View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: June 12, 2012
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: Commission Chambers, First Floor, Muskegon City Hall
AGENDA
M
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 10, 2012
RU
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 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
O
Fox.
IV. Old Business
U
V. Adjourn
Q
O
N
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
April 10, 2012
Chairman R. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Hilt, S. Brock, B. Larson, J. Clingman-Scott
MEMBERS ABSENT: E. Fordham, excused; T. Halterman, W. German
M
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: J. Brown, JKB Construction
RU
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion that the minutes of the regular meeting of February 14, 2012 be approved was made by
B. Larson, supported by S. Brock and unanimously approved.
O
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Hearing; Case 2012-003: Request for a variance from “Section 1103: Area and Bulk
Requirements,” to allow a building to be built closer to the front and side property lines than
U
allowed at 2020 Lakeshore Dr, by GNS Subway, Inc. M. Franzak presented the staff report.
This vacant building is located in a B-4, General Business zoning district and was previously
used as a restaurant. The owner plans to demolish the current building and construct a new one.
Q
B-4 districts call for buildings to be set back at least 10 feet from the front property line, 10 feet
from the rear property line, and side setbacks of at least 8/20 feet. The proposed plans do not
meet the front and side setback requirements: The proposed front setback is 3 feet, and the side
setbacks are 15 feet on the west and 3 feet on the east. The owner is seeking a variance from the
front and side setback requirements. The current building does not have a front setback, as it is
O
built directly on the front property line. This is not uncommon for commercial buildings on this
stretch of Lakeshore Drive, comprising the Lakeside business district. Several building sit on the
front property line, with other businesses directly adjacent to them. The current building is
N
considered legally non-conforming, but may not be rebuilt there without a variance. The owner
has an easement in place with the parking lot to the east of the property for ingress to the drive-
thru.
J. Brown stated that this would be a dual-suite building. Subway would be in one side, with a
tenant in the other side yet to be determined. They needed the variance so that they would have
room for the drive-thru. B. Larson asked who owned the parking lot adjacent to the building. J.
Brown stated that G. Bailey did. M. Franzak stated that he had a copy of the easement
agreement.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Larson, supported by R. Hilt and
unanimously approved.
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
M
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.
RU
A motion that the findings of fact as determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals be adopted and
that the variance request to allow reduced front and side setbacks at 2020 Lakeshore Drive be
approved, with the conditions that 1) 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 B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
O
OLD BUSINESS
U
None
Q
OTHER
None
O
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:12 p.m.
N
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REVIEW
June 12, 2012
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
BACKGROUND:
Applicant: Cheryl Fox
RU
Property Address (location): 2283 Resort Ave
Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Current Land Use: Residential
O
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1. The owner plans on demolishing the current carport, which is attached to the home, and build
U
an attached garage and a front porch.
2. The house is considered a non-conforming structure because the house is only 26.5 feet from
the rear lot line. The site plan indicates that the house is 28.5 feet, but staff measured it to
Q
make sure that it wasn’t 30 feet (in an effort to alleviate this problem).
3. A non-conforming structure may be expanded up to 30% with a special land use permit from
the Planning Commission.
4. The applicant would like to expand the current structure by 35%, so a variance is needed.
O
5. The current structure totals 1528 sqft and the proposed addition is 540 sqft, making it a total
of 2068 sqft.
N
6. If this variance is approved, the applicant will be going to the Planning Commission meeting
on June 14, 2012 for the Special Land Use Permit to expand the structure MORE than 30%.
Existing Site Plan
M
RU
O
U
Proposed Site Plan
Q
O
N
Zoning Map
M
RU
O
Ordinance Excerpt:
U
SECTION 404: AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS [amended 4/00]
Q
1. Minimum lot size: 6,000 sq. feet
2. Density (see definition in Article II): 7 dwelling units per buildable acre.
O
3. Maximum lot coverage:
Buildings: 50%
Pavement: 10%
N
4. Lot width: 50 feet (shall be measured at road frontage unless a cul-de-sac, then measured
from setback).
5. Width to depth ratios: The depth of any lot(s) or parcel(s) shall not be more than three
(3) times longer its width.
6. Height limit: 2 stories or 35 feet. Exception: Homes located in an established Historic
District may be up to 3 stories or 45 feet, if found to be compatible with other homes
within 600 feet. [amended 9/08]
Height measurement: In the case of a principal building, the vertical distance measured
from the average finished grade to the highest point of the roof surface where the
building line abuts the front yard, except as follows: to the deck line of mansard roofs,
and the average height between eaves and the ridge of gable, hip, and gambrel roofs (see
Figure 2-2). If the ground is not entirely level, the grade shall be determined by
averaging the elevation of the ground for each face of the building (see Figure 2-3).
7. Front Setbacks: [amended 1/05]
Minimum:
Expressway or Arterial Street: 30 feet
Collector or Major Street: 25 feet
Minor Street: 15 feet
M
Note: For minimum front setbacks new principal structures on minor streets may align
with existing principal structures in the immediate area even if the front setback is below
the minimum required.
RU
8. Rear setback: 30 feet
9. Setback from the ordinary high water mark or wetland: 30 feet (principal structures
only).
O
10. Side setbacks:
1-story: 6 feet and 10 feet
2-story: 8 feet and 12 feet
U
Note, setback measurement: All required setbacks shall be measured from the right-of-
way line to the nearest point of the determined drip line of buildings. [amended 10/02]
Q
11. Zero lot line option: New principal buildings may be erected on the rear lot line and/or
one side lot line provided: [amended 10/02]
a. The building has an approved fire rating for zero-lot line development under the
O
building code.
b. The building has adequate fire access preserved pursuant to fire code
N
requirements.
c. The zero lot line side is not adjacent to a street.
d. A maintenance access easement is granted by the adjacent property owner and
recorded with the County Register of Deeds and provided to the zoning
administrator with the site plan or plot plan.
e. It is not adjacent to wetlands, or waterfront.
N
O
Q
U
O
RU
M
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 for an expansion of a non-conforming structure more that 30% with
a Special Land Use Permit from the Planning Commission at 2283 Resort 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.
M
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.
RU
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
O
property more profitable or to reduce expense to the owner.
f. That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the difficulty.
U
CONDITIONS
1. That the additions to the property must be complete within one year (Sec. 2504) or the
Q
variance is void.
2. The variance is recorded with the deed to keep record of it in the future.
O
N