Blissfest Letters to Township & County Planning Officials
|
1/31/01
Max Putters The Blissfest is hereby withdrawing its application for a Planned Unit Development or amended Planned Unit Development. Instead we are submitting our request for a Special Use Permit for temporary parking and camping on a portion of the 80 acre parcel owned by the Blissfest and adjacent to the original 40 acre parcel which is subject to the existing Special Use Permit approved in 1992. Rationale for new request: The Blissfest has elected the following option in order to remedy some confusion regarding the use of a portion of the Blissfest property that was purchased in 1998 and has been used for auxiliary camping and parking one weekend each year since 1996 in a lease arrangement with the former owner. Prior to 1998, camping was a principal permitted use in FF District. As of 5/24/98, camping became a permitted use subject to a special use permit. Since it appears that the current use of this portion of the Blissfest property for camping and parking is non-conforming, it is the intention of the organization to apply for a special use permit allowing for temporary camping and parking on this portion of its property during the annual weekend Blissfest festival.The Blissfest believes that the existing Special Use Permit permits temporary retail sales during the one annual weekend Blissfest festival.Temporary weekend concession stands for food, arts and crafts, and T-shirts have been a continuous part of the Blissfest event since it started 21 years ago. The enclosed special use permit
request includes a description of and use specifications for the
temporary camping and parking area as well as graphics that show
existing conditions and proposed uses. As a courtesy to the zoning
and planning department the Blissfest is also providing a site map
for the current festival grounds with self-imposed use
specifications that are in response to community concerns and a
result of ongoing long-term organizational planning. At the planning
commission’s option, upon approving the requested Special Use
Permit, Blissfest does not object to the imposition of such
specifications as conditions to the permit.incerely, 2/5/01 Dear Mr. Putters, After some further consideration and consultation, the Blissfest Music Organization would like to include some additional acreage in its Special Use Permit request dated 1/31/01. The additional property will also be used for temporary auxiliary camping and includes10 additional acres of the Blissfest property and an additional 20 acres of adjacent leased property east of the Blissfest property. The leased property is owned by Robert Barcheski. He will be sending your office a letter of concurrence. All of the other parameters and specifications of the original 1/31/01 SUP request remain the same. Enclosed are updated graphics that include the additional temporary camping area. Sincerely,Jim Gillespie, Executive Director
2/5/01
Dear Mrs. Call, The Blissfest has notified the Emmet County Planning and Zoning Department that we are withdrawing our application for a Planned Unit Development or amended Planned Unit Development. Instead we are submitting our request for a Special Use Permit for temporary parking and camping on a portion of an 80 acre parcel owned by the Blissfest and 20 acres of property leased by the Blissfest from Mr. Robert Barcheski. Both properties are adjacent to the original 40 acre parcel which is subject to an existing Special Use Permit approved in 1992. I have enclosed copies of the new request with accompanying graphics. The county planning committee will be reviewing this proposal at its March 1,2000 meeting. Please let me know about any meetings that you will be planning regarding this new proposal. I am also providing a proposed site map that also includes our current festival grounds on the original 40 acre parcel with accompanying use specifications that are in response to the current situation that allows for a weekend Blissfest but does not have any specifications regarding the festival. At the Board’s option, upon recommending approval of this requested Special Use Permit, Blissfest does not object to the imposition of such specifications as conditions to the original special use approved in 1992. Rationale for new request: The Blissfest has elected this option in response to the Readmond Planning Committee’s apparent unwillingness to pursue the PUD as a planning tool in Readmond Township even after the board recommended a PUD-1 overlay for the Blissfest in a memo to Emmet Planning & Zoning dated 5/3/00. In addition, the committee chair did not put to a committee vote the request by the Blissfest to table a decision on the PUD to allow time to amend it.A special use permit is now our preferred option. This new Special Use Permit would remedy some confusion regarding the use of a portion of the Blissfest property that was purchased in 1998 and had been used for auxiliary camping and parking one weekend each year since 1996 in a lease arrangement with the former owner. The 20 acre parcel owned by Mr Barcheski has been leased since 1993. Prior to 1998, camping was a principal permitted use in FF District. As of 5/24/98, camping became a permitted use subject to a special use permit. Since there is some concern that the current use of this portion of the Blissfest property and the Barcheski property for camping and parking may be non-conforming, a Special Use Permit would remedy the situation. The request is only for a special use permit that allows temporary camping and parking on these properties during the annual weekend Blissfest festival. This appears to be a logical course of action. The situation has been further complicated by the fact that there are currently no regulations or ordinances in the township regarding outdoor gatherings. Request for information: I would also like to request copies of any past board minutes that make reference to the Blissfest. Minutes of board or committee meetings from February through April of 1988 and March through-June 1992 that include the Blissfest or the Outdoor Education Center proposal by Howard Rice are of interest to me. There may also be a Blissfest reference in the minutes from July 1990. I am also interested in minutes that reference discussion of any outdoor gathering ordinance proposals that were being considered by the township. I believe these may have occurred in the winter or spring of 1993,1994,1995 or 1996. I would like to request copies of any letters to the board or planning committee that complain about the Blissfest. This includes any historical documents as well as any recent letters. In addition please send a copy of any letters from The Emmet County Sheriff or Michigan State Police regarding the Blissfest. We would be happy to reimburse the township for any monetary compensation that the township normally charges for such requests. Sincerely, Jim Gillespie, Executive Director
2/7/01 Martha Dykesterhouse, Supervisor Dear Martha, I am sending this letter regarding the 1/23/01 meeting and my response to some of the claims by the opposition’s lawyer. There were a couple of statements made by him that I feel need a response as you deliberate on the Blissfest. Also, as you probably know we have withdrawn our PUD proposal and instead have submitted a Special Use Permit request. The new request does not include use of any acreage in Cross Village Township. I am not sure how that impacts meetings in your township. I would like to assure you that we will continue to do all we can to work with Cross Village Township to minimize any inconvenience that the festival might present to your township. I would also like to inform you that the Blissfest Music Organization intents to do every thing possible continue our annual weekend festival on our property in Readmond Township. I am enclosing a complimentary copy of our recent SUP request. The lawyer representing those against the Blissfest made some claims that I feel warrant a response in order to provide you with the Blissfest perspective. First, the claim that if a PUD or an SUP were approved for the Blissfest it would start a precedent and open the door to other "commercial" enterprises in Cross Village and Readmond Township’s FF Districts. Our response to this claim is that there has been a SUP for the Blissfest and an Outdoor Education Center on our property since 1992. There have been 8 years to start the rush to commercialize the township’s FF districts. Has this happened? I do not believe there have been any SUP approvals in the two townships that in any way approach this so called commercial development. We do not believe that any precident will be set by allowing the Blissfest to continue and to include additional auxiliary camping one weekend per year on our property. We also disagree in principal with the portrayal of the Blissfest as a commercial entity. The Blissfest is a non-profit charitable organization with the purpose of promoting traditional arts and cultural enrichment. Another claim that I feel needs clarification is regarding the statement that there has been a 30% increase in crime in Readmond Township in the pat 3 years due to the Blissfest. The opposition’s lawyer has been creative with the actual statistics and I believe misrepresented them in an attempt to discredit our organization and scare the community. He is trying to portray the Blissfest patrons as running amok in the townships and creating havoc. There have been some isolated incidents but they are just that, isolated. The actual statistics from the Michigan State Police show that during the past three Blissfest weekends there have been the following road arrest statistics in Readmond and Cross Village Township. It should be noted that the statistics do not confirm a causal relation with Blissfest only an association in regards to the dates: 1998 Cross Village: 1 Marijuana Possession In addition the state police were invited to the Blissfest property to do foot patrol on 7/8/00 and issued 6 MIP citations and 2 Marijuana citations to some youth at the festival. This was a planned intervention and done at the request of the festival in an effort to provide consequences for this activity and deter future behavior. We are all too familiar with the indiscretions of youth in our townships but extrapolate these statistic and infer that the Blissfest has caused such an increase in crime in Readmond Township I believe is another gross overstatement. Please add this letter to your written comments on this matter. Sincerely, Jim Gillespie
January 13, 2001 Readmond Township Board Les Arnold Dear Board Members, After attending the January 16, 2001 meeting of the planning committee I feel I must address a few points. Let me first say I thought Mr. Hamill did a fine job at the first two public forums, and I told him as much. I also don’t have any objection with the committee rejecting the PUD as submitted. However I was quite disappointed with the way the meeting was handled. The committee had the choice of accepting, rejecting, or amending the PUD as submitted. In addition the applicant requested a postponement of the committee’s vote to allow Blissfest time to resubmit an amended PUD. Acting without a vote by the rest of the committee Mr. Hamill made the decision himself to reject that request. Such a decision, I feel should have been put to a vote or at least discussed and a consensus reached by the full committee. He then launched into a rather lengthy monologue of his personal opinions more on the existence of the Blissfest than on the PUD to be decided upon. He tried to make a case that a PUD is an unenforceable document and that there would be no assurance that any agreement entered into would be binding. In fact, Mr. Putters spelled out quite clearly that he had the resources of the prosecuting attorney, the sheriff’s department, the zoning ordinance officer and his staff to enforce a PUD. My understanding of the role of a committee chair is to facilitate a consensus amongst it’s members. While Mr. Hamill certainly has a right to voice his opinion on the issue at hand, it seemed inappropriate for him to use his position to dominate the proceedings and not allowing the committee to exercise all the options available to them. (amend current document or to honor the request of Blissfest to do so) I realize the committee is made up of volunteers giving their time and energy for the good of the community, however a certain amount of professionalism is required when considering matters of importance to such a large number of people. According to the members of the committee, they had never dealt a PUD before. It was stated during the meeting that a PUD changes the zoning and would stay with the property to subsequent owners. As Mr. Putters discussed, it is rather an overlay of existing zoning upon which terms and conditions can be applied including it terminating upon sale of the property. Another concern I heard was that there was no way the size of the festival could be controlled. This is an issue was under consideration by the Blissfest Board before the PUD was even considered. Many members and participants have expressed concern that the festival has reached or has slightly exceeded the optimal number. There is a proven method of handling this situation. The Wheatland Music Festival held in Remus Michigan had grown to 15,000 participants and was becoming burdensome. In one year they decided to sell only advance tickets and limit the number to 12,000. Notice was posted in all promotional materials stating that there would be no tickets available at the gate. This occurred nearly 10 years ago and their numbers have been consistent ever since. Problem solved. It was said that the Blissfest is a bunch of "outsiders who believe they can do what they what because this is the middle of nowhere". With the exception of one member from Boyne City, the Blissfest Board is comprised solely of citizens from Emmet County. In addition, according to membership numbers over half of festival participants are from an area north of Traverse City. One need only to attend a Blissfest to see all the familiar (and happy) faces who are, with rare exceptions, the most well behaved and courteous lot you’ll see anywhere. Another concern of the committee was preserving the rural character of the area. Few uses of the Blissfest site would do more to maintain open space and scenic beauty than having a yearly 3day festival followed by 362 days of unspoiled open space. True there is some activity preparing for the festival and cleaning up afterward, but the numbers involved could hardly be considered troublesome. And here again the Blissfest Organization has offered to set aside a substantial portion of the property in a conservation easement assuring that the rural beauty of the area would be preserved. I truly believe that if all parties sat down as rational and intelligent people, these issues of concern could be worked out satisfactorily. One possible solution might be to draw up a 3year plan under a special use permit with limits on size, the addition of shower facilities (to address the beach bathing issue), controls on alcohol use and whatever other issues were deemed appropriate and review it’s success on an annual basis. Then, at the end of the trial period perhaps a more informed decision could be made on the appropriateness of a PUD and what it should contain. I sincerely hope the Township Board will look critically at the evidence and consider the rights and benefits of the residents of the entire area in making your decision. The Blissfest and it’s supporters have put countless hours and many dollars into making their home in Readmond Township a place they can be proud of and enjoy for years to come. There is certainly still much work to be done, and this process of the past few weeks has been a wakeup call to move ahead quickly with those improvements that are needed to alleviate the hardships on it’s neighbors. Your fellow township resident, Les Arnold
.
|