Vergennes Township

Planning Commission Minutes

December 2, 2002

A meeting of the Vergennes Township Planning Commission was held on December 2, 2002 at the Township Offices. At 7:00 PM the meeting was called to order by Chairman Jernberg. Also present were Commissioners Gillett, Mastrovito, Medendorp, Nauta, and Richmond. Absent was Kropf.

Approval of October 28, 2002 minutes: Motion to approve by Nauta, seconded by Medendorp. All approved.

Approval of/Changes to Agenda: Motion to approve the agenda written on the yellow sheet by Gillette, seconded by Nauta. All approved.

1. Fuhr private road application/Public Hearing.

Presentation by Todd Fuhr. Went over questions/concerns from prior meeting. Attorney questions about road maintenance agreement still need to be tidied. Jeanne Vandersloot has given him a template to use. Re: 10 percent grade, his communication with township engineer that he approves 10% with a recommendation to consider paving for washout prevention.

Discussion regarding road width (16 feet to serve 4 homes). Richmond: the owners of the 10 acres in back are using the same driveway/ Fuhr said that unit constitutes the fourth lot. Discussion about purchaser of 2 parcels reserving right to divide the 10 acre lot, still splitable. Responsibility to upgrade the road would accrue to that owner if it’s spelled out in the maintenance agreement. Another property to the east could be as much as 3 more parcels. This project puts in a 16-foot gravel road to serve the existing parcels. Gravel OK on that steepness of grade/might use crushed concrete with a stone gutter system to prevent washout. Jernberg: that would need to be spelled out.

Public Hearing opened at 7:12 pm:

· Scott Osborne, 1560 Lincoln Lake. Purchased his property as two 5-acre parcels, which would be 4 splits, not including the neighbor’s splits. He has the right reserved to do 2 other splits with his other 5 acres for total of 3 three(plus)-acre parcels. His attorney faxed information to the township to this effect. He thinks it should therefore be a 22-foot road. Has been waiting two years for this road to be put in.

· Jack Amelar, 1554 Lincoln Lake. Curious what issues affect him. He uses this road via an easement. Has been there 13 years.

· Kim Osborne, 1560 Lincoln Lake: wanted to keep the parcels in two to hold the splitting options open because they have kids and want to be able to help out their children later.

Public Comments closed at 7:18 P.M.

Jay Kilpatrick: the road proposal calls upon two different sets of standards, and there’s evidence that this road will need to have the higher standard apply. Lack of a maintenance agreement via a private arrangement is needed. Also, it would be hard to engineer a lesser grade than 10 percent without a lot of fill infringing on the neighbors, esp. if it’s kept gravel. The proposed “fix” should be on the site plan. Engineer was most comfortable with pavement (not a normal requirement, but the steep slope makes it a good call. The alternative being suggested – crushed concrete – may also be good.) Ask the applicant for more information.

Jernberg: determine best standard and surface, esp. re: water runoff. Legal description accounting for all road users and road maintenance agreement needs to be created.

Applicant would be interested in tabling the issue and coming back later.

Motion by Nauta to adjourn the public hearing and keep it open until a later date (estimated to be February 2003). Seconded by Gillette. All approved.

2. Ordinance Amendments - Public Hearing.

a) Lake Residential lot area. Presentation by Jay Kilpatrick. Lake Residential district zoning as it is now doesn’t address lots not served by the Grattan public sewer. Amendment was needed for lots not served by public sewer. This amendment would make lot size for single family homes not served by public sewer the same as R1 district (more consistent). Public hearing opened 7:28 pm. Baird: quite a few lots on the west side. Capacity in Grattan unknown - capacity is restricted by lift station capacities, per Jernberg. Public hearing closed 7:30 pm.

Motion by Gillette to recommend to the Township Board the changes in the Lake Residential district proposed amendments that add clarification for lots not served by public sewer. Seconded by Nauta. All approved.

b) Industrial multi-tenant buildings and lighting. Presentation by Jay Kilpatrick. This amendment would provide for smaller multi-tenant industrial buildings. Would permit them up to 10,000 square feet as a use by right, with larger tenants as a special use. 10,000 sq feet is not a very large building nowadays, is a way to encourage someone to start a smaller business. This would add a new category in the use by rights category. Public hearing opened 7:34 pm. No public comments. Public hearing closed. Commission discussion: clarification of size. Any change in sign ordinance required? Could do that, but tenants would typically share the sign, which is per building not per tenant.

Motion by Medendorp to recommend to the Township Board these amendments for approval. Seconded by Gillette. All approved. Also, motion by Gillette to recommend to the Township Board to accept changes in the lighting ordinance to go along with what’s in the commercial district. Seconded by Medendorp. All approved.

3. Site Plan Review – Reitsma Electric. Presentation by Ron Reitsma with son, Jim. Proposing to build a building at Bieri Industrial Park. Reitsma has been in business 35 years in Cascade. Jim is a resident of Vergennes Township, and is on the threshold of taking over the business so the company is eager to move into the area. Mostly storage and office. Most vehicles go home with employees, but one or two might be there overnight and would be inside. Lighting would be directed downward (he’s a pilot, so is sensitive to lighting issues). Number of people working there? Up to 10-15 at peak times. Parking? Most will back up to the doors for loading. Questions regarding dimensions of the lot. A substandard lot meaning it’s less than the 2-acre minimum lot size. Jernberg: his drawing shows 2.1 acres. Lighting on the sign – size and lighting requirements are known by the applicant. Metal roof. Storage second floor?/mezzanine. Medendorp: several things missing from Jay’s review, e.g. grade, location of sewers & utilities, landscaping. Reitsma: lot number is incorrect on application (last three numbers should be 010 not 011). 35 feet on parking seems narrow (engineer told him that was the minimum - applicant would like to make it wider, to end of gravel area). Jernberg - needs certain information to be shown on the next set of drawings for the public record: verify size of lot, address issues brought to attention by Jay Kilpatrick and the group - signs, driveway size and surface, parking capacity (looks thin), site lighting details, surface water handling.

Motion by Gillette to table this until the January meeting or until a special meeting on December 16 at 6:30 pm in order to demonstrate these issues to be resolved. Seconded by Mastrovito. All approved.

4. Ordinance Amendments.

a) Special exception use section. Presentation by Jay Kilpatrick. There’s confusion in the special exception use language about which applications go to which, the Board or the Planning Commission. This would clarify what goes straight to the Board. The dilemma is, there’s a 2-step process, where Township Board is ultimately responsible but wants the Planning Commission’s input most of the time. Other than unclassified special exception uses, all would first go to the Board, then to PC, then recommendation back to the Board. When someone has a minor amendment to a site plan, right now they have to go all the way through the process, but this amendment allows the Zoning Administrator to approve minor changes. These standards have been used well in other communities. Jernberg: what happens if someone not as sharp as or experienced as Jeanne was in the job of zoning administrator? Nauta: there are differences of opinion and the Township Board wouldn’t let someone in that position do the wrong thing.

Motion by Nauta to schedule this for a public hearing at the next Planning Commission meeting. Seconded by Gillette. All approved.

b) Septic waste and sludge disposal. Presentation by Jay Kilpatrick. The DEQ has assumed regulation of application of septic sludge, and communities can take back that authority if they want to. Is this something we want more information on, to possibly take back authority at the local level? Current language would not be approved by the DEQ if a waste hauler were to apply. If we want, have Jay do research and report back on the issues and whether we want to get into it.

Motion by Gillette to have Jay Kilpatrick pursue information about the issues and report back to the Planning Commission in January. Seconded by Medendorp. All approved.

5. Jim Kegle. Presentation by Jim Kegle. Wants to know if the three parcels he’s proposing which are presently zoned R-1 could all be R-3. Knows there’s concern/resistance to mobile home parks and he’s willing to sign something that he won’t do mobile homes. He wants an apartment PUD. Treated as a PUD means that’s all that could be built there, and people would then respond to the site plan, not the potential for mobile homes. It’s a 24.9 acre parcel behind the high school on west side of Alden Nash. Sewer runs through it on its way to the high school, and he is working on preserving rights with Lowell Township. Wants 150 apartments (compatible with the density). Was given information and will be back.

6. Meetings 2003: Motion by Gillette to accept the following dates - seconded by Medendorp. All approved.

January 6

February 3

March 3

April meeting (spring break) March 31

May 5

June 2

July 7

August 4

September 8 (1^st is Labor Day)

October 6

November 3

December 1

General Public Comment Time: None. Baird questioned the sludge question. Richmond: has to be away from homes. Won’t do it on his land because he has cow manure & doesn’t need it. Doesn’t know leach potential. Baird: disease potential. Jernberg: would need to be in a controlled area. It’s knifed in.

Motion to adjourn by Medendorp. Seconded by Nauta. All approved.

The next meeting is January 6, 2003.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Kate Dernocoeur, Recorder