OSTLOGOL.GIF (2116 bytes)

OSHTEMO CHARTER TOWNSHIP

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

JUNE 25, 1998

______________________________________________________________________________

Agenda

QUAIL MEADOWS, PHASE II CONDOMINIUM UNITS - SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE/SITE PLAN AMENDMENT

QUAIL MEADOWS PUD EXPANSION - SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE/SITE PLAN REVIEW

INDUSTRIAL CLASS REVIEW - PROJECT UPDATE

_____________________________________________________________________________

A meeting was conducted by the Oshtemo Charter Township Planning Commission on Thursday, June 25, 1998, commencing at approximately 7:00 p.m. at the Oshtemo Charter Township Hall, pursuant to notice.

Members present:

Wilfred Dennie, Chairperson
Millard Loy
Ted Corakis
Marvin Block
Lara Meeuwse

Member Absent:

Ken Heisig
Elizabeth Heiny-Cogswell

Also present were Mike West of the Planning and Zoning Department, Patricia R. Mason, Township Attorney, and four (4) other interested persons.

CALL TO ORDER

The Chairperson called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.

AGENDA

The Chairperson suggested reversing the order of consideration for items #4 and #5. He also suggested adding a discussion, under "Other Business," of the preceding Township Board meeting. Ms. Meeuwse moved to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. Block seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously.

 

MINUTES

The Planning Commission considered the minutes of the meeting of June 11, 1998. The changes suggested by Township staff were noted. Ms. Meeuwse moved to approve the minutes as amended, and Mr. Corakis seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

QUAIL MEADOWS, PHASE II CONDOMINIUM UNITS - SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE/SITE PLAN AMENDMENT

The next item was consideration of the application of Bruce Brown, representing United Homes of Michigan, for special exception use/site plan amendment as to phasing and other related amendments regarding the condominium units/buildings in Phase II of the Quail Meadows Planned Unit Development.

The report of the Planning and Zoning Department is incorporated herein by reference.

Mr. West referenced the "site plan" map attached to the report, on which Phase II had been outlined. It was stated that the Phase II Quail Cove Condominium portion of the Quail Meadows PUD had been approved to consist of eleven condominium buildings located on the east side of Quail Run Drive. Each of the buildings would have between two and four units. The applicant was seeking special exception use/site plan amendment to allow for phased occupancy of the Phase II Quail Cove Condominium buildings/units located within the Quail Meadows PUD. The phased occupancy is proposed to occur on an individual building-by-building basis, as well as on an individual unit-by-unit basis within each building. Township staff had previously communicated with the applicant and reached an agreement as to the conditions for unit-by-unit occupancy of Building N. The agreement between Township staff and the applicant was expressed in a letter dated June 5, 1998. It was the understanding of the Township that the applicant would be required to obtain Planning Commission approval for phased occupancy of the remaining buildings.

Michael Chojnowski, attorney for the applicant, was present, stating that the conditions expressed in the June 5, 1998, letter were acceptable to the applicant.

Frances Connor, president of the Quail Run III Association, had a question with regard to the site plan map and the layout of two of the buildings.

There was no public comment offered, and the public hearing was closed.

The Chairperson referenced the letter of June 5, 1998. As to the requirement of installation of landscaping surrounding the subject building, Mr. Corakis questioned whether this would include installation of underground sprinkling. Mr. West responded that the landscaping "site issue" referred to the seed or sod and landscape elements, such as bushes and trees, consistent with other buildings. Ms. Meeuwse felt that, if underground sprinkling is to be provided, it should be installed prior to occupancy. The Planning Commission reviewed the "building issues," and it was noted that the requirements were imposed in order to serve public safety.

Mr. Corakis commented he felt that it should be required that one coat of drywall mud be in place prior to the occupancy of a unit within a building. Mr. West stated that Fire and Building approval would require such a coating since the walls in the unoccupied units would have to be "fire rated." Ms. Meeuwse questioned "what other buildings in the phase would be like" at the time of occupancy. Mr. West stated that this would be variable. Other buildings could be in various stages of framing. Buildings might not even be commenced at the time a unit in one building was allowed occupancy under this proposal. However, Mr. West noted that all public improvements had been completed and that a base coat had been completed on the entire Phase II street system.

After further discussion, Mr. Corakis moved to approve the special exception use permit/site plan amendment with regard to Phase II, finding that the amendment would meet the criteria of Sections 60.400, 60.100 and 82.800, with the following conditions:

(1) Completion and approval of all public utilities (public water, sewer and storm sewer) within Phase II Quail Cove Condominium portion of the PUD.

(2) Completion of base coat paving of the street system within Phase II Quail Cove Condominiums, with final coat paving occurring before the winter of 1998.

(3) Occupancy for individual units within individual Phase II buildings, as they are completed and approved for occupancy, would require completion of the following Planning and Zoning Department "site issues" associated with each building:

        (A)    Intital coat of pavement on all driveways serving the subject building:

        (B)    Final grading of the land immediately adjacent to and surrounding the subject
                building; and

        (C)    Installation of landscaping surrounding the subject building. Such landscaping
                  would include the seed or sod, landscape elecments (such as bushes and trees
                  consistent with other buildings) and the installation of underground sprinkling
                  if proposed.

(4)    Additionally, occupancy of each building/unit would require completion of the following Building Department/Fire Department "building issues" associated with each building/unit:

        (A)    Completion of the exterior of the subject building;

        (B)    Rough-framing inspection and approval by the Township of all non-occupancy
                units within the subject building; the rough-framing stage will include the completion
                of fire-rated walls and fire blocking/stopping, drywalling and smoke detector installation
                throughout the entire building, subject to inspections and approvals.

(5) Occupancy of each unit will be subject to the inspection and final approval by the Township Building Department (and subtrades), Fire Department, and Planning and Zoning Department.

(6) Phase II continues to be subject to all conditions imposed in previous approvals which were not specifically amended herein.

Mr. Block seconded the motion.

There was no public comment and, upon a vote on the motion, the motion carried unanimously.

 

QUAIL MEADOWS PUD EXPANSION - SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE/SITE PLAN REVIEW

The next item was consideration of the application of Bruce Brown, representing United Homes of Michigan, for special exception use/site plan review to allow for expansion of the Quail Meadows Planned Unit Development on approximately 8.5 acres in the SE╝ of Land Section 23. The subject property is located on Quail Run Drive within the "R-3" Residence District Zoning classification.

The report of the Planning and Zoning Department is incorporated herein by reference. Mr. West reminded the Planning Commission that, on March 26, 1998, the applicant received conceptual plan review for a proposed 8.5-acre expansion of the Quail Meadows PUD, which was proposed to consist of 53 residential units, 26 townhouse dwelling units and 27 courthome dwelling units. The applicant has now modified the original proposal and is requesting special exception use/site plan review for PUD expansion to consist of 24 courthome dwellings (six four-unit buildings) to be located along the north side of Quail Run Drive. This would involve two acres of the total 8.5-acre parcel. The proposed development to the south would be part of a later application.

Reference was made to the letter dated May 26, 1998, from United Homes. This letter is incorporated by reference.

Attorney Michael Chojnowski was present on behalf of the applicant. He stated that he was available to answer questions.

The Chairperson inquired into the "target market" of the condominium units. Mr. Chojnowski referenced the May 26, 1998, letter of United Homes as to the anticipated pricing of the condominium units but indicated that there was no target as far as the age group, etc.

There was no public comment offered, and the public hearing was closed.

The Chairperson noted that the proposal involved an expansion of an existing development.

With regard to the application guidelines, the Chairperson expressed concern that the drawing might not be drawn to scale. Mr. West noted that the site plan was drawn to scale with the exception of the vicinity map.

There was discussion of the criteria of Section 60.470 and the lack of information with regard to the location and type of drainage, sanitary sewers, storm sewer, etc. Mr. West noted that the applicant’s engineer is associated with the Township Engineer and that these items related to information required for the engineer’s review and approval. The applicant would be using a previously approved retention system designed to retain stormwater for the entire development. Mr. West felt that the Planning Commission could satisfy this condition with regard to needed information by requiring Township Engineer review and approval.

Documentation as to condominium ownership, etc., had not yet been received; but approval could be conditioned upon receipt of same.

The Chairperson made reference to Section 60.410, noting that the proposal met the purposes of PUDs. There was no material change with the expansion. Further, Section 60.420 was satisfied in that this proposal is a special exception use. As to Section 60.430, the Chairperson pointed out that the overall PUD included less density than that permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. There was some discussion about the density proposed for these two acres, but Planning Commission members felt that, given the location of the density (adjacent to offices and open space) and given the density of the overall project, the proposal was acceptable. The proposed courthomes meet setback requirements. The Chairperson was somewhat concerned that some of the setbacks were "right on the line." The Chairperson stated that the setbacks were so close that he was concerned that it would be easy to err in construction and that these buildings would not conform. Further, the Chairperson was concerned that these condominium units would cater to families with children and that there was no designated play area. Mr. Loy and Ms. Meeuwse agreed.

Attorney Chojnowski stated that he understood the Planning Commission’s comments but, as to setbacks, felt that, merely because the fit would be "tight," the Planning Commission could not require a larger setback than required by Ordinance. He felt it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to make it clear that it would not grant variance/ deviation. As to the playground issue, he felt it was speculation as to who would live in these condominium units.

Mr. West commented that he had contacted the applicant, Bruce Brown, who stated that he did not wish to "shift" the location of some of the buildings in that the applicant was attempting to retain as much existing vegetation as possible. The applicant was confident that they could comply with setback requirements.

Section 60.440 was reviewed. The Chairperson noted that complaints had been received regarding construction traffic failing to use the 9th Street access point to Quail Run Drive. Mr. West stated that the Ordinance Enforcement Officer had been working with the applicant to establish signage directing construction equipment to access via 9th Street.

As to stormwater management, it was noted that the Township Engineer would review and approve this item. Ms. Meeuwse felt it would be appropriate to ask the engineer to pay particular attention, given previous drainage problems experienced in other phases.

As to screening, it was felt that the natural heavy vegetation would be sufficient. Moreover, given the surrounding area, there was "nothing to screen from."

Planning Commission members reviewed the criteria of Section 60.100, first determining whether the proposed use was compatible with other uses expressly permitted within the "R-3" District. It was noted that this use is an expansion of an existing development. It involves four-family dwellings. The "R-3" District permits four-family dwellings and, therefore, the proposed development is compatible.

The Planning Commission then discussed whether the proposed use would be detrimental or injurious to the use or development of adjacent properties or the general neighborhood. Planning Commission members felt that residential dwelling units would not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood. The overall PUD development meets density limitations of the Ordinance.

Planning Commission members also concluded that the proposed use would promote public health, safety and welfare. Municipal water and sewer would service the subject site. All utilities would be placed underground. Lighting would be required to comply with Section 78.700. Additionally, the development would be subjected to Township Fire Department and Engineer approval.

The Planning Commission also concluded that the proposed use would encourage use of the land in accord with its character and adaptability. It was emphasized that the proposed development is a westerly expansion of a previously approved PUD.

The Planning Commission next discussed the criteria of Section 82.800 as to site plan review. All units would gain access to Quail Run Drive from private drives. Four parking spaces for each unit would be provided (two inside and two outside).

Mr. Block questioned the location of the herby-curbys, and it was suggested that each unit would have one which was likely to be located in each unit’s garage.

It was noted that the applicant was suggesting phased occupancy of each building and unit therein as previously proposed for Phase II. Mr. West suggested that a plan including phase boundaries and tentative completion schedules should be provided to Township staff for review and approval. There was discussion of the site work completion element, and the Chairperson expressed the opinion that the applicant should be required to complete site work for the two paired buildings before occupancy of a unit in one of the buildings was allowed. Ms. Meeuwse felt that, in addition, both buildings included in the pair that share parking area should be required to meet "building issues." Mr. Loy expressed agreement with the idea that the site work for both paired buildings should be completed but felt it was unnecessary for the interior of the second building to meet building issues when a unit for occupancy of the unit in the other building.

After further discussion, Ms. Meeuwse moved to approve special exception use permit, finding compliance with Sections 60.400 and 60.100 and with the following conditions, limitations and notations:

(1) That the documentation required in Section 60.470(D) as to condominium ownership of the proposed development be provided.

(2) That approval was subject to the review and approval of the Township Engineer with specific attention to stormwater retention given flooding problems in previous phases. Sufficient information to allow Township Engineer review and approval was required to be submitted by the applicant.

(3) That legal documentation (condominium association information) which details how open space will be held under common ownership, maintained and protected from development, must be provided.

(4) That outdoor lighting must be designed in compliance with Section 78.700, and a detailed plan must be submitted to Township staff for review and approval.

(5) That the applicant’s proposal to preserve natural features and wooded areas where possible was approved, and a proposed plan which details this retention, along with any supplemental landscaping, must be submitted to Township staff for review and approval.

(6) That the approval was subject to the review and approval of the Township Fire Department.

(7) That all trade and construction vehicles were urged to access the site from 9th Street.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Loy.

Mr. Connor spoke, expressing concern that numerous construction vehicles were not accessing the site through 9th Street. The Chairperson suggested a letter be directed from the Planning Commission/Township to Bruce Brown. This letter would request that a letter be sent to contractors emphasizing the need to access with construction vehicles through 9th Street. Mr. West indicated that the Ordinance Enforcement Officer would continue working with the situation to attempt to minimize/eliminate construction vehicle use of the Stadium Drive access point.

Upon a vote on the motion, the motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Block moved to approve phasing that would allow occupancy of the courthome buildings on a building-by-building and unit-by-unit basis prior to completion of the entire development. The approval was conditioned as follows:

(1) That a plan evidencing phase boundaries with a tentative schedule of completion must be submitted to Township staff for review and approval.

(2) That all public utilities (public water, storm and storm sewer) within the PUD expansion must be completed.

(3) That a base coat of paving of the street system within the entire expansion must be completed with a specific date for deadline regarding final coat paving.

(4) That Planning and Zoning Department "site issues" associated with regard to each building must be completed as follows:

(A) Initial coat of pavement on all driveways and parking lot serving the subject building;

(B) Final grading of the land area immediately adjacent to and surrounding the building in which the unit is located; and

(C) Installation of landscaping defined as seed and sod with landscaping elements, such as trees and shrubs. Further, sprinkling system, if any, must be installed.

It was required that, prior to occupancy of a unit within any building, these "site issues" must be completed around the two buildings which were paired and sharing a parking lot.

(5) That the following Building/Fire Department "building issues" associated with each building/unit must be completed:

(A) Completion of exterior of subject building;

(B) Rough-framing inspection and approval by the Township of all nonoccupancy units within the subject building. The rough-framing stage includes the completion of rated fire walls and fire-blocking/ stopping, drywalling, and smoke detector installation throughout the entire building, subject to inspections and approvals.

(6) That occupancy of each unit is subject to inspection and final approval by the Township Building Department (and subtrades), Fire Department, and Planning and Zoning Department.

Mr. Loy seconded the motion.

The Chairperson invited public comment, and Brian Moloney stated that, in his opinion, given the income level of the persons who would purchase these units, probably most work would be done before occupancy.

Attorney Chojnowski stated that he concurred with the motion, stating he felt it would be a grave injustice to require a developer to finish all units in order to sell one. However, he was concerned that it was impractical to require all site work be completed around both buildings.

It was felt by Commission members that phasing lines could be drawn in such a way as to include site work which would be facing the building to be occupied but still allow that area between incomplete buildings to be natural.

Upon a vote on the motion, the motion carried 4:1, with Ms. Meeuwse voting in opposition.

Ms. Meeuwse moved to approve the site plan with the following conditions, limitations and notations:

(1) That the proposed development would be serviced by three two-way access drives off Quail Run Drive which will be private interior drives to the development.

(2) That parking has been provided in accordance with Ordinance standards.

(3) That all building locations comply with setback standards based upon the plan and premised upon the applicant’s assurance that the leading edge of each building would satisfy setback and separation standards. It was noted that no deviation/variances would be granted and that the applicant would be required to correct all violations.

(4) That each courthome unit is to be provided with a herby-curby or general refuse use.

(5) That all outdoor lighting is subject to compliance with Section 78.700, and a lighting proposal must be detailed and submitted to Township staff for review and approval.

(6) That all signage must comply with Section 76.115 of the Zoning Ordinance and be reviewed and approved through the permit process.

(7) That the applicant proposed preservation of natural features and wooded areas where possible, and a proposed plan which details this retention, along with any supplemental landscaping, must be submitted to Township staff for review and approval.

(8) That approval is subject to the review and approval of the Township Fire Department and Township Engineer.

(9) That phasing as outlined in the preceding motion was approved.

(10) That issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed development is contingent on final inspections/approvals from the Building, Mechanical, Electrical, Fire, Planning and Zoning Departments to insure compliance with all applicable standards, conditions and regulations.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Loy.

The Chairperson expressed some concern with regard to the turning radiuses for the private drives, and Mr. West indicated that Township staff and Township Engineer would review this item.

Upon a vote on the motion, the motion carried unanimously.

Mr. Chojnowski expressed concern regarding the discussion of construction traffic on Quail Run Drive. He felt the Township could not ticket trades people who were accessing the site from Stadium Drive in that it was a public street. Further, he felt that the applicant was attempting to do all possible to insure that construction traffic would access through 9th Street. However, many times this was impractical. He stated that he would relay the concerns of Mr. Connor to his client.

 

INDUSTRIAL CLASS REVIEW - PROJECT UPDATE

A report had been submitted by Ms. Harvey concerning the Industrial Class review project. This report is incorporated herein by reference. Ms. Harvey was currently working on compiling background information for the subcommittee. The Chairperson expressed that he would like to see discussion of business/industrial parks in this review process. Mr. Corakis felt that a representative of the Oshtemo Business Association should be included in the subcommittee.

 

 

OTHER BUSINESS

The Planning Commission discussed the 1998 work program second quarter report. There was also discussion of upcoming work items. Mr. West indicated that he would provide the Planning Commission with documentation concerning the estimated time of completion of these projects.

As to the seating arrangement for the third quarter, lots were drawn.

The Chairperson discussed the preceding Township Board meeting, noting that the Breckenridge item had received approval. With regard to the Schramm rezoning, the Township Board had decided by a 4:3 vote to send the matter back to the Planning Commission. He stated it was the feeling of some Township Board members that the Industrial property would never be utilized. Further, there should be inquiry into whether all the properties were buildable. Further, some Township Board members felt that the Planning Commission should consider enlarging the area under consideration.

It was noted that direction as to this rezoning might be provided by the Industrial classification review. The Chairperson suggested taking up the returned item after discussion with the Township Board at a joint meeting and subsequent to the subcommittee’s work on the Industrial class review.

Brian Moloney, owner of RollerWorld, stated that he was interested in this rezoning in that his business is presently nonconforming. He feels that a "redo" of the Industrial classification will not help his situation. He needs his use to be made conforming.

 

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.

Minutes prepared:
June 26, 1998

Minutes approved:
July 9, 1998