Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes

CITY OF NORTHVILLE
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting – February 5, 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
Connie Cronin
Bill Lokey
James Bress
Carol Maise
Chris Gazlay
John Rae
Charles Ayers

Absent: James Haveraneck - excu

Luke Durst – excu

Also Present: Richard Starling, Building Official

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

MINUTES:

Motion by Cronin, supported by Rae to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 8, 2003 with a minor correction. Voice Vote: Ayes: All. Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

The applicant stated that the Grounds for Appeal: Undue Hardship.

Chairman Rolland Stapleton stated that the three variances should be voted on separately.

Greg Presley, the architect for the project, described plans to renovate the Victorian Farm House (built in the prior century) and to convert the existing residential building to an office, consulting business. It is zoned PBO. The attached garage, fencing and planters will be removed. A one thousand square foot addition, covered porch and 13 spaces in a parking lot will be added.

Presley continued, that at the February 5, 2003 Planning Meeting, the Commission was in favor of the preliminary plans, but voted 5-3 against the project because of the required variance. The proposed addition encroaches on the east and north setbacks. If the building were square, relative to the property line, a variance would not be required. However, the home is angled on the property which creates a practical difficulty. The 6’ wide porch conforms to the required 20’ east side setback at the southeast corner, but encroaches as the porch continues north to a maximum of 2.5’ into the setback at the north edge. The same issue applies to the two story addition relative to the north side yard setback. Because of the angle of the house, the proposed addition on the north side conforms at the northwest corner but encroaches into this setback at the east end by 6 inches. He also asked for a third variance of 9.7’ for a ramp to be placed along Johnson St to allow for the last leg of the uncovered handicapped ramp.

Sue Klimeck (324 S. Main St.) stated she is in favor of the project and comfortable with the drawing.

Commissioner Bress read a letter from Mr. Bartel (330 Yerkes) expressing concerns regarding ingress and egress issues, no parking signs along Johnson St. and maintaining the residential feel of the neighborhood along Johnson Street and with the neighborhood to the west.

BZA member and Planning Consultant, Chris Gazlay, reported that the three negative votes from the Planning Commissioners were because they felt the application should have been presented to BZA first.

Generally they liked the fact that the wrap around porch will hide the handicapped ramp, and that there is sufficient rear yard parking, and it adds a nice touch to have a front yard entrance.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: All liked the Johnson Street front yard concept.

Motion by Cronin supported by Rae to grant the variance for the 1/2 foot on the north side yard. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: Ayers, Bress Cronin, Gazlay, Lawrie, Lokey, Maise, Rae, Stapleton, Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried..

Motion by Lokey, supported by Maise to grant the 2.5’ variance from the 20’ front yard setback on the east side. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: Ayers, Bress, Cronin, Gazlay, Lawrie, Lokey, Maise, Rae, And Stapleton. Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

Motion by Cronin, supported by Lawrie to grant a variance of 9.7’ variance along Johnson to allow for the east leg of an uncovered handicapped ramp. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: Ayers, Bress, Cronin, Gazlay, Lawrie, Lokey, Maise, Rae, Stapleton. Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

The Commissioners referenced a letter (10-8-2002) to City Manager, Gary Word in which the BZA wants to modify the wording regarding "nonconforming structures." The Commissioners agreed on the following: Any non-conforming property, structure, or use of property that has been granted a variance, is required to obtain a future variance, is required to obtain a future variance for any modification, use elevation, or footprint.

Motion by Rae, supported by Ayers to direct City Staff to seriously consider the above mentioned language change regarding "non conforming" structures. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: All, Nays: None Motion Unanimously Carried...

Motion by Lokey, supported by Maise to adjourn at 8:30 PM. Voice vote: Ayes: All: Nays: None. Motion Unanimously Carried.

Respectfully submitted,

P S Howard
Recording Secretary