Saturday, November 25, 2017
Holland Logo

Minutes - May 9, 2017

HOLLAND CHARTER TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION

Regular Meeting
May 9, 2017

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Marion Hoeve at 7:00 p.m.

Present: Chairman Marion Hoeve, Vice-Chairman/Secretary Jack Vander Meulen and Members Ken Bosma, Dennis Gebben, LaVerne Johnson, and Ed Zylstra. Also present was Assistant Planner Corey Broersma, and Recording Secretary Laurie Slater.

Absent: Norm Nykamp

The minutes of April 11, 2107 were approved as written.

Mr. Hoeve explained the meeting and hearing process to the audience.

Mr. Hoeve opened the public hearing for a rezoning submitted by Warren Westenbroek for property located at 0 Mason Street described generally as vacant land west of 10837 Mason Street, Holland, MI from A Agricultural to R-1 Single-Family Residential. Parcel Number 70-16-35-100-071.

Present for this request was Warren Westenbroek.

Mr. Westenbroek explained that he owns five acres that he would like to split into two parcels of two and a half acres each.

The rezoning would comply with the Township’s Future Land Use Map of Single Family Residential (R-1). The zoning would be consistent with the adjacent properties, however the proposed lot size of two and a half acres is larger than near-by residential developments.

The lot split approval is pending. The assessor has reviewed the request for the lot split and is waiting on the rezoning.

**   It was moved by Mr. Bosma and supported by Mr. Zylstra to close the hearing. Motion carried.

**   It was moved by Mr. Bosma and supported by Mr. Vander Meulen to recommend to the Township Board that the proposed rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Single-Family Residential (R-1) be approved. Motion carried.

Mr. Hoeve opened the public hearing for a proposed amendment to the Final Development Plan for the Flagstick Planned Unit Development, located generally at 3284 – 100th Avenue. The proposed amendment seeks to establish a home based business within unit 1’s accessory building and to allow an apartment within unit 1’s accessory building for immediate family members and medical assistants serving the residents of unit 1. Parcel Number: 70-16-12-463-006.

Present for this request was Chad and Marianne Hunderman.

Mr. Hunderman explained that they would like to have an apartment in the upper level of the accessory building with a small machine shop on the main level. Their daughter has an illness that has her confined to a wheelchair. They quite often have to pick her up from school and there are frequent doctor visits. It would make it easier if Mr. Hunderman could work from home.

Sections of the ordinance pertaining to Accessory Buildings and Home Occupations:

Section 3.30.E states:

“No accessory building or structure shall include residential or living quarters for human beings.”

Further, Section 3.34.b.2 states:

“The use of the dwelling for the home occupation shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes, and not more than twenty (20) percent of the floor area of the dwelling shall be used for the conduct of the home occupation.”

The home business would be a small machine shop. The level of noise would be comparable to cutting plywood with a table saw. He would not work at night. The work would be brought to the shop in the back of his vehicle in totes, so no large trucks or extra traffic would be created by the business.

Concerns the Planning Commission had were in regards to the mixed uses. Putting an industrial home business in an R-1 Residential Zone. Also, could they limit the business to only the one worker and make it contingent on ownership. Could they default the accessory building back to storage only when it changes owners. The consensus was that there is a medical hardship.

Mrs. Hunderman has spoken with two of the three other owners within the PUD and they had no concerns with it. The property that is now vacant will start construction in June.

Mrs. Hunderman further explained that their daughters’ condition will continue to deteriorate and she will eventually need around the clock care, which is why they would like the apartment in the upper level of the accessory building for medical attendants or family. They do not plan on renting it out ever. Their plans are to leave the house to their daughter as it is completely handicap accessible and it would not meet a typical family’s needs.

Other concerns the Commission had were about future owners. If we approve this, someone could come along and put a different type of small business in the accessory building, one that is louder and creates more traffic. Also, the living quarters upstairs could never be rented out.

The Commission would like to get the opinion of the Township Attorney as well as Mike Winkler, the Building Official.

**   It was moved by Mr. Gebben and supported by Mr. Bosma to table this request until next month. The Planning Commission needs further information from legal counsel and the Building Official. Motion carried.

The Final Plan Review for Creekside Meadows Planned Unit Development will be heard at the June 6, 2017 meeting. They are still working on it.

Next the Planning Commission heard the Final Plan Review for Mason Lake Estates PUD. Present for this request was Kelly Kuiper of Nederveld, Inc., Project Manager and Brad VanderZwaag, owner.

Ms. Kuiper explained to the Planning Commission that they have tried to address all the items of information that were requested at the April 11, 2017 meeting.

Ottawa County Road Commission was contacted and has requested the following changes:

Ryans Way was adjusted slightly so that the right-of-way did not overlap with the ANR pipeline easement.

Ira Springs Road was revised to simply Ira Spring due to the length of the name.

Turnaround radii, curves and labels were corrected and/or added to the plan.

Other adjustments discussed at the Preliminary:

A sidewalk has been added to the west side of Belfaire Court.

A landscape feature and entry sign has been indicated at the Mason Street Entrance.

Side lot line dimensions have been added for adjacent homes.

Also, the pond is slightly smaller. All streets now have a sidewalk on at least one side of the road. The street lights are marked. The side yard setbacks from the adjacent properties on Ryans Way where the road will be connecting are 15 feet and 11 feet.

Plans have been submitted to the gas company, to all utilities and the road commission. The plans have not yet been formally submitted to the Water Resources Commission, but Ms. Kuiper has communicated with Dennis Cole on the drainage issues.

There was discussion on the type of streetlights that would be installed and the association maintaining those. Mr. Broersma stated that should the association ever want the Township to take over the care of the proposed streetlights, their request would likely be denied in part because the lights were closer together than the Township’s guidelines of not less than 550 feet apart with a maximum of 750 feet. Also there was no indication of the style, height, or energy efficiency of the proposed lights.

In regards to sidewalks, they are not required to be installed, however, room for them must be maintained. Mr. VanderZwaag would rather not have sidewalks. The adjacent residential development does not have sidewalks. The maintenance of the sidewalks would be another issue for the association. They already have the maintenance of the common areas, the streetlights and the pond. Ms. Kuiper also indicated there would be no true traffic coming through the development and the road curves help keep traffic moving more slowly and safely through the development.

The Planning Commission agreed to allow the removal of sidewalks from the plans provided space for future sidewalks is maintained.

Ms. Kuiper indicated the project has not been approved by the Road Commission but was confident the permanent cul-de-sac would be accepted. Mr. Broersma agreed that the Road Commission had provided a preliminary indication that the cul-de-sac would be accepted into their system.

The Planning Commission went over the Staff Comments:

Confirm 7 land divisions will be part of the development and subject to its bylaws.

Utility and Grading Plan lacks the required utility service sizes.

Also per the Water Resource Commissioner’s office, a determination on how to convey the low and emergency flows is needed.

Street Lighting is shown on the plan. In addition to providing the style and height of the lighting fixtures, the Applicant should speak to their long-term operation and maintenance of the system.

In addition to obtaining Road Commission approval, the Township should require written approval from the underground utility (ANR Pipeline Company) to ensure roads and driveways are feasible where proposed.

Applicant should speak to any community amenities being provided such as a bus shelter or play equipment. Also, Landscape Plan shall be revised to include common names as required.

Staff would like to avoid the need for a PUD amendment given the road and pipeline concerns. Staff would recommend tabling a recommendation for approval unless the Planning Commission is confident in the applicant’s direction for utilities, roads, lighting and sidewalks.

**   It was moved by Mr. Bosma and supported by Mr. Zylstra to recommend the Township to prepare a favorable report and resolution for Planning Commission Review along with revised plans for the June 6, 2017 meeting. Motion carried.

Hearing declared open to consider an amendment of the Trinity Woods PUD in order to: #1) replace a toddler park and picnic area with grass overflow parking; #2) shift unit 4 and unit 5 south to accommodate a drainage easement; #3) enlarge the building envelopes of unit 4 and unit 5 and #4) allow barrier free ramps to be constructed within the building setbacks.

Present for this request was Doug Gritter.

Mr. Gritter explained that this PUD started many years ago. It was intended for Habitat for Humanity Homes. Units 1 & 2 are Habitat Homes and then the economy went bad.

Unit 3 is an adult foster care home. They used the entire building envelope for the house and are requesting to put a handicap ramp on the north side of the house outside the building envelope. The ramp would be a three foot wide regulation handicap ramp.

Mr. Gritter presented a form signed by all three of the current tenants, units 1, 2 & 3 stating they approve of the proposed changes.

There was some discussion between staff and applicant about why the ramp was denied by staff to start with. Mr. Broersma stated his understanding was that it was too big to be considered a ramp. It was more like a deck with a ramp coming off of it.

Mr. Gritter stated that it was not a deck, but that more room is needed at the top of the ramp to navigate the wheelchair. The west end of the ramp would be four feet wide with a regulation three foot ramp along-side the house. The entire ramp would be in the side yard setback of seven feet.

Unit 3 is a bi-level with the host family living in the lower level and those being fostered living in the upper level, which is where the bedrooms are. The ramp would allow individuals to bypass the interior stairs and have direct access to the upper level.

Units 4 & 5 have to be shifted to the south to accommodate a County drainage easement. The applicant is also asking for a larger building envelope; an additional 16 feet of depth on each unit. The proposed houses would be three bedroom two bath single family homes. They are comparable to what is in the area. Also, they would like to have rear decks overlooking the pond.

The consensus of the Planning Commission is that they have no problem with shifting the units to the south or the larger building envelope. The rear decks would have to be within the building envelope.

The overflow parking in place of the toddler park and picnic area was discussed. Mr. Gritter commented that overflow parking would be more valuable than a toddler park.

The Commission stated that if units 4 & 5 were not being built as foster care, there is no yard for children to play. Also, parking must be paved. It cannot be grass. From the looks of the plans, the proposed parking would compromise the garage stall of unit 5.

**   It was moved by Mr. Bosma and supported by Mr. Gebben to recommend the Township Attorney prepare a favorable report and resolution for the expansion of units 4 & 5 and adjusting the site locations for the Planning Commission’s review. Toddler park and picnic area is to remain. No unpaved overflow parking is permitted. No ramps outside the building envelope is permitted. Motion carried.

Next on the agenda was White Oaks Tentative Preliminary Plat Submittal. Michigan Land Division Act requires the Township to review and approve the plat prior to the applicant submitting the Preliminary Plat to the Ottawa County Road Commission, the Ottawa County Water Resources Commission, the Ottawa County Plat Board and all other appropriate entities.

Present for this request was Robert Barr of Nederveld and Matt Wickstra, Developer.

This is a 21 acre parcel. The plans for the subdivision were approved in 2006 then the economy took a dive. Matt is purchasing the parcel and the plan is basically the same as it was in 2006. This plan has 52 building sites proposed instead of the original 55. Proposed houses will be spec homes as well as custom built.

The Planning Commission went over staff comments:

The Planning Commission shall review the preliminary plat for compliance with the requirements outlined in Section 30-66 of the Subdivisions Ordinance. Items not included are:

Five copies of proposed protective covenants and deed restrictions, or a written statement that none are proposed.

Five sets of preliminary engineering plans for streets, water, sewers, sidewalks and other required public improvements. Such preliminary engineering plans may be incorporated as part of the plat drawing and shall contain enough information and detail to enable the township to make a preliminary determination as to conformance of the proposed improvements to applicable township ordinances, regulations and standards.

The applicant indicated the Deed Restrictions are in process and will be provided at the next stage of the approvals for the Planning Commission’s review. Similarly, the applicant is awaiting preliminary approval prior to finalizing the detailed construction plans.

The Planning Commission may determine if the submitted plans, in conjunction with the petitioner’s comments to be recorded in the meeting minutes, will satisfy the items above. If the Planning Commission is satisfied with the submittal, simply direct Staff to prepare the necessary letter of recommendation to the Township Board of Trustees for action no later than June 12, 2017.

**   It was moved by Mr. Zylstra and supported by Mr. Gebben to recommend approval of the White Oaks preliminary plat to the Board of Trustees. Motion carried.

Next on the agenda was the Waverly Shores Village PUD Resolution Correction.

Now that the applicants plan errors have been corrected and the 89 units previously approved are accurately shown, a motion is needed to readopt the resolution and report with the corrected plan dates inserted. Note, no public hearings are required before the PC or the Board to make this correction.

It was moved by Mr. Bosma and supported by Mr. Johnson to adopt the corrected resolution and report. Motion carried.

There were no public comments.

The Planning Commission will have a work session on Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 5:30 to go over the proposed ordinance updates.

No communication from Westshore Apartments PUD.

The meeting adjourned at 9:07.

Respectfully submitted,

Laurie Slater
Recording Secretary

six pack abs