OSHTEMO CHARTER TOWNSHIP

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES

November 30, 1998

____________________________________________________________________________

Agenda

GOODMAN, DDS OFFICE BUILDING - SITE PLAN REVIEW - 5925 VENTURE PARK DRIVE

MILLCREEK APARTMENTS - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT - CARPORT STRUCTURES OVER PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PARKING SPACES

______________________________________________________________________________

A meeting was conducted by the Oshtemo Charter Township Zoning Board of Appeals on Monday, November 30, 1998, commencing at approximately 3:00 p.m. at the Oshtemo Charter Township Hall, pursuant to notice.

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Brian Dylhoff, Chairperson
Thomas Brodasky
David Bushouse
William Saunders
Lara Meeuwse

MEMBERS ABSENT: None

Also present were Jodi Stefforia, Township Planning and Zoning Department, Patricia R. Mason, Township Attorney, and five (5) other interested persons.

CALL TO ORDER

The Chairperson called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.

MINUTES

The Board considered the minutes of the meeting of November 2, 1998. Mr. Brodasky moved to approve the minutes as submitted, and Ms. Meeuwse seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

 

GOODMAN, DDS OFFICE BUILDING - SITE PLAN REVIEW - 5925 VENTURE PARK DRIVE

The next item was the application for site plan of a new 2,496 sq. ft. office building on lot 17 of Venture Park. The subject property is located at 5925 Venture Park Drive.

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

Ms. Stefforia reminded the applicant that the submission of an Environmental Permits Checklist and Hazardous Substance Reporting Form would have to be completed and submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. She noted that she had previously shared the Township Engineer’s comments with the architect for the project.

Ms. Meeuwse questioned how the parking calculation had been made, and Ms. Stefforia noted it was based on the "net area" of the building, i.e., that area which did not include storage, restrooms, mechanicals.

Terry Schley, architect for the project, and Sally Goodman, one of the owners, were present. Mr. Schley displayed a diagram depicting what he termed a five-"operatory" dental clinic. He also presented a drawing of the expected appearance of the exterior of the building. He noted the proposed project had been reviewed and approved by Venture Park. He stated that the plans had been changed to meet the Township Engineer’s comments.

It was noted that the barrier-free parking space must be at least 18’ wide to allow for an 8’-wide access aisle adjacent to the vehicle. The site plan at issue indicated a 16’ width. Mr. Schley, in response to questioning by Mr. Brodasky, indicated that the plan had been revised to meet this requirement.

As to stormwater management, Ms. Meeuwse was concerned that monitoring would have to be done at the site to determine if stormwater management was sufficient. Ms. Stefforia indicated that, since the applicant indicated the stormwater management system had been changed to meet the Township Engineer’s comments, this would not be an issue. Mr. Schley stated he believes that the stormwater management system would provide for 160% of the surface water from paved surfaces and, therefore, the site had more than enough retention.

Ms. Meeuwse also questioned the applicant with regard to proposed landscaping. Mr. Schley stated that there would be plantings along the street near the building but that much of the site would be left as natural growth.

There was discussion of whether a landscaping plan should be required. Much of the proposed landscaping existing vegetation was shown on the site plan, including those areas which would be less natural. Further, it was clear that those areas near the street driveway would be grassed and mowed. However, the Chairperson was concerned that the landscaping around the building, although indicated on the plan, was not detailed.

The Chairperson sought public comment, and none was offered. The public hearing was closed.

The applicant was also questioned with regard to signage. Mr. Schley stated that a specific location for the signage would be noted when application for sign permit was made. He stated that the sign is being designed at present.

Mr. Brodasky moved to approve the site plan with the following conditions, limitations and notations:

(1) That the subject site is to be served by one access point onto Venture Park Road, a local street. It is required that the driveway be reviewed and approved by the Kalamazoo County Road Commission.

(2) That parking is adequate, and the layout and site circulation is satisfactory. All parking spaces must comply with the dimensional standards of the Ordinance at 10’ x 20’.

(3) That all barrier-free parking is subject to ADA and Michigan Barrier-Free Guidelines and must be designated with signage and pavement logo. Further, it was noted that the barrier-free space must be at least 18’ in width.

(4) That no outdoor storage was proposed or approved.

(5) That the proposed dumpster location and enclosure is sufficient.

(6) That all lighting must be in compliance with the lighting guidelines of Section 78.700.

(7) That all signage must comply with Section 76.000 and be approved through the permit process.

(8) That a landscaping plan providing detail as to the specific landscaping proposal for the perimeter of the building be submitted to Township staff for review and approval. Otherwise, the proposed landscaping is acceptable.

(9) That no variance had been requested.

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

(11) That the review and approval was subject to the review and approval of the Township Engineer.

(12) That public utilities would serve the proposed site.

(13) An Environmental Permits Checklist and Hazardous Substance Reporting Form was required to be completed and submitted for review and approval by the Township prior to issuance of a building permit.

The motion was seconded by Ms. Meeuwse, and the motion carried unanimously.

 

MILLCREEK APARTMENTS - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT - CARPORT STRUCTURES OVER PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PARKING SPACES

The next item was the application of Millcreek Apartments for amendment to an approved site plan to allow the placement of two separate carport structures over previously approved parking spaces associated with the construction of a new apartment building. The subject property is Millcreek Apartments at approximately 6600 Stadium Drive.

The report of the Planning and Zoning Department is incorporated herein by reference. The previously approved parking lot layout (access aisles, vehicle maneuverability, etc.) will not be changed. The applicant sought to establish carports over two different areas of existing parking.

In response to questioning by Ms. Stefforia, the representative of the applicant, Matt Weaver, indicated that the carports would not be illuminated. Reference to the report was made with regard to the requirement of a lighting plan and landscaping plan for the subject site. Mr. Weaver indicated that these plans had been submitted with the building plans in May or June of 1998. He stated that a landscaping plan for the retention area would be submitted within the next three weeks.

The Chairperson questioned the applicant with regard to the type of carport which would be constructed. The applicant stated that two types of structures were being considered: a steel structure or truss structure with shingled roof. The applicant stated that the choice of structure depended upon the results of the bidding process but that the applicant favored the second type of structure.

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

The Chairperson questioned the applicant further with regard to the lighting of the carports. Mr. Weaver stated that the electrician for the project felt that lighting as planned in the parking lot area would be adequate.

Mr. Saunders moved to approve amendment of the site plan to allow the carports as proposed with the following conditions, limitations and notations:

(1) That the parking lot layout not be changed.

(2) That no lighting was to be established on the carports.

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

(4) That no other changes to the proposed site plan had been proposed or approved.

 

Mr. Brodasky seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously.

The applicant indicated that it was probable that the project would be completed in the first part of February. He inquired as to how occupancy could be obtained prior to completion of site items which might be impeded by weather, such as asphalting of the parking lot. There was discussion of the proposed text amendment which was in the process of approval which would allow such an issue to be handled administratively rather than by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

OTHER BUSINESS

There was discussion of the agenda of the upcoming meeting.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m.

Minutes Approved:
December 7, 1998