View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Tuesday, February 13, 2024
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: City Hall Commission Chambers, First Floor, Muskegon City Hall
AGENDA
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 14, 2023.
III. Public Hearings
A. Hearing; Case 2024-01: Request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance
to allow a garage to be increased in height over the 14 feet maximum height limit at 1294
Lakeshore Dr.
B. Hearing, Case 2024-02: Request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance
to allow a new house to be constructed within the required 30-foot rear setback at 3534
Wilcox Ave.
IV. New Business
V. Old Business
VI. Other
VII. Adjourn
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETINGS
OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGON AND ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES
To give comment on a live-streamed meeting the city will provide a call-in telephone number to the public to be able to call and give comment. For a public meeting that is not live-streamed, and
which a citizen would like to watch and give comment, they must contact the City Clerk’s Office with at least a two-business day notice. The participant will then receive a zoom link which will
allow them to watch live and give comment. Contact information is below. For more details, please visit: www.shorelinecity.com
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 with twenty-four (24) hours’ notice to the City of Muskegon. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services
should contact the City of Muskegon by writing or by calling the following:
Ann Marie Meisch, MMC
City Clerk
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49440
231-724-6705
[email protected]
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REPORT
Tuesday, February 13, 2024
Hearing; Case 2024-01: Request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance to
allow a garage to be increased in height over the 14 feet maximum height limit at 1294
Lakeshore Dr.
SUMMARY
1. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density, Single Family Residential.
2. An existing detached garage is located on the west side of the property. The garage was 14’
tall, which is the maximum height allowed for detached garages.
3. The garage was increased in height without the proper permits. The current height of the
structure is about 17’2”. The height of a garage is measured from the ground to the midway
point of the peak.
4. The height was raised to make room for more storage. The property owner does not intend
to turn the space into an accessory dwelling unit and would not be allowed to under the
current zoning designation.
5. All properties within 300 feet of the applicant were notified. At the time of this writing,
staff had received two letters of support from the applicants neighbors, including the next
door neighbor to the west.
Before and After Height Increase
Zoning Map
Aerial Map
Site Plan
Answers Provided to Variance Questionnaire
Please see attachment
REVIEW STANDARDS
Questions to consider when reviewing a variance request:
a. Are 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. Is the dimensional variance 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. Will the authorizing of such dimensional variance be of substantial detriment to adjacent
properties?
d. Is the alleged difficulty caused by the ordinance and not by any person presently having
an interest in the property, or by any previous owner?
e. Is the alleged difficulty founded solely upon the opportunity to make the property more
profitable or to reduce expense to the owner?
f. Is the requested variance the minimum action required to eliminate the difficulty?
DELIBERATION:
The following motion is offered for consideration:
I move that the request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance to allow a garage
to be increased in height up to 17’2” at 1294 Lakeshore Dr. be (approved/denied) based on the
review standards in Section 2502 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Hearing, Case 2024-02: Request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance to
allow a new house to be constructed within the required 30-foot rear setback at 3534 Wilcox
Ave.
SUMMARY
1. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density, Single Family Residential.
2. A new house is proposed on the parcel. The house would be located at the top of the dune.
The slope of the dune is preventing the house from being located at least 30 feet from the
rear property line. The applicant is proposing to have a 10-foot rear setback because of the
property hardship.
3. Easement will be created to allow for a new driveway that will be located on several
adjacent properties (all under the same ownership as of now).
4. Notice was sent to everyone within 300 feet of the property. At the time of this writing,
staff had not received any comments from the public.
View of the Steep Hill at 3534 Wilcox Ave
(Wooded lot to the right of the house on the corner)
1294 Lakeshore Dr
Zoning Map
Site Plan
Answers Provided to Variance Questionnaire
REVIEW STANDARDS
Questions to consider when reviewing a variance request:
g. Are 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?
h. Is the dimensional variance necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in
the vicinity?
i. Will the authorizing of such dimensional variance be of substantial detriment to adjacent
properties?
j. Is the alleged difficulty caused by the ordinance and not by any person presently having
an interest in the property, or by any previous owner?
k. Is the alleged difficulty founded solely upon the opportunity to make the property more
profitable or to reduce expense to the owner?
l. Is the requested variance the minimum action required to eliminate the difficulty?
DELIBERATION:
The following motion is offered for consideration:
I move that the request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance to allow a new
house to be constructed with a 10-foot rear yard setback at 3534 Wilcox Ave. be
(approved/denied) based on the review standards in Section 2502 of the Zoning Ordinance.
February 1, 2024
To Whom it may concern,
I am wri�ng a leter of support for my neighbor Michael Thomas who resides at 1294 Lakeshore Drive,
Muskegon, MI 49441.
She will be atending a public hearing, hosted by the City of Muskegon Zoning Board of Appeals,
regarding her request for variance approvals for her garage dormer construc�on and the height of the
construc�on. I am a neighbor of hers within 300 feet of the project.
Michael Thomas moved back home into our neighborhood about 4 years ago a�er her mother passed
away in an accident to help her family through the turbulent �mes. She purchased 1294, which is a very
old home on Lakeshore Drive, in need of extensive repairs and renova�ons. I don’t think she had any
idea the extent of the job she signed up for in buying the home and s�ll she’s tried to find reliable
contractors to support her restora�on efforts and has kept her head down trying to keep posi�ve
momentum in renova�ng her old home.
We have all watched her work through these extensive projects including re-grading her yard and
installing irriga�on to keep her lawn nice, which as you can imagine has helped the aesthe�c of our
neighborhood and community. She also made updates to her plumbing, as her ceiling and walls were
ro�ng from leaking plumbing – requiring electrical and flooring updates as well.
She has also done asbestos abatement on her garage and home roofs, has installed a new roof, new
guters and she also had new windows installed, as many of them were broken and roten – much of this
was not disclosed by the former seller, including water she gets in her basement (which I believe she’s
trying to remediate now).
I do understand the height of her proposed garage roof/dormer exceeds the 14 feet height limit;
however, it does not stand taller than other homes or garages in the area, including the neighbor directly
across the street from her who built a new garage a few years ago. The garage sits off the road and is
behind a few trees and the improvements add aesthe�c value to our road. There are trees behind her
garage, so the garage does not block any view. Addi�onally, the dormer is only a few feet higher than the
original garage structure – maybe 2 to 3 feet.
I know Michael has been a great neighbor, willing to jump in and help others in the area. I know she’s
trying to do the right thing and is learning some things along the way. I do hope the board will vote in
favor of gra�ng her the variances she’s reques�ng for this project.
Thank you,
Eric Stang