View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: August 14, 2012
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: Commission Chambers, First Floor, Muskegon City Hall
AGENDA
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 10, 2012
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hearing; Case 2012-005: Request for a variance from Section 2311: Accessory
Structures & Buildings, to allow a carport to be placed in the front yard at 3508 Wilcox
Ave, by Jack Lipps.
IV. Old Business
V. Adjourn
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION AND ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES
The City of Muskegon will provide necessary reasonable auxiliary aids and services, such as signers for the hearing
impaired and audio tapes of printed materials being considered at the meeting, to individuals with disabilities who want to
attend the meeting, upon twenty-four hour notice to the City of Muskegon. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary
aids or services should contact the City of Muskegon by writing or calling the following:
Ann Marie Cummings, City Clerk
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49440
(231) 724-6705
TTY/TDD: Dial 7-1-1 and request a representative to dial 231-724-6705
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
July 10, 2012
Chairman R. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: E. Fordham, R. Hilt, S. Brock, T. Halterman, J. Clingman-Scott,
W. German Jr.
MEMBERS ABSENT: B. Larson, excused
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: C. Fox, 2283 Resort Avenue; K. Bednarek, 3302 Arlington
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion that the minutes of the regular meeting of April 10, 2012 be approved was made by J.
Clingman-Scott, supported by E. Fordham and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Hearing; Case 2012-004: Request for a variance from Section 2203: Non-Conforming
Structures, to allow a non-conforming structure to be increased more than 30% with a Special
Land Use Permit from the Planning Commission, at 2283 Resort Ave, by Cheryl Fox. M.
Franzak presented the staff report. The zoning of this lot is R-1, Single Family Residential District,
and its current use is a residential home. The owner would like to demolish the current carport
which is attached to the home, and build an attached garage and a front porch. The house is
considered a non-conforming structure because the rear setback of the house is 28.5 feet, not 30
feet as required by the ordinance. A non-conforming structure may be expanded up to 30% with
a Special Land Use Permit from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved
that request at their June meeting, contingent upon ZBA approval of this case. Because the
applicant would like to expand the current structure by 35%, a variance is also needed. The
current structure totals 1528 square feet and the proposed addition is 540 square feet, making it a
total of 2068 square feet.
This case was tabled due to lack of a quorum at last month’s ZBA meeting. The applicant
proceeded with the Planning Commission case on June 14 and was approved for the Special
Land Use Permit to expand the structure more than 30%, contingent on ZBA approval of the
variance. R. Hilt stated that there were many non-conforming properties in this particular area of
town. J. Clingman-Scott asked if the porch addition would be the same height as the front of the
house. C. Fox stated that it would change the roofline and peak, but not substantially. She
showed a picture of her planned design and explained the project. J. Clingman-Scott thought
that the improvements would benefit the neighborhood. K. Bednarek had no opposition to the
request. In addition, the applicant had provided a list signed by several neighbors, stating that
they had no objection.
The following findings of fact were offered: a) That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question or to the intended use of the
property that do not apply generally to other properties or class of uses in the same zoning
district, b) That such dimensional variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the
vicinity, c) That the authorizing of such dimensional variance will not be of substantial detriment
to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the public
interest, d) That the alleged difficulty is caused by the Ordinance and has not been created by any
person presently having an interest in the property, or by any previous owner, e) That the alleged
difficulty is not founded solely upon the opportunity to make the property more profitable or to
reduce expense to the owner, and f) That the requested variance is the minimum action required
to eliminate the difficulty.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by E. Fordham, supported by S. Brock and
unanimously approved.
A motion that the findings of fact as determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals be adopted and
that the variance request to allow for an expansion of a non-conforming structure more that 30%
with a Special Land Use Permit from the Planning Commission at 2283 Resort Avenue be
approved, with the conditions that 1) That the additions to the property must be complete within
one year (Sec. 2504) or the variance is void, and 2) The variance is recorded with the deed to
keep record of it in the future, was made by J. Clingman-Scott, supported by S. Brock and
unanimously approved.
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER
None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REVIEW
August 14, 2012
Hearing; Case 2012-005: Request for a variance from Section 2311: Accessory Structures &
Buildings, to allow a carport to be placed in the front yard at 3508 Wilcox Ave, by Jack Lipps.
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1. The owner would like to place a carport on the property. Carports must be placed behind the
front property line. However, that is not possible in this situation because the house sits atop
a large hill without any way of having driveway access.
2. The owner would like to place the carport at the bottom of the hill, which is the front yard.
3. This area was once considered Wilcox Ave, however, a portion of the road was vacated.
Staff is still researching whether or not the owner is allowed to place anything on this vacated
road.
4. Notice was given to property owners within 300 feet of this property.
5. Barbara Fried, 3524 Wilcox Ave, is opposed to the project and believes that is the City right
of way.
6. Robert and Judy Shatney, 1792 Beach St, have no objections to the project.
The house at 3508 Wilcox Ave looking up from the road.
Vacated portion of the road. Orange marker denotes where carport would be placed.
Ordinance Excerpt:
ZONING ORDINANCE EXCERPT: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND BUILDINGS
SECTION 2311: ACCESSORY STRUCTURES & BUILDINGS [amended 4/04]
Accessory buildings shall require a development permit or when required by building codes, a
building permit, except as otherwise permitted in this Ordinance, and shall be subject to the
following regulations:
1. Attached: Where the accessory building is structurally attached to a main building, it
shall be subject to, and must conform with, all regulations of this Ordinance applicable to
the main building.
2. Front Yard, prohibition: Buildings or structures accessory to the principal, shall not be
permitted in any front yard. Parking lots are prohibited in any residential front yard.
Security stations within an “I” District may be erected in any yard. [amended 10/02]
DETERMINATION:
The following motion is offered for consideration:
I move that the findings of fact determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals be adopted and that
the variance request to place a carport in the front yard at 3508 Wilcox Ave be
(approved/denied), based on the following review standards (found in Section 2502 of the
Zoning Ordinance) and subject to conditions:
a. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the
property in question or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to
other properties or class of uses in the same zoning district.
b. That such dimensional variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in
the vicinity.
c. That the authorizing of such dimensional variance will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the public
interest.
d. That the alleged difficulty is caused by the Ordinance and has not been created by any
person presently having an interest in the property, or by any previous owner.
e. That the alleged difficulty is not founded solely upon the opportunity to make the
property more profitable or to reduce expense to the owner.
f. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the difficulty.
CONDITIONS
1. That the additions to the property must be complete within one year (Sec. 2504) or the
variance is void.
2. The variance is recorded with the deed to keep record of it in the future.