that are the precursor to other steps. One example is the recommendation in Chapter 4 to develop a 5-year countywide strategic economic development plan . • Those actions that are assigned to a particular group are a high priority. • A lower priority may be those actions that are not assigned to a group or that broadly identify the "county," as the responsible party. • If an action does not list a responsible party, it remains a lower priority until a group or agency steps forward to take ownership of it. The following activities should be the key priorities of the Planning Commission for the next five years: Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-2 �• • • • • • • • • • Educate all local units of government in the county about the vision , goals, objectives and strategies of the County General Plan and provide technical assistance in the integration of these elements into local plans and zoning decisions. Educate all citizens about the vision , goals, objectives and strategies of the updated County General Plan and provide technical assistance in the integration of these elements into property owner development and redevelopment efforts. Directly use this Plan in the analysis and review of proposed rezonings , zoning text amendments, and new or amended master plans submitted to the County Planning Commission for statutory review and approval. This means recommending approval for actions consistent with the Plan and denial or modification for actions inconsistent with this Plan. Exercise review authority in ways to improve local decisions by guiding decisions toward integrated and coordinated solutions based on the core objectives and strategies in this Plan. Provide training and technical assistance to local governments on general planning , zoning and capital improvement programming. Many County Planning Commissions in Michigan host an annual one day conference for local governments in the County, others offer periodic workshops on key topics. Both are great ways to meet the local planning commission education needs in the land use arena. Monitor local and county agency decisions and periodically inform local governments and the County Board of Commissioners on the status of efforts to improve land use decision making in Montcalm County. Strongly advocate that the county budget and provide for digital air photos of all the land in the county. These photos should be taken during flights in 2010 (to correspond to the next Census). Strongly advocate that FEMA complete mapping of floodplains throughout the county. Join efforts with others outside the county to modernize planning and zoning enabling legislation and to authorize new tools to better manage growth and preserve open space. Update the Montcalm County Data Book online on at least an annual basis and major updates to hard copy consistent with the next update to the Plan in late 2010 and 2011 when new Census data is available. The County Planning Commission should also be involved with others and champion the preparation of the following additional plans in the county: • A county transportation plan • A county strategic economic development plan • Access management plans for M-57, M-66, M-46 and M-91 . • An agricultural protection plan in conjunction with townships with zoning , so that farmers in the county are eligible to participate in the state PDR program. Watershed management plans of each river watershed and major lake • watersheds. • A greenspace plan for a linked system of greenspaces throughout the county . • Periodic updates to the Montcalm County Recreational Plan . The number of county parks should be expanded per the Montcalm County Recreational Plan , but special attention should be given to establishment of new county parks in the parts of the county without any. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-3 �ADDRESSING ISSUES OF GREATER THAN LOCAL CONCERN Local jurisdictions frequently face issues that have implications beyond the jurisdiction (both intra-county and inter-county) . Public interests that are broader than simply local interests include (but are not limited to) those in Table 7-1 . Examples of common issues of greater than local concern are illustrated in Figure 7-2. Figure 7-2 Examples of Issues of Greater than Local Concern PROTECT PROTECTION OF FLOODPLAINS WATERSHED MANAGEMENT BUFFER ZONE GRAVEL PIT INFRASTRUCTURE EXTENDED .· '~--. •\ ·t ~--~>~~.. \\.' -~ \ Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-4 �Table 7-1 Issues of Greater than Local Concern Protecting the Environment and Natural Resources • Watersheds and water quality • Wetlands protection • Floodplain protection • Land pollution (contaminated sites) • Soil conservation and stormwater pollution • Air pollution • Groundwater pollution • Oil and gas pollution • Noise pollution • Water pollution of inland lakes, rivers and streams • Protection of areas with steep slopes • Wildlife corridors and fish and wildlife habitat protection • Protection of unique and endangered species • Protection of agricultural land • Sustainability of privately owned forest land • Water surfaces that are under control of multiple local jurisdictions, especially as relates to keyhole development Use of public access sites • • Maintaining a "sense of place" where that sense is the major attraction for tourists and the service sector economy. Siting Public Facilities or Providing New Public Services • Solid waste and recycling • Emergency services (fire, ambulance, police) - to achieve greater efficiency • Transportation/roads • Public transportation • Trails (siting of) - federal, state, local, and property owners • "Regional" park facilities • District library and district boundaries for libraries • Mental and other health facilities • Provision of senior services - location of facilities, including handicapped services • Extension of sewer and water utilities • Schools (especially if a new school, or consolidation of schools is considered) Maintaining a Sustainable Economy and Promoting Economic Development • Real (livable) wages, job opportunities for young adults and families with children • Adequate lifelong educational opportunities for all citizens: health of the Montcalm Community College • Adequate affordable housing for middle and low income persons. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-5 �Table 7-1 (Continued) Issues of Greater than Local Concern Land Use • LULU's (locally unwanted land uses that meet a regional need) , such as gravel pits, junk yards, landfills, communication towers, electric generating windmills, etc. • Large scale development (shopping center, airports, etc.) • Zoned density in some rural areas while low, is too high to cost effectively service • Compact settlement pattern vs. dispersed settlement pattern and the associated impacts on infrastructure extensions or establishment of infrastructure • Siting affordable housing-especially mobile home parks • Lack of similar regulations and uneven enforcement across jurisdiction boundaries • Compatibility of land uses along jurisdiction boundaries regarding zoning and land use issues • Loss of rural open space-especially along roads in the county • Regional focus on open space preservation and farmland preservation • Protecting important viewsheds and rural corridor views. Other • lnterjurisdictional equity issues • Intergenerational equity issues • Sustainability. In many instances, these issues of greater than local concern revolve around common environmental features (which do not respect municipal boundaries) , or infrastructure, economic development and the needs of special populations. It takes a basic change of attitude toward other jurisdictions to effectively deal with issues of greater than local concern. It takes recognition that all the citizens are in the same boat together. In the aggregate, they all face the same potential loss or gain. It takes acceptance that the other jurisdictions are not in competition or opposition , at least not on every aspect of the issue. It takes the ability to exercise mutual respect in areas of overlapping responsibilities and mutual support where responsibilities are separate, but compatible in pursuit of common goals and a common vision of the county. By jointly engaging the issues, common ground can usually be found . It is the common ground that is most often used as the basis for effective interjurisdictional cooperation . ROLE OF KEY PLAYERS It will take the efforts of many different groups to implement the Montcalm General Plan . Key among them are the local planning commissions and governing boards, the County Board of Commissioners and the County Planning Commission. The framed text on Table 7-2 on the next three pages lists the traditional roles and responsibilities of local planning commissions, local governing bodies, the County Board of Commissioners and the County Planning Commission . These traditional roles are proposed to be continued . Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-6 �Table 7-2 Traditional Responsibilities of The Local Government Decision-makers County Board of Commissioners The County Board of Commissioners must take the lead in order to support continued planning in Montcalm County. Its basic statutory and administrative responsibilities are as follows (not all of these are currently being performed): • Adopt the County General Plan • Periodically hold a joint meeting with the County Planning Commission to go over is~-ues of common interest. • Approve funding for the planning/zoning program each year including funds for training and continuing education of commissioners and staff, and for public and local official education on planning and zoning. • Approve hiring of consultants as recommended by the County Planning Commission and pursuant to an approved work program and budget. • Ask the Planning Commission to prepare an annual report of activities and a proposed work program for the next year, in enough time to be considered in the budget process. • Ask the Planning Commission to review proposed capital improvements for consistency with the Plan prior to the County Board or other public agency action. • Initiate and coordinate activities with representatives of other units of government on various issues of greater than local concern. • Support efforts by the Planning Commission to educate citizens and local officials on a wide variety of land use and Smart Growth issues. County Planning Commission The County Planning Commission was created by the County Board of Commissioners on September 8, 2003 pursuant to the requirements of the County Planning Act, PA 282 of 1945. Currently, the County Planning Commission is responsible for: • Preparing and maintaining a plan for the development and protection of the County. It will be the first to adopt the General Plan. • Making recommendations on proposed Township plans and/or rezoning or text amendments. • Attempting to prevent incompatible planning and zoning along governmental boundaries. • Reviewing and commenting on proposed new public lands, facilities or improvements for consistency with the General Plan. • Review and comment on proposed PA 116 Farmland and Open Space Enrollments. • Periodically reviewing and/or preparing various state or federal grant applications. • Receiving, storing and sharing data from the Michigan Resource Inventory Program and helping to keep the County Community Information System filled with valuable and contemporary information. • Providing information and education services for the U.S. Bureau of the Census. • Receiving citizen comments on local planning and zoning issues and acting upon or referring those comments as appropriate. • Educating citizens and representatives of local units of government on various county planning and Smart Growth development issues. • Learning about and staying up-to-date on the responsibilities of the Planning Commission and on various tools available to implement local plans. • Coordinating planning and associated development regulations with other governmental units and public agencies. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-7 �Table 7-2 (Continued) Traditional Responsibilities of the Local Government Decision-makers Local Governing Bodies Local city or village councils and township boards of trustees also have specific planning and zoning responsibilities. These include: • Appointment of qualified persons to serve as members of the local Planning Commission/Zoning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals. Adoption of ordinances recommended by the Planning Commission for implementation of the local • future land use plan, including when supported by the governing body, a zoning ordinance and subdivision regulations. • Providing an adequate budget for the Planning Commission to carry out its responsibilities including keeping the Plan and Zoning Ordinance current, and receiving proper training on their roles, responsibilities and new tools and techniques for improving the community. • Providing adequate staff and financial resources (including setting fee levels) for proper enforcement of adopted regulations. • Conducting required public hearings prior to acting on zoning, subdivision or infrastructure development matters. • Receiving and acting upon citizen complaints related to planning and zoning issues and as appropriate, referring matters to the Planning Commission for action. Coordinating actions with representatives of other units of government on issues of greater than • local concern. Local Planning Commissions Planning commissions in cities and villages in the county are organized under the Municipal Planning Act, PA 285 of 1931. Township planning commissions are organized under PA 168 of 1959. Some of their principal responsibilities include: • Creating, adopting and maintaining a local comprehensive (or master) plan to guide future land use change and to serve as the legal basis for the local zoning ordinance. • Creating, maintaining and administering responsibilities under the local zoning ordinance (for those municipalities with local zoning) adopted pursuant to the City-Village Zoning Act, PA 207 of 1921 or the Township Zoning Act, PA 184 of 1943. • Advising the local governing body on proposed rezonings, text amendments, plats, land divisions, capital improvements and related planning and zoning decisions. • Responding to the recommendations of the County Planning Commission on planning and zoning issues. • Making recommendations on special projects or delegated responsibilities (e.g. zoning ordinance enforcement). • Working with property owners in order to try and achieve good development (or redevelopment) . • Educating citizens on the values and benefits of planning. • Receiving citizen comments on local planning and zoning issues and acting upon or referring those comments as appropriate. • Learning about and staying up-to-date on the responsibilities of the Planning Commission and on various tools available to implement local plans. Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-8 �CONCLUDING THOUGHT This General Plan represents hundreds of hours of input by the County Planning Commission, citizens and local government officials in Montcalm County over the past year. The circumstances it is intended to address did not occur overnight and they will not be resolved overnight. However, this Plan sets forth another option to a future that will occur if existing trends and uncoordinated decisions continue. Existing trends are fueled to a very great extent by existing plans, regulations and institutional relationships. To create a future different from existing trends, then current plans, policies, regulations and institutional relationships must also be changed . Perhaps the catalyst for that change is for the preferred vision of Montcalm County, and what it takes to get to that vision , to be part of the "story" of Montcalm County that every resident, of every age, knows by heart. So, for example, if all Montcalm County residents know by heart that clustering, conservation subdivisions, community service districts, and farmland preservation are necessary for Montcalm County to remain largely rural, prosperous and continue to have a high quality of life, there is a greater chance that Montcalm County will have these characteristics. It is up to the County Planning Commission with support of the County Board of Commissioners to achieve this level of citizen understanding of and support for this vision and this Plan. E:\word\Montcalm\Plan feb 06\Chapter 7 Implementation lnterjuris Cooper2.doc GAF : C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Chapter 7 Implementation lnterjuris Cooper2 (3 06).doc CAF : C:\G-Drive\WINWORD\PROJECTS\Montcalm County\Final General Plan July 2006\Chapter 7 Implementation lnterjuris Cooper (7 06).doc • Montcalm County General Plan July 2006 7-9 �re RESOLUTION 2006-25 ADOPTION OF MONTCALM COUNTY GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the Montcalm County Planning Commission has prepared a General Plan to guide future land use and infrastructure decisions in the County; and WHEREAS, the public provided input to development of the Plan via four Tovm Meetings during the planning process; and WHEREAS, the Montcalm County Planning Commission has solicited public comment from all jurisdictions within the county and abutting the county, as ½ell as from the public, and has received \-\Titten an oral comments on the draft Plan; and \IVHEREAS, the fontcalm County Planning Commission has conducted a duly advertised public hearing to receive public comment on the draft Plan; and WHEREAS, the Montcalm County Planning Commission has reviewed public comments to the draft Plan and prepared amendments to the draft General Plan in response to public comments, which amendments are attached to this Resolution; and • WHEREAS, the Montcalm County Planning Commission has duly reviewed the draft General Plan for the development of the County pursuant to the authority of Act 282 of 1945 (known as the County Planning Act). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Montcalm County Board of Commissioners adopt the Montcalm County General Plan, as amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution be published inside the back cover of each printed copy of the Montcalm County General Plan, along with the Resolution adopted by the Montcalm County Planning Commission, to certify that all maps, charts and descriptive and explanatory matter therein are a part of the Plan. STATE OF ~ICHIGA"'\ .. COL~TY OF .10~TC-\L\1 } }SS. } I, the undersigned, duly qualified and acting Clerk of the County of Montcalm, Michigan (the "County'') do hereby cenify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of Resolution 2006-25 adopted by the Board of Commissioners at a regular meeting on the 10th day of July. 2006. the original of which is on file in my office. Public notice of said meeting was given pursuant to and in compliance ,\ith Act. 'o. 267, Public Acts of Michigan, 19 6, as amended, including in the case of a special or rescheduled meeting, notice by posting at least eighteen (18) hours prior to the time set for the meeting. 2006 _ A.i;;. Vl!Th'ESS \\'HEREOF, I have h e r e t o =offi]l~ture on this 12th day of July, ~~OALU County of fontcalm, State of Michigan �Resolution of Adoption of Montcalm County General Plan Whereas the Montcalm County Planning Commission has prepared a General Plan to guide future land use and infrastructure decisions in the County; and Whereas the public provided input to development of the Plan via four Town Meetings during the planning process; and Whereas the Montcalm County Planning Commission has solicited public comment from all jurisdictions within the county and abutting the county, as well as from the public, and has received written and oral comments on the draft Plan; and • Whereas the Montcalm County Planning Commission has conducted a duly advertised public hearing to receive public comment on the draft Plan; and \Vhereas the Montcalm County Planning Commission has revievved public comments to the draft Plan and prepared amendments to the draft General Plan in response to public comments, which amendments are attached to this Resolution; and \r\7hereas the Montcalm County Planning Commission has duly reviewed the draft General Plan for the development of the County pursuant to the authority of Act 282 of 1945 (knovvn as the County Planning Act); and Now therefore be it resolved that the Montcalm County Planning Commission does on the date listed below, hereby recommend that the Montcalm County Board of Commissioners adopt the Montcalm County General Plan, along with the amendments attached to this Resolution, and does direct the Chairperson of the County Planning Commission to deliver a copy of the recommended Plan to the County Board of Commissioners and following their adoption, to the West Michigan Regional Planning Commission along ·with this Resolution as certification of the adoption of the Plan; • Be it also resolved that this Resolution be published inside the back cover of each printed copy of the Montcalm County General Plan to certify that all maps, charts and descriptive and explanatory matter therein are a part of the Plan as so signified by the signature of the Chairperson of the Montcalm County Planning Commission, and the Chairperson of the Montcalm County Board of Commissioners on this Resolution. �• Roll Call Vote: Bruce Noll- Yes Lonnie Smith- Yes John Johansen- Yes S. Michael Scott- Yes Franz Mogdis- Yes Don Smucker- Yes Pete Haines- Yes Phil Lund- Absent 7 Yes, 0 No, 1 Absent Date: June 15, 2006 I • Signa Monte _ · g Commission E;\ word\ Montcalm\Montcalm county plan resolution2.doc • � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Wyckoff Planning and Zoning Collection Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Planning & Zoning Center (Lansing, Mich.) (Organization) Wyckoff, Mark A. Description An account of the resource Municipal master plans and zoning ordinances from across the state of Michigan, spanning from the 1960s to the early 2020s. The bulk of the collection was compiled by urban planner Mark Wyckoff over the course of his career as the founder and principal planner of the Planning and Zoning Center in Lansing, Michigan. Some additions have been made to the collection by municipalities since it was transferred to Grand Valley State University. Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1960/2023 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Subject The topic of the resource Michigan Comprehensive plan publications Master plan reports Zoning--Michigan Zoning--Maps Maps Land use--planning Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-240 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Language A language of the resource eng Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Montcalm-County_General-Plan_2006 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Montcalm County Planning Commission, Montcalm County, Michigan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2006-07-12 Title A name given to the resource Montcalm County General Plan Description An account of the resource The Montcalm County General Plan was prepared under the direction of the Montcalm County Planning Commission by the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. in July 2006. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. (consultant) Subject The topic of the resource Master plan reports Montcalm County (Mich.) Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/870">Planning and Zoning Center Collection (RHC-240)</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/">No Copyright - United States</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource application/pdf Language A language of the resource eng Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/91fd75dd72e57bd5f102324d058dcfcf.jpg 091796da8b337f149512aa38edc45181 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Naval Recognition Training Slides Subject The topic of the resource Slides Military education Airplanes, Military--Recognition Warships--Recognition World War, 1939-1945 Description An account of the resource Slides developed during World War II as a training tool, for top-side battle-station personnel on board ship and for all aircraft personnel, by the US Navy. In 1942 a Recognition School was established by the Navy at Ohio State University where the method of identification was developed. In 1943 the school was taken over by the US Navy. The importance of training in visual recognition of ships and aircraft became even more evident during World War II. Mistakes resulting in costly errors and loss of life led to an increased emphasis on recognition as a vital skill. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource United States. Navy Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <a href="https://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/477">Naval recognition slides (RHC-50)</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Special Collections & University Archives. Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-04-04 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/?language=en">No Copyright - United States</a> Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource image Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-50 Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1943-1953 Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Source <a href="http://gvsu.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/477">Naval recognition slides, RHC-50</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-50_M1065 Title A name given to the resource Montecuccoli class light cruiser Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource United States. Navy Description An account of the resource Montecuccoli class, Italian CL (light cruiser), April 14, 1943. Subject The topic of the resource United States. Navy World War, 1939-1945 Military education Warships--Recognition Slides Italy Language A language of the resource eng Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource <a href="http://rightsstatements.org/page/NoC-US/1.0/?language=en">No Copyright - United States</a> Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpeg Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Naval recognition slides (RHC-50) Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1943-04-14 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/d211773869004e735d8268806fe51868.jpg 7cd0961d42fdc330862e0bae8e71eba3 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_2_001 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-01-31 Title A name given to the resource Montello at Galveston dock Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of the Steamship Montello at Galveston Dock. Subject The topic of the resource Galveston Bay (Tex.) Boats Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/b76ff2a08be131a620b2307ab1a8d7d0.jpg f5be5854b59098e3c12346c1a5b80d25 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_1_005 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-01-16 Title A name given to the resource Montello at Mobile docks Description An account of the resource Steamship Montello, 6400 tons loading at Mobile, Alabama. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3ffa34c5094a3f432ccce0aafc2d3b90.jpg fc72f631635e013490623ebda743eb7d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_1_006 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-01-16 Title A name given to the resource Montello at Mobile docks Description An account of the resource Steamship Montello, 6400 tons loading at Mobile, Alabama. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/63a22748dff4260e4649cff80d0c2631.jpg e6db9c812fe19cef1fadabbb7993fffb Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00361 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-22 Title A name given to the resource Montello carrier pigeon Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide (dark) of a sailor holding a carrier pigeon. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Steamboats Boats Homing pigeons Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6eb6127bdd41e5f2ceaa277a622ac4bc.jpg 4d374fc646c8ee77dbf70253cd4df371 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00362 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-23 Title A name given to the resource Montello compass bearing Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of a man reading the compass bearing on the deck of the S.S. Montello. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Steamboats Boats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/6ce5be7db6a4aa02c74660d2f951ff0e.jpg 749aa185e2972536b125b58731d48e5d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_2_007 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-22 Title A name given to the resource Montello crew at supper Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of seven people on the Steamer Montello. One man is standing on the upper walkway. Four men are standing on the lower walkway with one man standing at a window. One woman is visible in the window and another woman is standing in a doorway. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboat workers Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/32b9a5c47b7f179cc1063ee9fdcc9cd6.jpg 4044e9a44d324abda710e2761403e7f8 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_2_004 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-11 Title A name given to the resource Montello foremast painting Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of the foremast of the Steamer Montello. Three people are visible painting the mast. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboat workers Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/af4d83ea442b6d25ad8511b2554493a4.jpg 5a4894ed52c0a665fca53b8969dba98b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00358 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-11 Title A name given to the resource Montello mast Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of the mast of the S.S. Montello. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Steamboats Boats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/132b0be0144352844cd974c59625cdd2.jpg 84df8fb4c77f749a1d3725cba9ef8155 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_2_012 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-26 Title A name given to the resource Montello officers mess Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of five men sitting and eating at a table in the officers mess of the Steamer Montello. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboats Steamboat workers Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/4682675914b4cd4470c587183dab335b.jpg df6ea89e61fca0dd4e1bd4429c1729ca Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_LS00360 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-10 Title A name given to the resource Montello officers observing Description An account of the resource Black and white lantern slide of a line of steamship officers standing along a railing surveying the horizon with sextants. Subject The topic of the resource Lantern slides Steamboats Boats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives https://digitalcollections.library.gvsu.edu/files/original/3cdd8eec1e62d14691483be0d574e49f.jpg 3d6561e587ad2c800ef6be675daba694 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Robert H. Merrill photographs Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1909/1950 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context RHC-222 Description An account of the resource Photographs, negatives, and lantern slides digitized from the papers of engineer and archaeologist Robert H. Merrill. A Grand Rapids native, Merrill held an accomplished career as a civil engineer. He founded the company Spooner & Merrill, which held offices in Grand Rapids and Chicago. From 1919-1921, Merrill lived in China, working as Assistant Principal Engineer on a reconstruction of the Grand Canal - the oldest and longest canal system in the world. Merrill became fascinated by archaeology, and among other projects, he traveled to the Uxmal Pyramids in Yucatan, Mexico, with a research expedition from Tulane University. Merrill's photo collection includes images of his travels and projects, friends and family. Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Merrill_FilmPacks_2_003 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1937-02-10 Title A name given to the resource Montello officers observing latitude Description An account of the resource Black and white photograph of four officers standing on a railed walkway. Three of the four men are observing the latitude of the ship. Subject The topic of the resource Boats Steamboat workers Steamboats Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Robert H. Merrill papers (RHC-222) Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Type The nature or genre of the resource Image Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource image/jpg Language A language of the resource eng Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Merrill, Robert H., 1881-1955 Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Grand Valley State University. University Libraries. Lemmen Library and Archives