VBT planners recommend changes for senior housing ordinance

A recommendation to amend the township ordinance to make way for senior housing in the township was approved unanimously at the July 24 meeting of the Van Buren Township Planning Commission.
The ordinance amendment now will go to the township board for a final vote.
Vidya Krishnan, a principal planner at McKenna who had been a consultant to the commission, switched her seat at the board table, to fill in as Director of Planning and Economic Development since that position is now vacant.
She presented the amendment she had prepared as consultant. At the June 26 meeting the commission discussed the amendment and asked her to change the title and text from “elderly” housing to “senior” housing, which she has done.
Also, the amendment adds senior housing (independent and dependent living) as special land uses in the RM – Multiple Dwelling Residential Districts, RMH Mobile Home Park Districts, C Local Business Districts, C-1 General Business Districts, C-2 Extensive Highway Business Districts, and M-U Mixed-Use Districts. Her suggestion to also have senior housing available in Industrial zoning, as in other communities, was removed since at the June 26 meeting commissioners objected to that.
A new section was added – 5.143 Senior Housing in Article 5, Development Standards for Specific Uses.
During the five-minute public hearing, Township Trustee Sherry Frazier, speaking as a resident, said, “I think this is important to have senior citizen housing for our Van Buren seniors.”
She said as a Realtor, she has seen that some of the senior housing has been out of reach for residents and it’s important to accommodate the older population. She said senior living space is very expensive.
Trustee Frazier said they should have senior living spaces at all prices, including lower and medium prices. She pointed out studies show the population is becoming older and schools have fewer students because fewer babies are being born.
“I would like to see good senior citizen housing in our community available to our residents,” Frazier concluded.
Krishnan said the new ordinance will give the whole gamut of options for aging in place.
“I’m glad it’s not in Light Industrial [zoning],” said Treasurer Sharry Budd, the township board’s liaison to the commission.
The commission took a roll-call vote and all voted to recommend the ordinance changes to the township board.
Krishnan said the township has heard from a couple of developers who say they are interested in senior housing.
Lakefront lot setbacks
Krishnan reminded them that at the June 26 commission meeting, township staff presented information and analysis concerning lakefront lots.
The minimum lot width for any zoning district in the township is 70 feet. There are some legally nonconforming lots which are narrower than that, she said.
One section of the township ordinance requires a minimum 24-foot width across the front and rear elevations of a home and another section requires the side yard setbacks to total at least 25 feet. For lots that are 50 feet wide or narrower, these requirements do not leave a viable building envelope, she said.
The Board of Zoning Appeals had asked the staff to look into the concentration of narrow lots in the township, particularly on the lakefront and whether the setback requirements should be amended for these lots.
Krishnan presented a sliding scale to see if this is an approach the commission would like.
Director Best said this scale would be helpful for garages and new construction and would allow for 15 feet of side lot that would allow for public safety.
“This allows the building department to be more gracious with building permits … and planning,” Best said.
“The BZA should not be used to develop property,” Krishnan said. “If a lot of people go to the BZA for the same thing, it’s time to change the ordinance. The minimum would be five feet for fire safety.”
Commissioner Joan Franzoi asked if this was just for lake lots and Best said yes, it was specific to the needs of lakefront lots.
Commissioner Jahr said the 50-foot lots on the lake were created before zoning regulations.
“Many were getaway lots and generally pre-date the zoning ordinances,” Krishnan agreed.
A public hearing was set for Aug. 28 to get public input on a suggested zoning amendment for R-1B and R-1C districts:
“Lakefront lot setbacks. The structures on the parcel shall comply with the required front and rear yard setbacks for the underlying zoning district. Where the lot does not comply with the minimum required lot width, the narrowest side yard shall not be less than five feet or 15 percent of the lot width, whichever is greater, and the sum of the two side yards shall not be less than 30 percent of the lot width.”
Krishnan said on a 50-foot-wide lot, the required side-yard setbacks would be 15% of 50 or 7.5 feet. A combined side yard of 15 feet would still allow a buildable width of 35 feet, she said.
Commission Chairwoman Carol Thompson said the list of non-complying lots on the lake was less than ten lots on the whole lake.
“It would help some lots,” Krishnan said.
“We want to be gracious to all our residents,” said Commissioner Medina Atchinson. “Help those who want to develop their property. This is fair.”
Commissioner Jeff Jahr agreed that this proposal did a good job of being fair.
Treasurer Budd pointed out the planning commission could handle the developments of these lots now, without residents have to have the cost of going to the BZA.