hamburg township planning commission …hamburg.mi.us/boardroom/planning_commission/agendas... ·...

- 1 -

HAMBURG TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING WITH THE TOWNSHIP BOARD AND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2014

7:00 P.M.

HAMBURG TOWNSHIP HALL BOARD ROOM 10405 MERRILL ROAD HAMBURG, MICHIGAN

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE TO THE FLAG

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. August 20, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

5. CALL TO THE PUBLIC

6. OLD BUSINESS

7. NEW BUSINESS a. Joint Review and Discussion of the Planning Commission, Zoning Board of

Appeals and Planning and Zoning Department projects during 2013-2014 b. Joint Review and Discussion of the Land Use Permit Process c. Joint Review and Discussion of possible Future Zoning Ordinance Revisions d. Riparian Lot Lines

8. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’s REPORT

9. ADJOURNMENT

A GREAT PLACE TO GROW

FAX 810-231-4295 PHONE 810-231-1000

P.O. Box 157 10405 Merrill Road

Hamburg, Michigan 48139

Pledge to the Flag

P.O. Box 157 10405 Merrill Road Hamburg, Michigan 48139-0157 (810) 231-1000 Office (810) 231-4295 Fax

Supervisor: Pat Hohl Clerk: Jim Neilson Treasurer: Al Carlson Trustees: Mike Dolan Bill Hahn Chuck Menzies Jason Negri

MEMORANDUM

To: Township Board, Planning Commission, and Zoning Board of Appeals

From: Scott Pacheco, Zoning Administrator Date: September 17, 2014 Subject: 2013 – 2014 year to date: Planning and Zoning Department Report LAND USE PERMITS: The Table 1 below shows the LUP’s issued in 2013 by type and Table 2 depicts the LUP’s issued in 2014 year to date by type.

Table1

TYPE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC TOTALAdditions 1 2 0 2 6 1 1 2 3 3 2 0 23Alterations 1 0 1 4 3 1 3 5 0 4 2 4 28Demolitions 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 8Fences 0 0 0 1 4 2 1 1 1 5 2 0 17Garages 0 0 2 3 1 0 2 4 2 3 1 0 18New Houses 0 2 6 6 8 10 3 4 0 9 0 3 51HO 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1Decks 0 0 1 1 7 1 4 4 3 3 0 0 24Sheds 0 0 0 3 5 2 3 7 2 1 1 0 24Other 0 2 3 1 4 2 0 6 2 1 3 4 28Pole Barns 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 1 2 0 1 9Signs 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 5Swimming Pools 0 1 1 2 1 4 0 2 0 1 0 12Seawalls 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3Renewal 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Repairs 10 9 8 25 21 27 27 17 16 15 18 7 200WFR 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

TOTAL 12 19 22 50 63 51 53 54 32 47 32 19 454

HAMBURG TOWNSHIP ZONING DEPARTMENTLAND USE PERMITS ISSUED

YEAR: 2013

Hamburg Township Planning & Zoning Department 2013-2014 Years in review September 17, 2014 Page 2

Table2

TYPE JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC TOTAL

Additions 2 1 1 3 5 3 1 4 20Alterations 1 2 4 5 7 5 6 4 34Commercial 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2Demolitions 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 1 7Fences 0 0 3 2 6 2 1 3 17Garages 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 6 12New Houses 3 6 1 4 5 7 11 3 40HO 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1Decks 0 0 0 4 7 7 1 8 27Sheds 0 0 0 2 2 1 2 4 11Other 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 3 12Pole Barns 2 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 8Signs 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1Swimming Pools 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 5Seawalls 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1Renewal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Repairs 7 4 8 19 21 23 21 22 125

WFR 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

TOTAL 17 13 19 46 60 57 54 59 325 LUP Process: 1. A completed land use permit application (LUP) is submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department with Three (3) copies of your project construction plans & 3 copies of your site (plot) plan- showing distances from your project to the property lines, well, septic or grinder pump location, structures on the property etc. The site must be staked prior to submittal of the LUP. 2. After the LUP and all the paperwork is submitted Planning and Zoning Staff preforms a site inspection to verify the information on the plans is accurate. 3. After the site visit is performed and the plans are check for compliance with the Township Ordinances a LUP is approved and the applicant is contacted to pay for and pick up their stamped plans and signed LUP. 4. If required the applicant visits the LCBD for a permit. 5. When the project is finished the applicant must contact the Planning and Zoning Department to receive a final inspection. Township staff visits the site to verify that the project was built to plan. This inspection includes checking to make sure that the final grade on the site is complete, all construction debris is removed from the site, all storm water run-off is managed on site, along with other items depending on the project. Once this inspection is done and all items have been completed Township Staff contacts the Building Department and inform them that the project passed the final zoning compliance inspection and that a certificate of occupancy can be issued. CODE ENFORCEMENT: I am unsure about the Code Enforcement efforts prior to my arrival. Since March 10, 2014 sixty code compliance request forms have been submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department by citizens of Hamburg Township. Staff has visited 51 of the properties in questions and issued 44 warning letters, 15 notices of violation, 4 first civil infractions, and 1 second infraction. Many of these code enforcement cases


require multiple trips to the subject property to take pictures, post notices, and meet with property owners and neighbors. Table 3 below list the code enforcement cases since March 2014 and the stage in the code enforcement process for each.

Table 3 Code Enforcement

Number Address of Alleged Violation Description of Complaint Case Closed working on compliance Stage of Code Enforcement CE-14-001 6490 Riverdale Rd, Whitmore Lake, MI Junk/ grass need cutting in yard Notice of Violation CE-14-002 6505 Woodland Ave, Whitmore Lake, MI Anti- Blight yes Case Closed CE-14-003 3505 Swarthout Rd, Pinckney, MI Wood piled on property, pick up truck Yes Notice of Violation CE-14-004 9483 Galatian Dr. Building fence w/out permit Warning Letter CE-14-005 5849 E. M-36, Whitmore Lake, MI Burning Wood Sales from home/ doesn’t meet home occupation regulation yes Case Closed CE-14-006 5000 Houghton Dr, Pinckney, MI Abandoned property, garbage in yard 1st Civil Infraction CE-14-007 8717 Rush side Firewood sales on property and running business from property Yes Notice of Violation CE-14-008 7937 Chilson Rd Horses on Property Yes Case Closed CE-14-009 2400 Baseview, Pinckney, MI CE-14-010 8971 Huron Oaks Ct, Domestic Animals Yes N/A CE-14-011 4555 Cornwell Ln, Whitmore Lake, MI Building wall w/out permit yes N/A CE-14-012 7458 Centerhill Road Damaged by a fire/ abandon vehicle and general debris Yes Warning Letter CE-14-013 8060 Grenada Dr, Brighton, MI Noxious weeds/ Anti- blight 2nd Civil Infraction

CE-14-014 11714 Tamarina Ct Pinckney, MI Fence/ Shed- Need LUP yes Warning Letter CE-14-015 11875 Louis Lane, Whitmore Lake, MI Raising poultry in residential subdivision yes Warning Letter CE-14-016 11853 Louis Lane, Whitemore Lake, MI Firewood sales on property yes Warning Letter CE-14-017 9134 Robert Burke Dr, Brighton, MI Structural housing damage, inoperable; unlicensed motor vehicle yes Warning Letter CE-14-018 9315 Silver Maple Blight yes N/A CE-14-019 9475 Galatian Dr, New Fence w/out permit Warning Letter

CE-14-020 11642 High Ridge Rd, Pinckney, MI Inoperable and/or unregistered vehicles on property Yes Notice of Violation CE-14-021 10868 Bob White Beach Blvd , Whitmore Lake, MI Grass need cutting/ removal of trash and dead trees Yes Notice of Violation CE-14-022 8761 Riverside Dr, Brighton, MI Blue Tarp on roof, Lawn badly in need of mowing Yes Notice of Violation CE-14-023 8975 Riverside Dr, Brighton, MI Abandoned property, dis-repair/noxious weeds yes Notice of Violation CE-14-024 9241 May fred Dr, Paint cans on yard /Anti- Blight yes Warning Letter CE-14-025 3437 Colonial Dr. Pinckney, MI Chickens on property Yes Warning Letter

CE-14-026 4389 Shoreview Lane, Whitmore Lake, MI Dogs barking 1st Civil Infraction CE-14-027 2260 Mumford Dr, Pinckney, MI Running motor business from home/ doesn’t meet home occupation regulation yes N/A CE-14-028 7481 Garland Ave Blight yes Notice of Violation CE-14-029 4444 Pierre Dr Grass/Weeds yes Notice of Violation CE-14-030 5138 Girard Dr Building without LUP's Yes Warning Letter CE-14-031 5523 Shoshoni Pass POD in street, blight / trash Warning Letter CE-14-032 6397 Riverdale Rd Trailer home is dilapidated w/ bee hives yes Warning Letter CE-14-033 Mystic Ridge Sub vegitation grown to 5ft on vacant lot yes warning letter CE-14-034 8673 Creston Dr Junk cars yes Warning Letter CE-14-035 8892 Lagoon Dr Brighton, MI Inoperable and/or unregistered vehicles on property & Noxious Weeds Notice of Violation CE-14-036 2021 Kingston Dr unlicensed vehicle in yard Yes Warning Letter CE-14-037 3254 McCluskey, Pinckney, MI unlicensed vehicle in yard Warning Letter CE-14-038 5126 Girard lit ter, blight, unlicensed vehicle and noxious grass yes Warning Letter CE-14-039 8806 Riverside Dr. cottage is abandon Warning Letter CE-14-040 9052 Moonlight Bay Built structure with out permit within rushlake Warning Letter CE-14-041 3129 Sand Pebble Built structure with out permit within rushlake Warning Letter CE-14-042 5448 Shoshoni Pass Unlicensed vehicles, blight Need to Visit Site CE-14-043 8189 Teahen Rd Blight, junk and 30 cats yes N/A CE-14-044 10201 Kress Rd Special use permit/ loud music Yes Warning Letter CE-14-045 4768 Midland Drive Chickens on property Need to Visit Site CE-14-046 9915 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Warning Letter CE-14-047 9927 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Yes Warning Letter CE-14-048 9939 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Yes Warning Letter CE-14-049 9963 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Warning Letter CE-14-050 9975 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Warning Letter CE-14-051 9987 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Warning Letter CE-14-052 10001 Whispering Woods Drive Blight- Dead Vegetation Warning Letter CE-14-053 6496 Riverdale Dr Need to Visit Site CE-14-054 6497 Riverdale Dr Need to Visit Site CE-14-055 6491 Woodland Av Need to Visit Site CE-14-056 6110 Cottonwood Dr Need to Visit Site CE-14-057 9512 Crestline Need to Visit Site CE-14-058 6966 Kestrel Ridge Road Need to Visit Site CE-14-059 Whispering Pines HOA Blight- Dead Vegetation Yes Warning Letter CE-14-060 7778 Chilson Road Grading without a permit/auto repair shop on site yes N/A

CE Process: The following is the brief description of the code enforcement process:

1) Receive filled out Code Compliance Request Form. 2) Visit site, verify violation to code, prepare warning letter, post warning letter and

take pictures. (allow 10 to 20 days for compliance depending on violation)


3) Revisit site after 10-20days is over. If violation still exists, take pictures, prepare notice of violation and send it certified mail to property owner and post it on the subject site. (allow 10 to 20 days for compliance depending on violation)

4) Revisit site after 10-20days is over. If violation still exists, take pictures, prepare 1 civil infraction notice (CIN), and send it certified mail to property owner and post it on the subject site. (allow 2-7 days for compliance and to pay violation)

5) Revisit site after 7 days. If violation still exists, take pictures, prepare 2 civil infraction notice, and send it certified mail to property owner and post it on the subject site, (allow 2-7 days for compliance and to pay violation)

6) Revisit site after 7 days. If violation still exists, take pictures, prepare 3 civil infraction notice, send certified mail and post on site. (allow 2-7 days for compliance and to pay violation)

7) Revisit site after 7 days. If violation still exists, take pictures, prepare 1 civil infraction citation (for the cost of the first 3 CIN’s), and send it certified mail to property owner and post it on the subject site,

8) Send all information on the code enforcement to the township Attorney and to 53rd Judicial District Courts.

9) Set hearing date with the Courts. The Planning and Zoning Department is in the process of hiring a part time employee to help with the large number of code enforcement cases in the township. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: The Zoning Board of Appeals heard 8 variance applications (2013-001 to 007) in 2013 and has heard 17 variance applications (2013-008 to 010 and 2014-001 to 014) so far in 2014. Table 4 is a breakdown of the variance application that have been heard by the ZBA in 2013 and 2014.

Table 4 2013-2014 Zoning Board of Appeals

Hearing Date/ZBA #/ Addresses

Project Description Approved (A) Denied (D) Tabled (T)

2013 ZBA Hearings April 2013/ 13-001 6452 Riverdale

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 7.6.1 Yard Setbacks, and Article 11.3.2 Permitted Expansion of Nonconforming Residential Buildings to allow for the reconstruction and expansion of a nonconforming Single Family home in excess of fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value. The applicant is specifically proposing to square off the home and to extend the home to the east by 3 feet. The applicant is also requesting a variance to construct a covered porch to the south encroaching further into the required front yard setback 5 feet.

A

April 2013/ 13-002 3833 Green Hills Drive

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 8.3.9 to allow for a land division resulting in a parcel with an accessory structure without a principle structure

A

May 2013/ 13-003 10475 Knorpp

A variance from Zoning Ordinance 7.6.1 Schedule of Area, Height and Bulk regulations to construct a garage that encroaches into a required yard setback.

A


June 2013/ 13-004 4837 Downing Drive

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 7.6.1 Yard Setbacks for the construction of a detached garage on waterside lot that encroaches into a required yard setback. The applicant is also requesting a variance from section 8.3.10(b) to allow for the garage to be constructed on a separate riparian lot.

A

September 2014/ 13-005 11505 Dunlavy Lane

A variance from Section 11.3.2 Nonconforming Building and Structures Permitted expansion of Residential Buildings to allow for the expansion of a nonconforming multiple family residential structure and Section 11.2.4, modifying the use of an existing nonconforming use by expanding the area of a nonconforming use.

A

September 2014/ 13-006 3473 Dunlap Court

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 11.3.2 Permitted Expansion of Nonconforming Residential Buildings to allow for the expansion of a nonconforming single family home in excess of Fifty (50%) of the fair market value

A

Nov 2013/13-006A

A variance from Section 11.3.2 Nonconforming Building and Structures Permitted expansion of Residential Buildings to allow for the expansion of a nonconforming single family home in excess of fifty percent (50%) of the fair market value and a setback variance to allow for the construction of a porch that encroaches into a required setback under Section 7.6.1, Schedule of Area, Height and Bulk Regulations.

A

December 2013 A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 11.3.2 Nonconforming Building Structures Permitted expansion of Residential Buildings to allow for the expansion of a nonconforming multiple family residential structure that exceeds fifty (50) percent of the fair market value of the structure. The variance is to alow the building to be 31’ from the water where 50’ is required by the code.

A

2014 January 2014/ 2013-008 6259 Winans Lake Road

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 7.6.1 Schedule of Area, Height, and Bulk Regulations. In any District where lots abut a lake or river, the yard adjacent to the water may be considered the front yard, provided all other setbacks are met. (As amended 8/8/95). In any District, a principal building and all attached structures shall not be permitted within fifty (50) feet of the ordinary high mark of any body of water.

A

January 2014/ 2013-009 11036 Buhl

A variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 7.6.1 Schedule of Area, Height, and Bulk Regulations. (WFR) Water Front Residential, the applicant is requesting a variance from 7.6.1 Yard Setbacks to

A


allow for the construction of a new home that encroaches into the required 25’ setback from the property line adjacent to the roadway.

January 2014/ 2013-010 8830 Hendricks

A variance from Zoning Ordinance 7.6.1 Schedule of Area, Height and Bulk Regulations. Adding additions requiring a 2’ variance. Current side yard setback 8’ requires 10’. The applicant is requesting a variance from Zoning Ordinance Article 11.3.2 Nonconforming Building Structures Permitted expansion of Residential Buildings to allow for the expansion of a nonconforming single family residential structure that exceeds fifty (50) percent of the fair market value of the structure.

A

April 2014/ 2014-001 3472 Dunlap Court

Variances applications to allow construction of a 2,819 square foot two-story addition to an existing 1,000 square foot single-story non-conforming structure. The variances include: 1) A variance from Section 7.6.1 Schedule of Area, Height, and Bulk Regulations to allow the addition to encroach 3-inches into a required north side-yard setback, and 2) A variance from Section11.3.2 Permitted Expansion of Residential Buildings to allow an addition to an existing non-conforming residential structure that encroaches into a required side yard setback and exceeds fifty percent of the market value of the existing residential building. The project also includes the removal of a 292 square foot garage from the site.

A

May 2014/ 2014-002 4121 Shoreview

A variance to allow construction of two additions to an existing nonconforming structure. The additions will encroach into the lake and east side yard setbacks at 4121 Shoreview Lane. The two additions consist of a 209 square foot addition what will enclose an area off the rear (north) of the home currently used as a patio under the existing second-story master bedroom and a new 55 square foot entry way off the east side of the home. The addition to the north side of the home will encroach 20 feet into the required 50 foot setback from Gallagher Lake and the entry addition will encroach 8.1 feet into the required 10 foot east side yard setback

A

June 2014/ 2014-003 Shoreview

A variance to allow construction of a new single family home within the 125-foot river front setback on a vacant site on Shoreview Lane. The new square footage of the home will encroach 43.2 feet into the required 125-foot setback.

A

July 2014/ 2014-004 6409 Riverdale

A variance to allow construction of a new 28' x 20' garage that encroaches into the 125 foot river

A


setback. July 2014/ 2014-005 8604 Riverside Drive

A variance to allow for the demolition of an existing 992 gross square foot single-story home and the reconstruction of a new 2,538 gross square foot two-story home that is 42.5 feet from the high water mark of Ore Lake where a 50-foot setback is required by code.

A

August 2014/ 2014-006 5138 Girard

Variance applications to allow a new screened in porch with a roof to be located within the same footprint as an existing deck off the front of the home. The new addition will be 4 feet from the south property line where 30 feet is required and will only be 18 feet from the high water mark of Zukey Lake where 50 feet is required.

D

August 2014/ 2014-007 11430 Algonquin Drive

Variance application to allow the addition of a 572 square foot garage to be one foot from the rear property line along Algonquin where 15 feet would be required by the code.

T

August 2014/ 2014-008 9590 Blue Water

Variance applications to allow an 818 square foot second story addition to encroach 3’9” into the required 10’ side yard setback and to encroach 4’8” into the required 25’ front yard setback.

A

August 2014/ 2014-009 2691 Signature Circle

Variance application to allow a 220 square foot deck off the rear of the structure. The deck will encroach 11’ into the 30’ rear yard setback where a 6’ encroachment is allowed.

A

September 2014/ 2014-010 11412 Algonquin Drive

Variance application to allow construction of a new 597 square foot garage/laundry room addition to the main level and a 600 square foot second story addition to an existing 1,234 square foot home. The second story addition will encroach 4’3” into the 10’ north side yard setback, 4’8” into the 10’ south side yard setback, 2’ into the 30’ rear yard setback and 6’ into the 50’ water front setback. The new garage will encroach 15’3” into the 25’ front yard setback.

A

September 2014/ 2014-011 9180 River Valley Road

Variance application to allow the expansion of a non-conforming residential structure that exceeds 50% of the market value of the existing residence (section 11.3.2). The existing structure and the new additions will encroach 2’3” into the 10’ north side yard setback. The deck will encroach 9’3” into the north side yard setback.

A

September 2014/ 2014-012 11614 Portage Lake Ave

Variance application to allow the construction of a new garage 2.1’ from the south property line where 5 feet is required. The project will require the removal of an existing non-conforming garage that is 2.1’ from the south property line and 4.2’ from the east property line along Portage Lake Road.

A

September 2014/ 2014- Variance application to allow construction of a new A


013 Imus Road

2,363 square foot 2-story home with a 555 square foot garage. The new home will encroach 15’ into the south and 21.9’ into east setbacks. Because this lot is considered a corner lot both the south and east setback are required to meet the minimum front setback of 25’. The project also includes the demolition of the existing non-conforming home.

September 2014/ 2014-014 2200 E. M-36

Variance application to allow a 195’ tall wireless tower 85’ from the west property line where 195’ is required by code. The property is the site of the Pinckney Navigator School.

A

ZBA Process: The following is the brief description of the Zoning Board of Appeal (ZBA) process:

1. The variance or zoning interpretation application and project plans are submitted to the Planning and Zoning a minimum of 4 weeks prior to the ZBA hearing;

2. Review the project plan to verify that enough information is submitted to allow the ZBA to make a determination on the application;

3. Create meeting notice and mailing list for project; 4. Send notice to the paper and to the owners of the property within 300 of the project site at

least 15 days prior to the meeting date; 5. Prepare staff report and put together packet for the ZBA members 2 Fridays prior to the

meeting; 6. Prepare meeting room and attend ZBA meeting; and 7. After meeting prior to next ZBA hearing prepare memorialization of findings for project.

PLANNING COMMISSION: In 2013 the Planning Commission held four hearing public meeting. They made determinations on 4 projects; 2 land divisions, 1 lot combination, and 1 preliminary and final site plan; and 1 Zoning Text Amendment regarding non-conforming uses. The Planning Commission started discussion on 2 more proposed zoning amendments; regarding accessory dwelling units and the keeping of poultry. In 2014 the Planning Commission has held four hearing and one site walk making determinations on 4 projects and 4 zoning amendments. Table 4 below states the dates of the Planning Commission hearing and the items the Planning Commission discussed at each hearing.

Table 4 2013-2014 Planning Commission

2013 Hearing Date Project Description Action May 15, 2013 Land division 15-08-200-019 Approve

Land division 15-25-100-094 and 085 Approve Preliminary and Final Site Plan: Livingston Eye Care Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Accessory Dwelling Units Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Non-conforming Uses Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Keeping of Poultry Continued

June 19, 2014 Parcel Combination 15-29-300-012 and 019 Approved Preliminary and Final Site Plan: Livingston Eye Care Approved


October 16, 2014

Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Accessory Dwelling Units Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Non-conforming Uses Continued

December 18, 2013

Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Accessory Dwelling Units Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Non-conforming Uses Approved*

2014 May21, 2014 Special Use Permit to allow a commercial roofing company at

7750 E. M-36 (old Mann’s Lumber site) Approve

June 18, 2014 Land Division 15-24-300-050 (Chestnut Development) Continue Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Non-conforming Uses Approved Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Keeping of Poultry Approved ** Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Marinas in Neighbor Service Continued Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Zoning Amendment Notice Approved

June 25, 2014 Site Walk- Chestnut Development Land Division No Action July 16, 2014 Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Marinas in Neighbor Service Continued

Land Division 15-24-300-050 (Chestnut Development) Approved August 20, 2014

Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Marinas in Neighbor Service Approved Proposed Zoning Text Amendment: Keeping of Poultry Approved Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval at 10068 Industrial Drive for 5,587 square foot addition (Extreme Machines)

Approved

Sing Review in the Village Center District at 10105 Veterans Memorial Drive (Livingston Professional Center)

Approved

*The Non-conforming uses ordinace text amendment was not properly noticed at the December 18, 2014 hearing was re-noticed and heard on June 18, 2014. **Was recommended for approval by the Township Planning Commission (TPC) on June 18, 2014 went to the Livingston County Planning Commission (LCPC) on July 16, 2014 and was sent back to the TPC for further review. LAND DIVISIONS/ BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS/ MERGERS Because it does not appear that these items were clearly tracked prior to my arrival, I am unable to provide data on these items prior to March 10, 2014. Below is a list of the land divisions, boundary adjustment and lot mergers that have been processed through the Planning and Zoning department since my arrival.


Owner Project Typoe Hearing Body Hearing Date Farmer Lot Combo TB 1-Apr-14Lewis Lot Combo TB 10-Apr-14Hayes Lot Combo TB 7-May-14Fitgerald Lot Combo TB 7-May-14SBRAU LLC Lot Combo TB 3-JunWard Lot Combo TB 3-Jun-14Shotts Lot Combo TB 7-Aug-14Chestnut Development Land Division PC 13-Aug-14Slepak Lot Combo TB 16-Sep-14Kuclo and Johns Lot Combo TB 16-Sep-13Purell Lot Combo TB 16-Sep-14Wing Land Division PC 15-Oct-14Kools Lot Combo TB Need to pay taxes Norton Lot Combo PC Need survey and legalKosman and Tupper Boundary Adjustment ZA Need correct owner information Land Division/Combinations/Boundary Adjustment Process:

1. An application for a Land Division/Combinations/Boundary Adjustment is submitted to the Zoning and Planning Department.

2. The Zoning and Planning Department sets up the file and distributes it to the Assessing, Utilities, Treasurer, and Accounting.

3. Once all the departments have signed off on the project Planning Staff prepares a report for the appropriate hearing body (Planning Commission or the Township Board) and places the project on the next hearing.

4. If the project is approved by the hearing body than Planning Staff sends the project to the Assessor’s to prepare the final paperwork.

5. Once the final paperwork is completed by the Assessor, Planning Staff prepares a letter to the applicant stating the project was approved and the steps necessary to final the project.

P.O. Box 157 10405 Merrill Road Hamburg, Michigan 48139-0157

(810) 231-1000 Office (810) 231-4295 Fax

Supervisor: Pat Hohl Clerk: Jim Neilson

Treasurer: Al Carlson Trustees: Mike Dolan

Bill Hahn Chuck Menzies

Jason Negri

MEMORANDUM

To: Township Board, Planning Commission, and Zoning Board of Appeals

From: Scott Pacheco, Zoning Administrator Date: September 17, 2014 Subject: Land Use Permitting Process Review

Current Land Use Permit (LUP) Process:

1. A completed land use permit application (LUP) is submitted to the Planning and ZoningDepartment with Three (3) copies of your project construction plans & 3 copies of your site (plot) plan- showing distances from your project to the property lines, well, septic or grinder pump location, structures on the property etc. The site must be staked prior to submittal of the LUP.

2. After the LUP and all the paperwork is submitted Planning and Zoning Staff preforms a siteinspection to verify the information on the plans is accurate.

3. After the site visit is performed and the plans are check for compliance with the TownshipOrdinances a LUP is approved and the applicant is contacted to pay for and pick up their stamped plans and signed LUP.

4. If required the applicant visits the LCBD for a permit.

5. When the project is finished the applicant must contact the Planning and Zoning Departmentto receive a final inspection. Township staff will visit the site to verify that the project was built to plan. This inspection includes checking to make sure that the final grade on the site is complete, all construction debris is removed from the site, all storm water run-off is managed on site, along with other items depending on the project. Once this inspection is complete and all items have been completed Township Staff contacts the Building Department and informs them that the project passed the final zoning compliance inspection and that a certificate of occupancy can be issued.

STAFF CONCERNS WITH THE CURRENT LUP PROCESS:

I have three main concerns with the current application and process for issuing a LUP in the Township. They are as follows:

1. The initial submittal and staking requirements are not clear,2. The initial staking inspection does not seem to be necessary and could open the township

up to unnecessary legal issues

Hamburg Township Planning & Zoning Department LUP Process Review September 17, 2014 Page 2

3. The final inspection requirements are unclear SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Currently three (3) copies of the project construction plans & three (3) copies of a site (plot) plan- showing distances from your project to the property lines, well, septic or grinder pump location, structures on the property etc are required when submitting for a LUP with Hamburg Township. The problem with these vague plan requirements are that there are no set criteria for what needs to be shown on the site or construction plans. This leads to confusion by the applicant when submitting and also mean that many time the Planning and Zoning received inadequate plans with a LUP application. Please see the Examples of some project plans that have been submitted (Exhibit A). There have been a few times when an applicant has submitted their plan for a LUP, I will review the plans and stamp them off as approved, the applicant will pick-up and pay for the permit and drive to the Building Department only to return a few hours later with additional stamp them off and I would suggest that the township create a comprehensive checklist for site plans and project plans. This checklist would state all the items that will be needed to be shown on the plans. I have prepared a proposed checklist for review at tonight’s meeting. The intent of the proposed checklist is to include as much information as possible and to discuss which items are necessary and which items are not necessary for review.

Land Use Permit Checklist Please submit three (3) sets of plans with the information required below, CLEARLY AND LEGIBLY DRAWN to scale. Unless substantiated to the satisfaction of the Township as not being pertinent to the application, the absence of any required item can result in the denial of your request for a Land Use Permit.

1. SITE PLAN (Required for all projects)

a. North arrow, legend, and scale. b. All property lines and dimensions. c. Indicate all required setbacks. d. All public and private roads, street names, right-of-ways and on-site easements. e. Footprint of all existing and proposed buildings with new building/addition dimensions to

all property lines. f. Existing and proposed retaining walls and fences. g. Indicate location of existing and proposed sanitary sewers, grinder pumps, and wells. h. All impervious surfaces and decks. Additional requirements as requested City staff:

i. Landscaping shall be included on the site plan if required under Section 9.4 of the Township Zoning Ordinance.


j. If the project is for an accessory structure over 200 square feet, an addition, or a new home and is proposed within 5 feet of the required setbacks than the site plan shall be prepared and stamped by a licensed surveyor.

k. For an accessory structure over 200 square feet, additions, or a new home that are within 20 feet of an interior property line please show all drainage improvements. (all storm water shall be managed on site)

2. LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS: (Required for all project except grading and fences)

a. Building lot coverage; the total footprint of buildings, parking, paved and gravel storage yards, driveways, streets, roads and sidewalks divided by the size of the site, excluding water bodies and wetlands.

b. Total impermeable surface; the total footprint of buildings, parking, paved and gravel storage yards, driveways, streets, roads, and sidewalks divided by the size of the site, excluding water bodies and wetlands.

3. EXTERIOR BUILDING ELEVATIONS: (Required for all new structures and additions)

a. All proposed exterior elevations showing existing and proposed exterior walls, roof, architectural features, doors, windows, trim, down spouts, exterior wall, roofing materials.

b. Include full exterior dimensions. Additional requirements as requested City staff:

c. Indicate both colors and materials for all exterior walls, trim, and roofing. d. Building section(s) indicating building height and eave height to the proposed or existing

grade. e. Profile of existing and finished grades.

4. FLOOR PLAN(S): (Required for accessory structures over 200 square feet, additions and new homes)

a. All proposed usable floor level area (including basements, attics, detached accessory structures, etc.)

b. All areas to be demolished with proposed walls and existing walls clearly indicated. c. All proposed rooms clearly identified and labeled for each floor level. d. All proposed decks, balconies, porches, garages/carports, etc. e. Exterior building dimensions. f. Doors, windows, bay windows, chimneys, stairways, etc.


INITIAL STAKING INSPECTION: Currently, after project plans have been submitted for a LUP a Planning and Zoning Staff member visits the site to verify the information stated on the plans is accurate. My main concern is that without a stamped survey staff cannot verify that the information presented on the plans is 100% accurate. I think that by doing the staking inspection many applicants and neighbors believe that the Township is verifying the accuracy of the information provided by the applicant on their plans and that is not the case. Many times staff will visit the site and the property lines will not be staked and even when stakes are placed at the property corners there is no guarantee that the stakes are set in an accurate location (See Picture 1). For an example of a property that is currently staked for an inspection (incorrectly) of a new single family home by Marshall Smith Builders you may visit the property to the left of 4629 Oaklawn Drive.

There are four options that could improve on the current process. With all of the options listed below I would suggest that the following wording be added to the LUP in order to reduce the Townships exposure to potential law suits regarding issuing permits. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that all structures and uses for which this application is made shall conform to the Ordinances of Hamburg Township, Livingston County and the State of Michigan. All information submitted for this permit is to my knowledge accurate. If the information is determined either now or in the future to be inaccurate the permit shall be void and any structures built or uses approved may be in violation of the Township Ordinances and must otherwise be brought into compliance with all Township Ordinances. The accuracy of the lot lines, dimensions and other information presented in the project plans are the sole responsibility of the property owner and in NO way does the Zoning Staff’s signature on


this permit or inspection of the site guarantee the accuracy of the information provided by the applicant for this permit. Option 1: Continue to do and initial inspection and add the working above to the LUP. Cons: 1) Requiring an inspection gives the public the perception that the Township is verifying the information on the plans, and 2) The inspection and staking requirements require more time from both the Township Staff and the Property Owner. The following are the staking requirements (although 9 out of 10 site inspection to not provide all of the required information):

1. Lot corners must be CLEARLY staked. 2. Lot lines must be marked with string for accurate lot line identification (when

applicable). 3. Project corners must be CLEARLY staked and the building perimeter footprint marked

with string. 4. Lot must be CLEARLY identified with a sign If an address is issued, address must be

visible from the road. Pros: The property owners need to provide a very small amount of information prior to building a structure on the site. Staff may be able to catch some violations and miss placed buildings prior to the construction of the buildings. Option 2 Eliminate the initial inspection all together and add the wording above to the LUP application. Pros: Less time and money required for the applicant to pull a LUP. Less time spent by staff to issue a LUP. Cons: Could lead to situations where a building is constructed in the wrong location. What happens if the building is in the wrong location does the Township get involved at that point of is it a civil matter? Option 3 Eliminate the initial inspection and require a survey in order to pull a LUP and add the wording above to the LUP application. Pros: No initial inspection of the site reduces the time needed to pull a LUP. Buildings are more likely to be constructed in the correct location on the site. If the building is built in the wrong location the surveyor is liable for providing incorrect information not the township. Con: Survey are costly, more people may build illegally if surveys are required.


Option 4: Eliminate the initial site inspection and require a survey on certain project and add the wording above to the LUP application. Examples of project that would require a survey; A new proposed structure is within 40 feet to a property line or 5 feet of a required setback, Only for new homes, additions or accessory structure over 200 feet. . (We should discuss these requirements) Pros: No initial inspection of the site reduces the time needed to pull a LUP. Requiring a survey for structure built near a property lines removes liability from the township if the structure is placed in the wrong location. Requiring a survey shows the neighbors of the new structure that the township is reviewing the location and requiring information prior to issuing a permit. The applicant is less likely to build a structure in an incorrect location if a survey is done. Cons: Surveys are costly, but they will. FINAL INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS: Currently when the project construction is finished the applicant must contact the Planning and Zoning Department to receive a final zoning inspection. Township staff visits the site to verify that the project was built to plan. This inspection includes checking to make sure that the final grade on the site is complete, all construction debris is removed from the site, all storm water run-off is managed on site, along with other items depending on the project. Once this inspection is complete and all items have been completed Township Staff contacts and informs the Building Department that the project passed the final zoning compliance inspection and that a certificate of occupancy can be issued. I am concerned with the requirement regarding the storm-water run-off being managed on site. None of the residential project plans that I have seen since arriving in Hamburg Township have had drainage or grading plan. Many of the homes that I have done finale zoning inspections on have not even considered their drainage until I show up to the site. When I have informed the home owner or developer that they have to put in drainage they get angry and state they have never had to do that in the past. I am also concerned that by not requiring a drainage plan and by just looking at the site and making a judgment call on the drainage is opening up the Township for future law suits if the final drainage solution fails. I would suggest that Hamburg Township require a drainage plan to be created for certain project. The plan shall manage the stormwater of the subject site. On this plan the applicant shall state that all stormwater will be managed on the site or review by the township engineer shall be required for drainage plans.

NO INFORMATION IN PACKET

IF COMPLETED IN TIME REPORT WILL BE E-MAILED PRIOR TO THE MEETING

HARD COPIES WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE MEETING

P.O. Box 157 10405 Merrill Road Hamburg, Michigan 48139-0157 (810) 231-1000 Office (810) 231-4295 Fax

Supervisor: Pat Hohl Clerk: Jim Neilson Treasurer: Al Carlson Trustees: Mike Dolan Bill Hahn Chuck Menzies Jason Negri

TO: Hamburg Board Members FR: Pat Hohl DA: September 12, 2014 RE: Riparian lot lines I received the attached letter from Mr. and Mrs. Tacy regarding riparian lot lines. The matter of riparian lot lines and the location of docks, boat hoists, etc. presents itself often. Please review the letter from the Tacys and prepare for a discussion at our joint meeting with the Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals at 7:00 p.m. on September 17.

No Information In Packet

hamburg township planning commission …hamburg.mi.us/boardroom/planning_commission/agendas... ·...

Documents