View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: February 14, 2006
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 January 10, 2005
III. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hearing Case 2006-003: Request for a variance from Section 2311: Accessory
Structures & Buildings, to erect a garage and shed in the front yard at 2984 Lakeshore
Drive, by Leland Leiter.
V. Adjourn
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETINGS 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:
Gail A. Kundinger, City Clerk
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49440
(231) 724-6705
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning_Board_of_Appeals\ZBA2006\2006 Agendas\zba 2-14.doc
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REVIEW
February 14, 2006
Hearing, Case 2006-003: Request for a variance from Section 2311: Accessory
Structures & Buildings, to erect a garage and shed in the front yard at 2984 Lakeshore
Dr.
BACKGROUND:
Applicant: Leland Leiter
Property Owner: Same
Property Address(location): 2984 Lakeshore Dr.
Zoning: WM, Waterfront Marine
Current Land Use: Single Family Residential.
Request: Variance request is for construction of a 30 x 50-foot garage and to allow a 12 X 22
foot shed in the front yard.
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1) The subject property is located just west of Cottage Grove Street on the north side of
Lakeshore Drive.
2) Zoning of the adjacent properties in the area is all WM, Waterfront Marine.
3) While the zoning is WM, Waterfront Marine the property is a residential non-conforming
use similar to the adjacent properties with the Balcom's Cove planned unit development
nearby.
4) This case has previously been before the Zoning Board of Appeals beginning in
December 2002 with a final vote at the March 2003 meeting. A zoning variance was
granted at the March 2003 meeting to allow the applicant to build the new 30 foot wide
by 50 foot long garage 100 feet from the front right-of-way line and at least 3 feet from
the western property line with the following conditions: 1) The garage doors may front
Lakeshore Dr. 2)The garage must be sided and may not be sheet metal. 3) An improved
driveway (paved) must be provided to the garage from Lakeshore Dr. 4) The new garage
may not be used for commercial purposes. 5) Both of the old garages must be removed
before the building permit is issued for the new garage.
5) The new garage was never built and the variance expired in March of 2004.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
1
6) There is considerable outdoor storage of materials and equipment on the site.
7) The current proposal is to construct a 30-foot by 50-foot garage facing east with access
via an established driveway easement. The access to the garage would be paved from the
east property line to the garage. Additionally, the applicant would like the existing
garage to remain on the property as a storage shed.
8) The existing garage currently on the property has been moved and enlarged without the
necessary permits and site plan approvals. Enforcement action had been initiated but no
formal action has been taken because the applicant has been working with staff towards a
resolution. Mr. Leiter has presented a number of concepts but the process has been
difficult, in part because of the changes in staff in our department during this same time
frame, but also due to the complexity of the case
9) For the existing building to be considered a shed, it must not be capable of storing
vehicles. This could be accomplished by removing the current garage doors and installing
normal single or doublewide service doors. A shed and vehicle storage building are
allowed in residential zones with certain restrictions regarding placement and
construction. These restrictions do not apply in a WM, Waterfront Marine zone.
10) If the existing garage is to remain on the site in its present form, the driveway to it will
need to be paved to the easement.
11) The ordinance requires that the driveway and parking areas have to be paved. This
section has been interpreted by staff in the past to mean any new portions of driveway
installed as the result of a new or moved structure and not to require pre-existing drives to
be paved except where they are being added to.
12) The proposed plan would use less pavement then what had been previously required and
have a lesser impact on water runoff both towards the home and lake and would help
preserve greenspace.
13) The Waterfront Marine district does not limit the number of accessory structures used for
vehicle storage as does our residential districts. Since the non-conforming use is single
family residential the construction standards for accessory structures in a residential use
do apply and the structures may not be Pole Style buildings with sheet metal sides and
they must meet the height restrictions.
14) Staff has received no comments regarding this case.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
2
Application Page 2:
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
3
Site Plan
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
4
Photos of 2984 Lakeshore before one garage was demolished and the other moved.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
5
Current Photos of 2984 Lakeshore Dr.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
6
ORDINANCE EXCERPTS: {Emphasis added}
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]
2. Height restrictions: Buildings accessory to residential buildings shall not be
more than one (1) story or fourteen (14) feet in height.
3. Detached: Detached accessory buildings shall:
a. Be at least six (6) feet from any principal building
b. Be at least three (3) feet from any side or rear lot line.
c. Not be located within a dedicated easement or right-of-way.
d. Any accessory structure placed in a residential property or zone in the
city shall be of residential construction properly painted or sided. Pole
style storage buildings and sheet metal accessory structures are
prohibited in all residential zones or developments. [amended 8/01]
5. Replacement: Existing accessory structures may be replaced on the existing footprint
provided they are wholly contained within the property and meet the required front
yard setback.
6. Satellite Dishes: Satellite dishes over twenty four inches (24”) in diameter shall be
considered accessory structures. The setback placement of satellite dishes shall be
measured from the outermost edge of the dish.
7. Number: No more than one (1) accessory building shall be located on any parcel
within an "R" or "RT" district, except that two (2) may be permitted when one is a
garage or other shelter for automobiles belonging to the residence.
8. Not Permitted Prior to a Principal Structure: Accessory buildings and structures shall
not be erected on a lot or parcel in a residentially zoned district prior to the
establishment of a principal structure. Where two or more abutting lots are held under
one ownership or control in a residentially zoned district, the owner may erect an
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
7
accessory building on a lot separate from that one which the principal building is
located, provided both lots are combined and used as one with a single tax
description.
SECTION 2326: OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING [amended 2/02]
1. Intent: It is the intent of this section that off-street parking spaces shall be provided and
adequately maintained by each property owner in every district for the parking of motor
vehicles for the use of occupants, employees and patrons of each building and premise
constructed, altered, or enlarged under the provisions of this Ordinance.
2. Scope: At the time any building or structure is erected, enlarged or increased in capacity,
or a new land use is established, off-street parking spaces for new or additional
development shall be provided according to the requirements of this section and Table
IB.
3. Parking and Loading Plan Review: Whenever three (3) or more vehicle parking spaces
are required for a given use of land, plans, specifications for the construction or alteration
of an off-street parking area shall be submitted for approval by the Zoning Administrator
before a development permit is issued. Such plans and specifications shall indicate the
location, precise use of buildings, size, design, surfacing, marking, lighting, drainage,
curbing and curb cuts, entrances, exits, landscaping, and other detailed features as
required by the provisions and standards of this zoning ordinance and other applicable
laws and rules.
4. Parking Areas Existing Before the Effective Date of This Ordinance: No parking area or
parking space or loading area which exists at the time this Ordinance becomes effective
shall be relinquished or reduced in any manner below the requirements established by
this Ordinance.
5. Uses of Parking Areas: Parking spaces and loading areas shall be used exclusively for
the parking of vehicles associated with a building, structure or land use in a manner
consistent with the purpose for which it is designed. No commercial activity or selling of
any kind shall be conducted within required parking areas. Permitted temporary uses
may operate in overflow parking areas or setback areas provided no clear vision or other
safety hazard is present. Vehicles shall not be repaired, stored, or displayed for sale or
hire in parking lots unless the principal use is classified for such uses.
6. Design and Access Standards: Multi-family, commercial and industrial land use areas
shall meet the screening, landscaping, and lighting standards of this ordinance.
7. Maintenance Standards: Parking and loading areas in all districts shall be paved,
marked and defined by curbing or curb stops.
8. Maximum Parking: The maximum amount of parking permitted for any use or group of
uses shall not exceed the minimum parking requirements by more than one-third (33%)
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
8
9. Loading Space Required: In order to prevent undue interference with public use of
streets, parking lots and alleys, uses such as manufacturing, storage, warehouse,
department store, wholesale store, retail store, hotel, hospital, laundry, dairy, mortuary,
and other uses similarly and customarily receiving or distributing goods by motor vehicle
shall provide space on the premises for that number of vehicles that will be at the
premises at the same time on an average day of full use. Loading spaces shall:
a. Be provided as area additional to off-street parking space and shall not be
considered as supplying off-street parking space.
b. Not interfere with fire access.
c. Provide adequate space for standing, loading, and unloading services and be not
less than twelve (12) feet in width, twenty-five (25) feet in length, and fourteen
(14) feet in height, open or enclosed, for similar uses similarly involving the
receipt or distribution by vehicles of materials or merchandise.
d. Have access provided as directly as possible from a public street or alley and be
arranged so as to provide sufficient off-street maneuvering space.
10. Joint Use of Parking Areas: The joint use of parking facilities by two or more uses may
be allowed whenever such use is practical and satisfactory to each of the uses intended to
be served, and when all requirements for location, design, and construction are met.
a. Computing Capacities: In computing capacities of any joint use, the total
space requirement is the sum of the individual requirements that will occur at
the same time each day. If space requirements for individual uses occur at
distinctly different times, the total of such off-street parking facilities required
for joint or collective use may be reduced by the Planning Commission below
the same total of the individual space requirements.
b. Record of Agreement: A copy of an agreement between joint users shall be
provided to the City. The agreement shall include provisions which assure
continued long-term use and maintenance of the parking facility by each
party, and their successors in interest, including owners and occupants of the
premises which are served by the parking facility.
11. Dimensional Requirements: Each parking space shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet
wide by eighteen (18) feet long. Maneuvering isles shall be a minimum of twelve (12)
feet wide for one-way traffic and twenty-two (22) feet for two-way traffic. Excessively
wide isles shall not be permitted.
12. Downtown Parking Overlay District: A downtown parking overlay district is hereby
created as outlined in Figure 23-2. Within said overlay area is permitted the following:
[amended 2/03]
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
9
a. In the downtown parking overlay district only, all land uses, except
residential, may use on-street parking for up to thirty percent (30%) of
their required parking area.
b. In the downtown parking overlay district, shared parking agreements
are encouraged. Parking areas for other than single or two-family
residential uses may be located up to 1,000 feet from the building they
are intended to serve and may be provided in any zoning district
except the R-1 district.
In all areas except for the downtown parking overlay district, off-street parking for
nonresidential uses shall be either on the same property or on a property zoned to permit
parking areas. The parking area shall be within three hundred (300) feet of the building it is
intended to serve, measured from the nearest point of the building to the nearest point of the
off-street parking lot. [amended 2/03]
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
10
Notice Map:
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
11
Minutes of Zoning Board of Appeals March 2003 meeting:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Reconsideration of Case 2002-25: Variance request to permit a detached garage to be placed
in front of the front building line at 2984 Lakeshore Dr., by Lee Leiter. B. Moore presented
the staff report. This is the case that Commissioner Schweifler requested come back before
the board to continue consideration of the case because, essentially, the motion to grant the
variance with conditions failed and no alternative action was taken. The ZBA does not have
to vote whether or not to reconsider this action since no final action was taken (per the City
Attorney). Since the public hearing was closed, it should not be reopened; the ZBA is merely
continuing their deliberation. Staff did send out a notice to surrounding property owners to
let them know the ZBA is continuing the discussion on this case but there is no public
hearing. The subject property is located on Lakeshore Dr., west of the Balcom’s Cove
development and contains a residence and two existing detached garages. Recall that the
applicant revised his original request and asked to demolish two existing garages on site and
build one new garage in their place rather than siting the new garage closer to Lakeshore
Drive. Staff is somewhat concerned that the revised request of a 1,500 square foot garage
(30 by 50) is beyond the scope of what is generally seen in other neighborhoods in the city.
An average two-stall garage is 24 x 24 or 576 square feet. Maximum lot coverage in the WM
zone is 60% for structures. The applicant indicated that although we have seen drawings that
show two parcels under his ownership, it is really one parcel so he can, therefore, make the
60% limit on lot coverage, even with a 1,500 square foot building. The Zoning Ordinance
allows detached accessory structures, but requires that they be located behind the front
building line of the home. In the case of the subject property, the home is located near the
rear of the property, closer to Muskegon Lake, which does not leave room to place an
accessory structure behind it. The two existing garages are nonconforming as they are
located in the front yard.
B. Moore informed the commission members that in order for the variance to pass, there
would need to be a majority vote of the members present, which would mean that 3 members
would have to be in favor of it. She understood that there was concern about the usefulness
of the front parcel for development if another driveway were required. However, the front
part of the parcel cannot be legally split off because the split would not meet the
requirements of the ordinance. The applicant did provide more information and the
commission members may want to have him explain his rationale. A drawing plan for
paving a new driveway through the parcel had been submitted by the applicant. R.
Schweifler stated that the drawing isn’t what the applicant wants to do, but instead shows that
a new driveway would be expensive and would need to use part of the easement to allow a
vehicle to swing into the side-loaded garage. This would cost the applicant almost $8,000.
R. Hilt stated that it looks like the swing of the driveway to the garage is because the garage
doors would be facing east. If the garage doors were to face Lakeshore Dr., then there would
be no worry about the swing into the garage and the easement. B. Moore stated that the
commission members could change or add to staff’s proposed conditions. R. Schweifler
stated that the applicant would still have to pave the drive. B. Moore stated that they can’t
open the public meeting, but they could ask questions of the applicant if they aren’t clear
with the request. J. Clingman-Scott asked if the variance was granted as requested, then the
garage could still be oriented to the east. S. Schiller stated that the issue with the driveway
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
12
before was that it was requested as a condition. That was why the motion did not pass. J.
Clingman-Scott stated that she recalled that. Her thinking at that time was that because there
is an easement, she didn’t feel that it had any place in the discussion. The easement is
recorded on the deed and can be used. The side-loaded garage made sense. She didn’t feel
that the new driveway was necessary because there was already an easement and access to
the property. It would place an unnecessary burden on the applicant to have to put in a new
driveway. R. Schweifler stated that, by ordinance, when you build a garage, you would have
to put in a paved drive. If there is an existing unpaved drive, then it is grandfathered in. In
this case, the existing drive is an easement and the commission members can’t require the
applicant to pave someone else’s property. B. Moore stated that if the applicant were come
to staff with a request for an attached garage and met all the setbacks, he wouldn’t need a
variance. He needs the variance because he wants a detached garage in front of the front
building line of the principal structure. He would be required to pave on his property where
the vehicles would be able to drive and maneuver.
R. Schweifler asked if the house had been oriented differently with the house closer to
Lakeshore Dr. with the placement of the garage in the back, would he need the variance? B.
Moore stated that he wouldn’t. R. Schweifler stated that the only reason the applicant needs
a variance is because his house is oriented toward the water and not the street. The zoning
ordinance language is designed for homes that are oriented toward the street. For the ZBA to
require an additional driveway, is far and above what the ordinance calls for. He also felt
that this would be excessive and unnecessary. He felt based on previous discussions, that the
commission members were requiring the applicant to have 2 driveways. R. Hilt disagreed
with this. The members aren’t requiring the applicant to request the variance. The applicant
has brought in another plan and he would like to ask him a question about it. If the applicant
were willing to do what was shown in the new drawing, then this would solve the problem of
having to pave his neighbor’s property. There are a lot of homes that face the waterfront that
have garages that face the street. Some have 2 or 3 garage doors and is a common thing.
Staff had asked not to have the garage doors face the street, but the garage could even face
Lakeshore Dr. and have a straight driveway. There would not be a need for a bend in the
driveway for access. He asked Mr. Leiter if he would be interested in turning the garage so
the doors would face the street and have a straight driveway to the garage. L. Leiter stated
that he wasn’t interested in doing what was in the new drawing. What he was trying to show
was how improbable the scenario would be. J. Clingman-Scott asked if the garage were
shifted facing the road and would miss the easement entirely by having a straight driveway,
would that make it more acceptable solution? L. Leiter stated that he would prefer not to
build another driveway. He would like to keep the new garage in the footprints of the
existing garages. His understanding when talking with staff was that the garage doors
couldn’t face the street. He would prefer not to cut the lot through the center with a
driveway.
R. Schweifler stated that the ordinance, in the way it is written, doesn’t take into
consideration for waterfront properties. He gave scenarios of when a variance wouldn’t be
needed. The first was if the garage were attached to the home and the second, if the home
were closer to the street so the garage could be placed in the back of the home. The way the
zoning ordinance is written is that it negates that an individual, especially on waterfront
property, would prefer to orient there house to the rear of the property and not on the street.
B. Moore stated that the variance is for the detached structure because there isn’t enough
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
13
room on the property to place it behind the home. R. Schweifler asked if the applicant
needed a variance due to the size of the garage. B. Moore stated that the size wasn’t a
problem since the applicant’s holdings are one lot. R. Schweifler stated that the zoning
ordinance doesn’t address waterfront property in that the homes usually face the waterfront
with the garages facing the street. B. Moore stated that the requirement to have a detached
garage in the back is a general provision for all zoning districts. R. Schweifler asked for
clarification that this wasn’t directed at just the waterfront marine zoning. B. Moore stated
that was correct, it was a requirement in all zoning districts. The only special requirement of
the property for waterfront property is the waterfront setback and the waterfront side is
considered the rear. J. Clingman-Scott asked if a motion is offered and dies, could another
motion be made. B. Moore stated that her understanding is that if the motion dies due to lack
of support, then yes, another motion could be made. If the motion dies due to the vote, then
it fails to pass. R. Schweifler added that there would need to be a material difference
between the motions. B. Moore reminded the commission members that if the motion ends
in a tie, it fails. The commission members also have the option to table this until there is a
full board.
A motion that the variance to permit a 30 foot wide and 50 foot deep garage one hundred
(100) feet from the front right-of-way line and at least three (3) feet from the western
property line for the home at 2984 Lakeshore Ave. be approved, based on the following
review standards (found in Section 2502 of the Zoning Ordinance): 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.
Based on the following conditions: 1) The garage doors shall not front Lakeshore Drive. 2)
The garage must be sided and may not be sheet metal. 3) An improved driveway (paved)
must be provided to the garage from the easement. 4) The new garage may not be used for
commercial purposes. 5) Both of the old garages must be removed before the building
permit is issued for the new garage, was made by J. Clingman-Scott, supported by R.
Schweifler and failed with R. Hilt and S. Schiller voting nay.
A motion that the variance to permit a 30 foot wide and 50 foot deep garage one hundred
(100) feet from the front right-of-way line and at least three (3) feet from the western
property line for the home at 2984 Lakeshore Ave. be approved, based on the following
review standards (found in Section 2502 of the Zoning Ordinance): 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
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
14
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.
Based on the following conditions: 1) The garage doors may front Lakeshore Drive. 2) The
garage must be sided and may not be sheet metal. 3) An improved driveway (paved) must be
provided to the garage from Lakeshore Dr. 4) The new garage may not be used for
commercial purposes. 5) Both of the old garages must be removed before the building
permit is issued for the new garage, was made by J. Clingman-Scott, supported by R.
Schweifler and was approved with R. Schweifler voting nay.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
15
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 allow a 30 foot wide by 50 foot long garage and a 12 foot by 22
foot shed in front of the building line as indicated on the included site plan at 2984 Lakeshore
Drive, 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. The variance is recorded with the deed to keep record of it in the future.
2. That the additions to the property must be complete within one year (Sec. 2504) or the
variance is void.
3. The existing garage shall be converted to a shed without the lean-to on the north side and
have received all necessary permits and final Inspection Department approvals for a
completed structure, prior to issuance of a permit to construct the new 30-foot by 50 foot
garage.
4. There shall be no commercial activity conducted in any accessory structure on the
property except as may be allowed under the home occupation regulations for the R-1
Single Family Residential zone.
City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals – 2/14/06
16
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails