VILLAGE OF SPRING LAKE
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
March 24, 2009
Barber School Community Building
102 West Exchange Street
Spring Lake, MI 49456
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman VandenBosch called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Present: Gleason, Johnson, Kleppe, C. Miller, S. Miller, Unkovskoy, VandenBosch, VanStrate, and Yasenak
Absent:
Staff present: Kathy Staton, Code Compliance and Planning Administrator
III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Johnson suggested that Item VI-E, Adult Day Care Facilities, be moved to the first order of business because the representatives for that item were the only people present in the audience. Chairman VandenBosch agreed. Motion by Johnson, support by VanStrate to approve the agenda as amended. All in favor, motion carried.
IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
A. Approval of the Minutes of the February 24, 2009, Regular Meeting.
Motion by S. Miller, support by C. Miller to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2009 regular meeting. All in favor, motion carried.
V. NEW BUSINESS
VI. OLD BUSINESS
E. Adult Day Care Facilities – Possible Ordinance Amendment
The Planning Commission will discuss the possibility of drafting an ordinance amendment to permit adult day care facilities in the Village.
Chairman VandenBosch explained that he, Staton, the Village President and Village Manager met with representatives of the Little Red House to discuss ways the Village might be able to change zoning requirements to permit the non-profit group running the Little Red House to purchase the property from Christ Community Church and become a stand-alone entity. VandenBosch stated that the general feeling at the meeting was that the Little Red House provides a valuable service in the community and that the Planning Commission should consider ways to allow it to continue. He thought it was important enough to add to the agenda for tonight and begin work as soon as possible. Dave Eagin and Jody Herrelko, Executive Director, were present from the Little Red House.
Staton explained the background. The Little Red House was established as an accessory use of Christ Community Church. Adult day care facilities are not a permitted use in the Public, Semi-Public zoning district. When Dave Eagin contacted Staton about splitting off from the church Staton checked with the Village Attorney. He determined that if the facility was no longer a part of the church it would become nonconforming and the Village would have to close the facility. The non-profit agency that runs the Little Red House could ask for approval as a PUD, but Staton felt that would not be the best option. Staton suggested that, if the Planning Commission was supportive, the best way to allow for this use would be as a special land use in the Public, Semi-Public District. That way there could be conditions placed on the use and the neighbors would have the opportunity to voice their opinions at public hearings for the ordinance amendment and for any future expansion of the facility.
Eagin explained the operation of the facility. It is strictly daytime, no overnight stays, for caregivers to have a homelike setting for their loved one. They also provide transportation. He stated that the church approached the Little Red House board last year to see if they would be interested in acquiring the property. He stated that they have invested a lot in the property over the years and they want to continue to run the facility there, possibly with limited expansion in the future, but they want to keep the quaint homey feel of the little red house which distinguishes them from other senior day facilities like Evergreen Commons in Holland. Eagin stated that they have a tentative purchase agreement contingent on zoning approval, and he hopes this can be worked out.
Jody Herrelko gave additional information about their program. She stated that the United Way and the Veterans Administration are their strongest supporters. She explained statistical data showing an increasing need for facilities like this. Facilities like the Little Red House make it possible for people to stay in their homes longer rather than having to be placed in a nursing home situation.
Eagin stated that they are a good, quiet neighbor compared to some of the other permitted uses in the Public District. Herrelko noted that they have been approached by the North Ottawa County Council on Aging about possibly expanding their service to include perhaps one evening a week so that a caregiver might have an evening out. They have not decided whether to do that or not yet.
VandenBosch noted that there were lots of concerns about the facility when it was originally approved, but there are no complaints now and it is a valuable facility in the Village. He stated that he thinks the Commission should start work to make this an approved use as soon as possible and asked for input from the commissioners.
Yasenak asked if there have been any comments from the neighborhood yet. Staton said she has not received any, but there will be 2 public hearings during this process, so the neighbors will have opportunity to comment. Yasenak stated that he feels the comments of the neighbors will be important to hear.
Unkovskoy stated that she is open to whatever can be done to help. S. Miller agreed and said that the Village should do whatever is necessary to keep the little Red House there. The service won’t change, just the ownership.
Yasenak noted that the facility is currently run as a non-profit, but asked if it could ever be changed to a for-profit business. Herrelko stated that they would lose their funding if that happened and they would not be able to provide the scholarships or run the facility without that funding. Staton explained that the Planning Commission can place a requirement in the ordinance that such facilities would have to be run by non-profit organizations. She stated that the ordinance language could be drafted to restrict this use to the things that the Planning Commission likes about the Little Red House such as the home atmosphere, the non-profit entity, the small number of clients, etc. Eagin and Herrelko explained why the number of clients is limited.
Gleason explained for the record that he is currently an employee of the Little Red House. He would be in support of making it a permitted use. He noted that it is way above the average day care center and is a real asset to the community.
Johnson stated he was in favor of allowing this. He has been a supporter of the Little Red House for years. There was discussion about access to the adjacent Savidge Street church owned lots. Eagin stated access to those lots would be from Savidge Street. VanStrate asked what the tax status of the property would be if the ownership changes. Staton said she will have to check with the assessor’s office. VanStrate asked where the clients come from. Herrelko stated they mostly come from Spring Lake, Ferrysburg, Grand Haven and southern Muskegon County.
The consensus of the Planning Commission was that staff should move forward with ordinance language to permit adult day care facilities in the Public, Semi-Public District as a special land use, and that the language should include requirements for size of facility and number of clients, home-like setting, non-profit organization, minimum lot size and open space requirements, and that the structure should have to conform to typical residential setback requirements.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Proposed Sign Ordinance Amendments
The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to discuss proposed zoning ordinance amendments to Chapter 17 – Signs. The proposed amendments affect numerous sections of the Chapter including height and setback for monument signs, new definitions and requirements for construction signs and developments signs, new provisions for roof signs, new language to help eliminate nonconforming signs and provisions for deviation from some of the sign requirements.
Chairman VandenBosch introduced the item and opened the public hearing. There were no members of the public present. Motion by Johnson, support by VanStrate to close the public hearing. All in favor, motion carried.
Staton explained the attorney’s comments and the minor change to political sign regulations. Kleppe asked about eliminating pylon signs. Staton explained that the existing pylon signs are considered nonconforming uses and have to be regulated like any other nonconforming use. There needs to be a clear intent to abandon the use on the part of the property owner.
Kleppe asked if there is anything in the ordinance to prohibit a sign being included in the roofing materials like is done at some Bass Pro Shop locations. Staton said that would be considered a roof sign and would be subject to the regulations.
Johnson asked about the temporary sign at Christ Community Church. There was discussion about temporary sign regulations. Staton noted that temporary signs are permitted in the commercial zoning districts in a limited manner. The ordinance does not permit them in the other zoning districts. The Planning Commission agreed that they should also be permitted in the other zoning districts except residential districts.
There was further discussion about finding a way to eliminate the temporary type signs that are being used long term, like at the church. The commission felt that while churches need a venue to provide messages regarding services and other events, that could be accomplished as part of their monument sign like St. Mary’s does. Staton noted that there is currently no provision in the code for changeable message signs of any type and asked the long serving members of the commission if it had been the intent of the Village when electronic message boards were prohibited to prohibit all changeable message signs. After further discussion it was determined that mechanically changeable message signs should be permitted as part of a permitted monument sign. It was further determined that efforts should be made to eliminate the temporary signs that are being used for extended periods of time.
Gleason stated that he still objects to the requirement that development signs be removed after 75% of the units are sold. He stated that this regulation is foolish because the development is a business and we should not be placing restrictions on businesses. Kleppe agreed. There was discussion about time limits for construction signs and development signs. The majority of the commissioners felt that the time limits should remain.
Motion by Johnson, support by C. Miller to recommend that the Village Council adopt the ordinance amending Chapter 17, Signs with the following changes:
1. The provision in Section 17.7(4) regulating temporary signs should be added to the sign requirements for the Office, Industrial and Public, Semi-Public zoning districts; and
2. That manually changeable message signs be permitted as part of permitted monument signs.
ROLL CALL - AYES: Gleason, Johnson, Kleppe, C. Miller, Unkovskoy, VandenBosch, VanStrate and Yasenak
NAYS: none
All in favor, motion carried.
B. Proposed Ordinance Amendment – Eastern Entryway District Design Standards
The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to discuss a proposed amendment to Chapter 11.A, Section 11.5A(D)2.a. The proposed amendment would change the required roof pitch for new structures in the Eastern Entryway District from a 5:12 pitch to a 6:12 pitch. The amendment is intended to make it easier to comply with the requirement using standard building materials.
Chairman VandenBosch introduced the item and opened the public hearing. VandenBosch stated that he heard that 5:12 pitch is not a commonly stocked truss size. This amendment would change the ordinance to 6:12 which is more common. There were no members of the public present. Motion by Johnson, support by Gleason to close the public hearing. All in favor, motion carried.
VandenBosch asked the commissioners if they were sure they want to change the requirement to 6:12. His new building is 4:12 and it looks fine. Staton explained that the intent of the EED District was to require commercial buildings to compliment the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the district. The steeper roof pitch is one of the things that would help make a commercial building look more in keeping with the older neighboring homes,
Johnson asked what pitch the Eye Vision building has because that is a nice looking building. The commissioners felt that building was about 6:12. C. Miller and Johnson both stated that they liked the requirement for the steeper roof pitch. Unkovskoy asked if this requirement would keep anyone from building. VandenBosch stated that the 6:12 roof would cost more to build. Kleppe agreed and stated that he thought it could cost 15% more to build. Staton noted that the design standards in the EED and also in the downtown would all add to the cost of construction, but the Village wanted a certain aesthetic throughout the Village which the design standards are intended to create.
Yasenak stated that the steeper pitch adds to the quaintness. VanStrate stated that he would rather keep the pitch lower to keep building heights down. Staton noted that most of the surrounding residential properties were 2 stories and the steeper pitch helps to keep the commercial buildings in scale.
Johnson stated that if the Mill Point Plaza strip mall was redone with a 4:12 pitch it would be very unappealing, but would look much better with 6:12 pitch. There was continued discussion and the Planning Commission referred to examples in the Village Downtown Design Manual as well as the publication Better Models for Commercial Development which gives examples of national chain stores that comply with local design standards.
Motion by Yasenak, support by Kleppe to recommend that Village Council adopt the zoning ordinance amendment to change the minimum roof pitch requirement in the Eastern Entryway District to 6:12 pitch.
ROLL CALL - AYES: Gleason, Johnson, Kleppe, C. Miller, Unkovskoy, VandenBosch, VanStrate and Yasenak
NAYS: none
All in favor, motion carried.
DISCUSSION
C. Proposed Ordinance Amendment – Exterior Site Lighting Regulations
The Planning Commission will continue discussion of a proposed ordinance amendment establishing regulations for exterior site lighting.
Chairman VandenBosch introduced the item. Staton explained that the Planning Commission worked on this amendment last spring. At the time she presented 2 draft ordinances that did not have a lot of technical details. The Planning Commission asked to have more detail in the ordinance so this is draft #3. It includes more technical data.
Kleppe asked if there was anything in the new ordinance that would regulate the lights at the Baptist church which are directed into the surrounding neighborhood. Staton said the ordinance would require that the lights only shine on the parking lot and only during hours of operation.
Johnson asked if the Village Sternberg decorative lights would meet the ordinance. Staton said that she wasn’t sure, but that street lights would be exempt. She read the list of lights which would be exempt from the regulations. VandenBosch stated that he was on the committee that worked on the decorative street lights. He said they are metal halide which is very bright. Shades were installed on top to help with the brightness.
After general discussion Yasenak suggested that the public hearing be scheduled. VandenBosch asked Staton to set the public hearing for the next meeting.
D. West End Development – Zoning Ordinance Amendments
The Planning Commission will begin discussions for the process of reviewing and updating zoning regulations for the west end of the Village as recommended in the 2006 Master Plan and the Downtown Development Plan.
Staton gave a brief background explaining that the Planning Commission began discussion about changes to the zoning at the west end of the Village after they finished with the Eastern Entryway District last year. She suggested that, because of the late hour, this item could be tabled to give the Planning Commission more time to discuss it at a later date.
Motion by C. Miller, support by Kleppe to table this item until the April 28, 2009 meeting. All in favor, motion carried.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Election of Officers
The Planning Commission will hold elections for the offices of Chair and vice-Chair for 2009.
Chairman VandenBosch introduced the item.
Motion by Yasenak, support by VanStrate to nominate Marv VandenBosch as Chairman.
Motion by Johnson, support by Kleppe to nominate Ken Gleason as Vice-Chair.
Motion by Unkovskoy to nominate Johnson as Chairman. Johnson declined the nomination.
Chairman VandenBosch asked if there were any additional nominations. There were none.
Vice-Chairman Gleason called the vote on the nomination of VandenBosch for Chairman. On a voice vote, all were in favor and the motion was carried.
Chairman VandenBosch called the vote on the nomination of Gleason as Vice-Chair. On a voice vote, all were in favor and the motion was carried.
VIII. STATEMENTS OF CITIZENS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
There were none.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, motion by Johnson, support by C. Miller to adjourn the meeting. All in favor, meeting adjourned at 8:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathy Staton
Code Compliance and Planning Administrator
|