Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes

CITY OF NORTHVILLE
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting – January 8, 2003 - Approved
Northville City Hall – Council Chambers

CALL TO ORDER:

Commissioner Stapleton called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.

ROLL CALL:

Commissioners:

Present: Rolland Stapleton
Eugene Lawrie
James Haveraneck
Bill Lokey
James Bress
Carol Maise

Absent: Chris Gazlay - excu.
John Rae - excu
Charles Ayers – excu
Connie Cronin – excu
Luke Durst – excu

Also Present: Richard Starling, Building Official

Motion by Lawrie, supported by Bress to approve the agenda. Voice Vote: Ayes: All. Nays: None.

MINUTES:

Motion by Bress, supported by Haveraneck to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 6, 2002 with a minor correction. Voice Vote: Ayes: All. Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

CASE 02 –04 Applicant requests variance to

Patricia Pokay Sec.18.09, fence height.

1051 Allen Drive

Northville, Michigan 48167

Ms Pokay stated that she had recently installed a fence in the rear yard. The Chief Building Official did not approve the fence because the fence height exceeds 6 feet. The posts vary from 6’6" to 6’9". Photos of her fence, as well as13 other fences in the City of Northville, which exceed the 6"’ height requirement were submitted. She stated that her fence is 6’ and only the decorative posts, take it over the limitation.

The Chief Building Official stated that because the decorative posts are part of the fence, the fence exceeds the height limitation. He also stated that at a recent Planning Commission meeting the Commissioners also agreed with the definition. This particular fence has already been installed and the contractors (Upright Fence – Westland) who installed the fence should be required to come to the meeting. They are aware of the rules and know that a permit is required. At that time, the specifics would be explained.

Commissioner Maise stated that the Grounds for Appeal should be changed from ERROR in the decision to UNDUE HARDSHIP because the contractor made the error.

Motion by Haveraneck, supported by Maise to grant the variance. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: Maise, Bress, Lawrie, Lokey, Haveraneck. Nays: Stapleton. Motion Carried.

CASE #3-01 Applicant requests variance from

Ken Nicholson Sec.15.01, maximum lot coverage

600 Horton to go from 30% allowable to 33.9%

Northville, Michigan 48167 and from Sec. 15.02, front yard set

back for a variance of 4.15’ from

required 25.65’ setback.

The applicant, Ken Nicholson stated he plans to renovate and add on to an existing 1150sq. ft. story and a half bungalow, which was built in the 1920’s. The new two-story addition will have an attached garage and basement. He was not aware that the deck and porch would be included in the 30 % maximum lot coverage requirement when he purchased the property. Grounds for Appeal: Undue Hardship.

He then stated that the second request is for a variance from the required 25.65 setbacks. One side of the existing non-conforming home is 13.5 off the south lot line and the other is 2.5’ off the north lot line. Grounds for Appeal: Non-Conforming Use.

The applicant also stated that he has purchased the lot directly to the north which is 26 feet wide and another nonconforming lot. Combining the two lot widths brings the total to 64’, providing one single lot that conforms to current regulations.

Charles Touissant (528 Horton) is against the "Big Foot" concept. He stated that he has lived here forever and appreciates the quaintness of the community. He wants to keep the tradition of the neighborhood and the greenery of the property to the north. He is against the request for both of the variances. In their wisdom, Council passed the ordinances and made the rules to keep and preserve the neighborhoods.

Todd Culp (375 Lake) is opposed to the increase of the square footage. Massing is too much for the neighborhood and would be a dangerous procedure for the existing homes, some of which are 100 years old. A large home would "dwarf" the smaller quaint homes.

Neal Mansilla (605 Horton) is opposed to a large new home directly across the street from his home.

Yu Han (533 Horton) is opposed to the addition. He expressed concerns with setting precedence for new large homes.

Alan Grooms (529 Horton) stated he is in favor of the requests. The plans are nice and he only sees the front porch and the back deck as the issue.

Jennilee Grooms (529 Horton) stated she is favor of the applicant.

Juliet Culp (375 Lake) appreciates the character of the neighborhood and lot coverage over 30% is too much. She also expressed concerns with the removal of beautiful old pine trees.

The architect for the project, Dennis Jones, stated that the existing home will be kept in tact and is the basis of the design for the addition. The plans are considerate and sensitive to the neighborhood.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: A true hardship has not been shown. By purchasing the lot to the north, the applicant intends to make a financial profit. The home can still be renovated and the front porch replaced within the original front porch footprint. The applicant also stated to the commissioners that he could reduce the size of the addition to fit within the ordinance.

Motion by Maise, supported by Haveraneck to grant the variance for the 33.9% lot coverage as requested. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: None. Nays: Bress, Haveraneck, Lawrie, Lokey, Maise, Stapleton. Motion Failed.

A friendly amendment by the commissioners stated that a new open porch could be placed within the footprint of the existing porch.

CASE #3-02 DISCUSSION: Applicant requests

First Presbyterian Church variance from Article 21, Section

Graphic Visions 21.01 to allow for additional set

200 E. Main Street back and ground signage.

Sue Dillon, representing Graphic Visions, requested a variance for the signage for First Presbyterian Church. Grounds for Appeal: Undue Hardship. The church has undue hardships that the codes do not account for and is requesting a variance in order to insure adequate communication at the various entrances. With the church’s new addition, it now has street frontage and entrances on all four sides of the building.

Multiple entrances occur for the various church functions.

Entrance for Sunday Worship Service – Sign #9

Two sanctuary entrances – Sign # 8

Christian Life Center entrance - Sign #4

Office entrance – Sign #3

Christian Education entrance – Sign #6, #7

Children’s Center entrance – Sign #5

Directional Signs. Visible signage must be utilized to avoid traffic hazards and to direct the large volume of visitors. The 2 S/F allowance, as allowed in the code, does not adequately mark the different entrances.

Signs #3, #4, #6 and #9

Hardship #3

Additional signs, not listed above, that will be installed are the MAIN ID ground sign #2 and the MAIN ID wall sign #1. They are both within the square footage code, however, the building sits so close to Main Street, the required setback in not possible. The new ground sign will be placed in the existing flowerbed area where the Historical Marker currently sits. The marker will be moved due west.

This sign was gifted to the church as a memorial and the church wishes to continue to use it in some capacity. This sign is not proportional to serve as the main identification sign and will be moved to the east side of the church.

Sue Dillon also stated that the Planning Commission denied the church’s application based on the square footage concerns. Some aesthetic alterations were made based on the Planning Commission’s recommendation. The Historic District granted the signs a unanimous approval on December 18, 2002.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: The Commissioners recognized the physical characteristics of the site. The church has four frontages on for different streets.

Motion by Haveraneck supported by Maise to grant the variance to allow for additional ground signs and set backs for First Presbyterian Church. Roll Call Vote: Aye: Bress, Haveraneck, Lawrie, Lokey, Maise, Stapleton, Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

CASE #2-03 ((providing requested letter) Applicant requests a variance to

Richard Brobst Article IV, Sec. 14-84, (e) to

301 N. Center place a condenser within the 25’

Northville, Michigan 48167 front yard setback.

A letter dated 11-19-02 from Kenneth Clarkson (Clarkson Development Company, LLC) stated that he was the title holder and the property owner of 301 N. Center. He has granted Richard Paul Probst permission to seek a zoning variance for the placement of an air conditioner on the south side of the house. (A variance was granted at the 12-2002 BZA meeting to allow the placement of an air conditioning unit in the side yard, pending a letter from the titleholder.)

Motion by Haveraneck, supported by Bress, to grant the variance. Roll Call Vote: Maise, Bress, Haveraneck Lawrie, Lokey, Stapleton. Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

Motion by Maise, supported by Haveraneck to adjourn at 8:50 PM. Voice vote: Ayes: All: Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

Respectfully submitted,

P S Howard

Recording Secretary