Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middleville planning commission backs broader master-plan work, urges M‑37 corridor study and ADU text changes
Summary
The Middleville Planning Commission reviewed the draft 2025–2031 Capital Improvement Plan and favored a more comprehensive master-plan option that would include a refreshed M‑37 corridor plan and expedited accessory dwelling unit (ADU) text amendments; staff will present the recommended scope to the village president for budgeting.
The Middleville Planning Commission spent the bulk of its meeting reviewing a staff-proposed scope for the village’s 2025–2031 Capital Improvement Plan and several options for updating the village master plan.
Planning staff member Doug Powers told commissioners the draft CIP contains many items but recommended the panel focus on pages three through six because those sections contain projects that implicate planning policy rather than DPW equipment. “There is a lot here,” Powers said, explaining staff prepared multiple consultant scopes ranging from a basic update to a comprehensive rewrite that would include sub-area plans and a corridor study.
Commissioners flagged the M‑37 corridor plan as a top priority: the corridor plan is more than 20 years old and commissioners said a cohesive approach is needed to manage redevelopment and frontage improvements along that stretch. Several members supported option three, which would pair a broader master-plan update with a dedicated M‑37 corridor study and additional community engagement (visioning sessions and targeted outreach).
The commission also pressed staff to move on accessory dwelling unit (ADU) text amendments. Commissioners said allowing ADUs to reflect existing housing patterns could expand housing options without large new apartment developments and asked staff whether ADU language should be advanced separately to accelerate adoption or folded into the master-plan update.
Members discussed data gaps for housing policy—staff said the village lacks a parcel-level inventory of rentals and has asked county mapping staff for assistance. Commissioners noted rental registration or other inventory tools would be implemented by council and administration, not by the planning commission directly.
Powers said he will present the commission’s preferred scope (the more comprehensive option that includes the M‑37 corridor work and ADU language) to the village president for consideration in the budget process and to determine consultant selection and schedule. The commission did not take a formal vote at the meeting; it agreed to forward its recommendation to administration for budgeting and next steps.
Next steps: staff will draft a recommended scope and budget for the president and council and return to the commission with clarified costs and timeline options.
