June 19, 2002
City Hall - 1st Floor
7:00 P.M.
A) CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by
Vice-Chairman Witthoeft
at 7:00 P.M.
B) ROLL CALL
Members Present: Horton, Witthoeft
and Nuttle
Members Excused: Withrow, Anderson,
Ostling and Cross
C) DESIGNATION OF ALTERNATES
Mr. Horton were designated as alternate.
D) APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Special meeting
of June 5, 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
Item #1 Case #02-11ZBA - Millington - 402 Park Avenue
Staff stated that one letter of support was received from Mr.
& Mrs. Robert Decker of 404 Park Avenue.
Mary Millington presented her case
, outlining the reasons
for the variance. She explained that for the past three years
they have been renovating this house on the inside and outside.
Now that the outside has been completed, they would like to build
a small deck outside of the french doors. This deck will not extend
over the property line.
Mr. Nuttle asked if the Applicant was aware that steps or a deck
would be required at the time the building permit was obtained.
Mr. Millington stated his builder was aware that something needed
to built outside the door wall. The renovation was done in stages,
with the deck as an after thought.
Staff stated the Building Department indicated the door wall would
have to be secured if no deck or stairs were installed.
Mr. Millington stated they were informed by the Building Department
that they needed steps or a deck outside of the door wall. Mr.
Nuttle asked if the Applicant was aware that the deck would increase
their square footage on the property. Mr. Millington stated he
did not.
Mr. Nuttle pointed out that the deck will stop at their property
line and not encroach into the right-of-way. He pointed out that
the structure on the adjacent property encroaches four (4') feet
into the right-of-way. Mr. Nuttle commended the Applicants on
the restoration of the house.
The Board reviewed the general findings Mr. Witthoeft pointed
out that there have been seven similar variances granted.
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:
The Board agreed with staff's recommendations outlined in the
general findings.
(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 deck is an appropriate
use of the land 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-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
The frequency of such requests
having similar circumstances is minimal.
(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 minimal due to the character of development along this section
of the street. The adjacent neighbor's letter indicated that
there would be no adverse impact.
(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 three special findings. The Board
agreed that special finding "(a)" appears to apply to
this case. The shape and size of the parcel and the size of the
existing house make it unfeasible to follow the strict letter
of the Chapter and the requirements of the building code.
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 Nuttle Supported by Horton
to grant a variance of 13% in total lot area for Case #01-11ZBA,
to build a small deck for ingress and egress at the existing door
wall.
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.
Ayes: Nuttle, Witthoeft and Horton
None: None
Motion Carried
ITEM #2 CASE #02-12ZBA - ROBINSON - 112 E. HURLBUT
Mr. Robinson explained the reason for the proposed variance. He
stated that they purchased the house in 1997. This garage (carriage
house) is 1 ½ stories in height. The garage has an inside
ladder to the second story. The roof has been repaired, as well
as the door sills. There is no sheer wall to support this garage.
By adding the side shed, the wall will be supported. Then he could
use the upstairs for storage and continue to reinforce the garage
from the inside.
Mr. Nuttle asked if there is enough storage without the added
shed. Mr. Robinson stated he only has a Michigan basement under
the house. Additional storage space is needed. There would be
no outside entrance into the shed. Access would be through the
garage.
Staff pointed out the Applicant has indicated they plan to move
to Charlevoix in the future.
Mr. Witthoeft stated there has been only one variance granted
for an addition to a detached accessory building.
Mr. Robinson stated the shed would be covered with the same siding
and window treatment, to match the garage. The eaves will match
the existing house and garage.
The Board reviewed the general findings, agreeing 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 shed is an appropriate
use of the land ans is in line with the existing structure, and
does not create a situation where the intent and purpose of the
Ordinance.
(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
The frequency of such requests
having similar circumstances is minimal.
(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 impacts
are minimal due to the existing character of development along
this section of the street. The addition would not extend any
further into the easterly side yard setback than the existing
structure.
(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.
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.
The Board agreed that additional
storage is necessary based on the age of the house. Other similar
area homes have been granted variances.
Motion by Horton Supported by Nuttle
to grant a total lot coverage variance of 3.2% for Case #01- 12ZBA,
to attach a 12' x 8' shed to the existing garage.
This variation is necessary for the preservation of a substantial
property right possessed by other properties within the same zoning
district.
Ayes: Witthoeft, Horton
and Nuttle,
None: None
Motion Carried
H) OLD BUSINESS
The following Decisions & Orders were approved as presented:
1. Decision & Order - Case #02-07ZBA - Groves
2. Decision & Order - Case #02-08ZBA - Gustin
3. Decision & Order - Case #02-09ZBA - Carlson
I) OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
None
J) NEW BUSINESS
None
K). PUBLIC INPUT, NOT RELATED TO OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
None
L). ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 P.M.