March 20, 2002
City Hall - 1st Floor
7:00 P.M.
A) CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by
Chairman Withrow at 7:00 P.M.
B) ROLL CALL
Members Present: Nuttle, Withrow,
and Horton
Members Excused: Witthoeft, Cross and
Ostling
C) DESIGNATION OF ALTERNATES
Mr. Horton were designated as alternate
D) APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of February 20, 2002 were approved as presented.
E) APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The Agenda was approved as presented
F) INQUIRY INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
No conflicts of interest were identified
G) PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Case #02-02ZBA - Decker - 404 Park Avenue
Mr. Decker explained that they purchased the home in 1999. Due
to the condition of the house, their remodeling turned into new
construction using the original the foundation. In addition, a
variance was granted to expand the front porch. The existing garage
was the only part of the structure that was not rebuilt.
He pointed out that there is a large birch tree in front of the
house which limits the size of the garage to only one car. As
of February of this year, Mr. Decker indicated that they are now
permanent residents of Charlevoix.
If granted, these variances would allow entrance for two cars,
with a 16' door. Mr. Decker stated he does not wish to cut down
the birch tree.
Mr. Nuttle asked the size of the current garage. Mr. Decker stated
it is 20' x 20'. He pointed out that this proposal would make
the garage 26' x 22'. He stated that there was a second garage
on the opposite side of the house which was torn down.
A small porch and covered roof was added on the west side to allow
for entry into the living room. Approximately three feet of the
porch encroaches into the 20' of garage area.
Mr. Nuttle reviewed the proposed variances. Mr. Decker pointed
out that a number of variances were granted to the prior owner
which are not going to be utilized. The slab poured for the rear
storage shed will be removed and the area will be landscaped.
Staff pointed out that this lot contains very steep topography.
Mr. Decker stated that he could not install a 16' garage door
without removing the birch tree. There is also a 3' service door.
The first 3' (west) of the 20.20' measurement is the exterior
of the new front porch. This allows for only 17' of usable space.
The current garage door is 10' in width. To the side of the porch,
there is a 30" service door to the garage.
Mr. Nuttle stated that of the 20.20', there is approximately 6'
of space that cannot be utilized. Mr. Decker stated the service
door allows him to get his snow blower in and out of the garage
without opening the garage door to the winter drifts.
Mr. Nuttle pointed out that there is a 6' x 3' concrete slab which
does not contain an entrance. He asked if the service door to
the garage could be located over this slab. Mr. Decker stated
that would be too close to the birch tree and that the slab is
a raised front porch and not an "at grade" slab.
Mr. Withrow asked if the service door could be located to the
west and still have room for a 16' door. Mr. Decker stated there
would not be enough room to move the entrance door. Due to the
steep topography and to gain access to the house, it was necessary
to add a concrete porch/landing area inside the garage.
This landing extends 3' into the interior of the garage.
Mr. Withrow stated one letter of opposition was received (see
file). Shalmir Langeweg of Grand Rapids (410 Park Avenue) objected
to granting these variances on the basis that the house is too
large and out of character with the neighborhood. Staff pointed
out that this house was rebuilt on the existing foundation and
is no larger than before.
Mr. Decker stated that this opinion is in direct opposition to
comments he has received from area residents.
The Board reviewed the general and special variance conditions:
The Board agreed with Staff's recommendations.
VARIANCE CONDITIONS. All of the following conditions, in the judgement
of the Board, shall exist before any variance from this Chapter
shall be granted. Any variance granted shall:
(a) Not be contrary to the public
interest or the general intent and purpose of this Chapter
(This Chapter is adopted pursuant
to the authority conferred by Public Act 285, P.A. 1931, as amended
of the State of Michigan, for the purpose of promoting and protecting
the public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience and general
welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Charlevoix by protecting
and conserving the character and social and economic stability
of the residential, commercial, industrial and other use areas,
by securing the most appropriate use of land; preventing overcrowding
of the land and undue congestion of population; providing adequate
light, air and reasonable access; and facilitating adequate and
economical provision of transportation, water, sewers, schools,
recreation and other public requirements.)
The proposed attached garage is
an appropriate use of the land and is in line with the existing
structure and does not create a situation where the intent and
purpose of the Ordinance will be compromised.
(b) Not permit the establishment of
a use within a given district which is prohibited therein.
The use requested is allowed in the R-1 district.
(c) Not be a variance so commonly
recurring as to make reasonably practical the formulation of
a general regulation by the City Council
The frequency of such requests
having similar circumstances is minimal.
The board indicated that this is only the fourth occurrence
in the past twenty years.
(d) Not cause substantial adverse
effect to properties in the immediate vicinity or in the zoning
district where the variance is located.
The Board determined that there
is no potential for adverse impact to the character of development
along this section of the street.
(e) Relate only to property that is
described in the application for the variance.
The request only relates to the
property described in the application.
Mr. Horton pointed out that this addition would not adversely
effect the character of the neighborhood. Staff indicated that
there are not problems with the Police and Fire Departments.
SPECIAL FINDINGS. If all the foregoing variance conditions can
be satisfied, a variance may be granted when the Board determines
that any one of the following special findings can be clearly
demonstrated:
(a) That there are practical difficulties
or unnecessary hardships resulting from the physical characteristics
of the property in question which make it unfeasible to carry
out the strict letter of this Chapter. Increased financial return
to the applicant shall not be considered just cause for a variance
based upon hardship.
(b) That there are exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances or conditions which apply to the
property in question that do not apply to other properties in
the vicinity within the same zoning district and which have not
resulted from any act of the applicant subsequent to the adoption
of this Chapter.
(c) That such variation is necessary
for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed
by other properties within the same zoning district.
Motion by Horton Supported by Withrow
to grant Case #02-02ZBA a variance of 4.59% in total lot coverage,
2.84' in the side (west) yard setback, 1.17' in the rear yard
setback and 11.57% rear yard lot coverage to enlarge the existing
one car garage.
These variances are granted on the basis that the general findings
have been met. Special Finding "b" would apply. There
are exceptional or extraordinary circumstance that apply to this
property that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity,
due to the configuration of the lot and steep topography. Special
Finding "c" would also apply based on the list of nine
(9) similar variances granted for nonconforming lots in the R-2
zoning district.
Ayes: Nuttle, Withrow and Horton
Nays: None
Motion Carried
2. Case #02-03ZBA - Polakowski - 301 Mason
Mr. & Mrs. Polakowski were present to answer questions and
explain this request. He stated that on February 15, 2002, their
home was destroyed by fire. For this reason, they are requesting
these variance to rebuilt their home.
Mr. Nuttle asked if the variances are need for the increase in
the porch and handicapped ramp. Mr. Polakowski stated that is
part of the reason for the variances, but that setback variances
would be need to rebuild, regardless of the porch and ramp.
Staff pointed out that multiple variances would be required to
duplicate the original structure. Staff pointed out that the original
house was 3.66' from the west property line. The current plan
calls for the house to be moved to the east, which would increase
the distance to 7'. If the ramp was not there, substantial variances
would still be required to rebuild.
Staff pointed out that the variances are necessary since the house
and foundation were removed. Mr. Withrow asked if the foundation
remained, could a house be rebuilt without the need for variances.
Mr. Harsch indicated that the Zoning Ordinance is not clear on
that point. He explained that once there is a nonconforming situation
and more than 50% of the value has been destroyed, there becomes
a question as to whether the structure can be rebuilt.
Mr. Nuttle pointed out that the only change to the house will
be the expanded porch and handicapped ramp. Mr. Harsch stated
that if a nonconforming situation exists, variances may be required
to rebuild after fire damage of more than 50%, even if the foundation
is not removed.
One letter of support was received from Lori Silva located at
303 Mason. She received plans from Staff prior to this meeting,
indicating that she was pleased that the west setback would be
increased to 7'.
Mr. Polakowski stated the handicapped ramp will be made of wood.
He stated that his best friend is in a wheel chair and requires
the use of this ramp.
The Board reviewed the general findings and agreed with staff's
recommendations.
VARIANCE CONDITIONS. All of the following conditions, in the judgement
of the Board, shall exist before any variance from this Chapter
shall be granted. Any variance granted shall:
(a) Not be contrary to the public
interest or the general intent and purpose of this Chapter
(This Chapter is adopted pursuant
to the authority conferred by Public Act 285, P.A. 1931, as amended
of the State of Michigan, for the purpose of promoting and protecting
the public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience and general
welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Charlevoix by protecting
and conserving the character and social and economic stability
of the residential, commercial, industrial and other use areas,
by securing the most appropriate use of land; preventing overcrowding
of the land and undue congestion of population; providing adequate
light, air and reasonable access;
and facilitating adequate and economical provision of transportation,
water, sewers, schools, recreation and other public requirements.)
Rebuilding this residence would
not be contrary to the public interest or intent of this chapter.
It will continue to promote and protect the character and stability
of this residential area by re- establishing the most appropriate
use of a nonconforming residential lot.
(b) Not permit the establishment
of a use within a given district which is prohibited therein.
The use requested is allowed in the R-2 district.
(c) Not be a variance so commonly
recurring as to make reasonably practical the formulation of
a general regulation by the City Council
There have been no similar circumstances
on record.
(d) Not cause substantial adverse
effect to properties in the immediate vicinity or in the zoning
district where the variance is located.
The potential for adverse impact
is minimum since the structure existed in the same location prior
to the fire. One letter of support was received.
(e) Relate only to property that
is described in the application for the variance.
The request only relates to the
property described in the application.
The Board reviewed the Special Findings and agreed that the fire
created exception and extraordinary circumstances.
SPECIAL FINDINGS. If all the foregoing variance conditions
can be satisfied, a variance may be granted when the Board determines
that any one of the following special findings can be clearly
demonstrated:
(a) That there are practical difficulties
or unnecessary hardships resulting from the physical characteristics
of the property in question which make it unfeasible to carry
out the strict letter of this Chapter. Increased financial return
to the applicant shall not be considered just cause for a variance
based upon hardship.
(b) That there are exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances or conditions which apply to the
property in question that do not apply to other properties in
the vicinity within the same zoning district and which have not
resulted from any act of the applicant subsequent to the adoption
of this Chapter.
Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
occurred when the nonconforming structure was destroyed by fire
on February 15, 2002.
(c) That such variation is necessary
for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed
by other properties within the same zoning district.
Motion by: Nuttle Supported by: Horton
To grant Case #02-03ZBA a variance of 7.1% in total lot coverage,
1.5' in the front yard setback, 13.16' in the rear yard setback
and 3.98% in rear yard lot coverage and 3' in the side yard setback
to rebuilt a house destroyed by fire, extend the front porch and
add a handicapped ramp.
These variances are granted on the basis that the condition of
the general findings have been met. Special Finding "b"
applies since there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances
that apply to this property due to the fire that destroyed the
Applicant's home .
Ayes: Withrow, Horton and Nuttle
Nays: None
Motion Carried
H) OLD BUSINESS
None
I) OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
None
J) NEW BUSINESS
Election of Officers was adjourned
to the next scheduled meeting.
K). PUBLIC INPUT, NOT RELATED TO OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
None
L). ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 P.M.