View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: February 13, 2007
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 December 12, 2006
III. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hearing Case 2007-001: Request for a variance from Section 2331:Landscaping,
Fencing, Walls, Screens and Lighting, to allow installation of wall mounted
emergency fluorescent lighting, where the light would not be contained to the
development site and the light would be directly visible from beyond the boundary of
the site. This request is for the property known as McAuley Place and located at
1380 E. Sherman Blvd., by David Nord of Rhoades Engineering Co. LLC on behalf
of McAuley Place.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
A. Tabled Case 2006-020 Request for a variance from Section 2331
Landscaping,Fenc ing,Walls, Screens and Lighting, to allow building accent lighting
that shines onto the building above the horizontal plane at 601 Terrace St., by
Christopher Kelley of the Parmenter O'Toole law firm.
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:
Linda Potter, Acting City Clerk
933 Terrace Street
Muskegon, MI 49440
(231) 724-6705
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning_Board_of_Appeals\ZBA2007\2007 Agendas\zba 2-13.doc
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REVIEW
February 13, 2007
Hearing Case 2007-001: Request for a variance from Section 2331:Landscaping, Fencing,
Walls, Screens and Lighting, to allow installation of wall mounted emergency fluorescent
lighting, where the light would not be contained to the development site and the light would be
directly visible from beyond the boundary of the site.
BACKGROUND:
Applicant: David M. Nord of Rhoades Engineering Co. LLC.
Property Owner: Trinity Continuing Care Services, D.B.A McAuley Place
Property Address(location): 1380 E. Sherman.
Zoning: MC, Medical Care
Current Land Use: Nursing Home Facility
Request: A variance request from Section 2331 parts 20(a), 20(c) and 20(e).
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1. Zoning of adjacent parcels in our jurisdiction are all MC, Medical Care.
2. The variance request by the applicant is being made because the proposed lighting will be in
violation of the lighting section of the Zoning Ordinance particularly Section 2331 items
20(a) 20(c) and 20(e). Item 20(a) requires lighting to be confined to the site. Item 20(c)
requires that the light sources or light lenses are not directly visible from beyond the
boundary of the site. Item 20(e) requires that light sources must be either high-pressure
sodium or halogen. Staff agrees with these assessments but believes that the request should
include item 20(d) because the fixtures would not be down-type having 100% cut off, the
suggested motion will reflect this additional item.
3. This request is a result of an inspection and subsequent finding of deficiency by the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Upon inspection HHS found that the
facility did not meet the updated requirements of the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) 101 Life Safety Code.
4. The applicant states they are required to provide emergency illumination on the building
exterior to 50 feet from the entrance. During staff’s research of the code it does not appear to
require the lighting to be building mounted.
5. While making the site inspection, it appears lighting could be provided by means of down
type fixtures mounted on poles and using 100% down type lighting with cut-off techniques.
This type of lighting would meet both our ordinance requirements and the needs of the
facility.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
6. A site plan has not been provided by the applicant to indicate placement or numbers of
fixtures to be used but the applicant states in an e-mail to staff: “We intend to place the new
lighting fixtures at the roof edge near each entrance and "shine" them outward from the
building as required to meet the 50'-0" requirement. The fixtures (please refer to the
previously-attached fixture cuts) will be equipped with top and/or full shield hoods to
prohibit stray light above the horizon, since it is not purposeful for the application there is no
need to waste lighting in those areas.”
7. The application denotes that the specification sheet is “typical”. Staff does not know if the
lights to be used will be as specified on the included specification sheet. The conditions of
approval if adopted should require the use of this fixture or a comparable alternative.
8. Staff has visited the site and the included pictures show the points of ingress/egress to the
facility. The area directly north of the facility is wooded and not currently developed, the
area to the east is facing the drive or main entrance to the Mercy Hospital Campus. The
property directly west is the new Shoreline Ophthalmology building.
9. The applicant has indicated that the lights in question will be used only in an emergency
lighting situation and will be on with generator power during a power outage to the facility,
but not during normal operations.
10. The applicant has indicated that the proposed lighting will be shielded. If the correct shields
are used and the fixture is mounted properly there should be no light above the horizontal
plane of the fixture.
11. Staff has not received any comments on this case.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Application Page 2:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Applicant E-mail:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Fixture Specifications:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Inspection Report Excerpt:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Notice Map:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Photos of Property:
East Front Entrance
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
West Front Entrance
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
West entrance near Sherman Blvd.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
East side of building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
West side of building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
North side of building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
North Side of building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Ordinance Excerpt:
SECTION 2331: LANDSCAPING, FENCING, WALLS, SCREENS AND LIGHTING
[amended 4/00]
20. Outdoor lighting in all districts: [amended 1/05] Outdoor lighting in newly developed
commercial and industrial uses, subdivisions, condominium projects and planned unit
developments, or replacement lighting for such developments and institutional uses, shall
be designed and constructed in such a manner to insure that:
a. Direct or directly reflected light is confined to the development site.
b. All light sources and light lenses are shielded.
c. No light sources or light lenses are directly visible from beyond the boundary of
the site.
d. Lighting fixtures shall be a down-type having one hundred percent (100%) cut
off. The light rays may not be emitted by the installed fixture at angles above the
horizontal plane, as certified by the manufacturer's photometric test.
e. Light sources shall be high-pressure sodium or halogen. Approved exceptions
shall use warm white or natural lamp colors.
f. Lighting shall be equipped with baffling or other devices to assure that the above
requirements are achieved.
g. The applicant shall submit the specifications for the lights, poles, fixtures and
light sources to the City for approval prior to installation.
h. The height of light poles shall not exceed twenty-five (25) feet as measured from
average grade.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
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 installation of wall mounted emergency fluorescent lighting,
not in full compliance with Section 2331, 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.
3. Fixtures are located only at current ingress and egress locations of the building.
4. An acceptable site plan indicating number of fixtures and locations, along with a fixture
specification sheet, are provided for zoning staff approvals, prior to application for permits.
Fixtures to be used must have the same specifications as submitted with the application.
5. Lights are operational only for short term testing or during power outages.
6. Lights are shielded and mounted in such a fashion as to prevent light rays at angles above the
horizontal plane of the fixture.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Tabled Case 2006-020 Request for a variance from Section 2331(20) Landscaping, Fencing,
Walls, Screens and Lighting to allow lighting that is not down-type having 100% cut off and
emits light above the horizontal plane of the fixture.
BACKGROUND:
Applicant: Christopher Kelley, Parmenter O'Toole Law Firm
Property Owner: Christopher Kelley, member of Newacre LLC
Property Address(location): 601 Terrace Street
Zoning: B-3, Central Business and a Planned Unit Development
Current Land Use: Law Firm
Request: A variance request to allow Parmenter O'Toole to illuminate its building through the
use of in-ground lighting.
STAFF OBSERVATIONS
1. The subject property is located in a Planned Unit Development with an underlying zoning of
B-3, Central Business. The adjoining property to the northwest is a residential development
currently under construction, Muskegon Lake is to the North and vacant property to the south
2. This request is the result of enforcement action taken when the lights were discovered on site
by the electrical inspector and it was brought to the attention of zoning staff that they were
not compliant with our ordinance.
3. The lighting in question was not a part of the approved site plan for the development, or even
shown on the original site plan, the lights were installed without proper approvals from the
Zoning Administrator as required in the Zoning Ordinance. In July 2004 during the initial
site plan review, staff made the following remarks, "Please label lighting fixtures. They need
to be a down type having 100% cutoff". While this site plan was submitted before the
ordinance language changed, the building wash lighting was not part of the plans. When the
final site plans were submitted for review in March of 2005 the fixtures in question were not
part of the final site plan review either.
4. When the final site plan was submitted for review in March 2005 the parking lot lighting was
labeled and fixtures were shown as 100% cut off fixtures as had been requested by staff but
the accent lighting was still not shown on the site plan. Because the site plan did not show
any wall wash style lighting, staff could not further advise the applicants of the requirements
regarding down type 100% cut-off lighting. The following statement was included with the
site plan approval, "If any changes are made to the site plan at any time after this approval
letter has been received, you must submit a new site plan, showing changes, to the Planning
Dept., for re-approval". This is used to advise all applicants of the need to resubmit changes
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
for approvals.
5. Staff feels that the proposed lighting will cause direct light spill into the sky. Only a portion
of the lights in place can actually be aimed in a fashion that will not directly contaminate the
night sky above but these style fixtures still shine above the horizontal plane (illustration 3)
and could still pollute the night sky to some degree. The remainder of the lights while
minimally baffled (illustration 1), are shining directly vertical into the sky.
6. Staff feels the intent of this ordinance language is very clear and had revised the language to
make it as clear as possible and be certain that everyone could reasonably know that the
language applied to all outside lighting before submitting it to the Planning Commission and
City Commission. Both bodies in charge of drafting and approving the zoning ordinance
have had that opportunity to review the ordinance language regarding outdoor lighting and
have determined that outdoor lighting of any kind is not to be allowed above the horizontal
plane and that fixtures should be down type with 100% cutoff.
7. Staff has the following comments regarding page two of the application.
Question 1 : Staff does not agree that the proposed lighting will not spill light into the sky
and in fact feels some of the fixtures will direct a significant portion of their light directly
into the sky.
Question 2: We agree that there are many examples of light pollution in the city but there
have been no cases that staff is aware of since our ordinance update, where lights are not the
type required by ordinance. It should be noted however that the lights along Western that are
mentioned by the applicant do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Zoning Ordinance.
Nevertheless, the city has taken measures to ensure that they are night sky friendly lighting
and in fact no direct light is allowed to shine upward from the fixture itself. Staff looked at
the fixtures in the early morning and found that they do not emit any light above the
horizontal plane of the fixture and because of the refractors installed in the lights they are a
down type fixture. They would not be considered a 100% cutoff fixture because the light
does go out on a horizontal pattern, which is the intent of the lighting but their scope is
limited due to special shielding in the fixtures. I have attached the bid specifications for the
Western Ave. lighting showing the night sky requirements.
Question 3: Staff is concerned with the impact that building wash style lighting will have
on the quality of life for residents of the new residential condominium directly adjacent to the
parking lot of the applicants. Additionally, while the applicant is a staff member of the city
attorneys' law firm, staff does not necessarily agree with their interpretations of our
ordinance.
8. The remaining comments are all somewhat repetitive regarding the intent of our ordinance
and various comments regarding the fixtures themselves that staff has commented on
previously.
9. Staff is of the opinion that the building could still be easily washed with 100% downward
light with the use of wall pack style lighting. This style lighting can be easily mounted to the
walls near the top of the structure, where the fixtures are easily accessible to wire in a
finished building and staff feels they would look aesthetically pleasing. I have included a
pamphlet with examples of that type of lighting. Staff would also agree that the top of the
building could be considered the horizontal plane, if the light fixture had been a wall pack
design mounted at the top of the wall. Staff has included an example specification packet on
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
the type of lighting that is acceptable for building wall wash applications.
10. Staff has not received any comments on this case.
Notice Map:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Zoning Adminstrators written opinion
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Western Ave, Bid Specifications Excerpt:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Photos of Property:
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Verticaly aimed lights.
Illustration 1
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Verticaly aimed lights.
Illustration 2
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Angled style lights.
Illustration 3
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Angled style lights.
Illustration 4
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
City Lighting on Western Ave.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
National City Building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
GVSU Building
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Western Avenue lighting.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Ordinance Excerpts: (emphasis added)
SECTION 2331: LANDSCAPING, FENCING, WALLS, SCREENS AND LIGHTING
[amended 4/00]
The intent of this section is to promote the public's health, safety, and general welfare by:
minimizing noise, air, and visual pollution; improving the appearance of off-street parking and
parking lots reducing heat, noise, and the glare of automobile and site lights; requiring buffering
between incompatible land uses: regulating the screening of property abutting public rights-of-way;
providing wind breaks, protecting and preserving the appearance, character, and value of the
business community and residential neighborhood areas; preventing soil erosion and soil depletion;
and promoting soil and water retention.
1. Scope: These requirements shall apply to all uses for which site plan review is required and
any other use so specified in this Ordinance. No site plan shall be approved unless said site
plan shows landscaping, berms, greenbelts, buffer zones, and screening consistent with the
requirements set forth herein.
20. Outdoor lighting in all districts: [amended 1/05] Outdoor lighting in newly developed
commercial and industrial uses, subdivisions, condominium projects and planned unit
developments, or replacement lighting for such developments and institutional uses, shall be
designed and constructed in such a manner to insure that:
a. Direct or directly reflected light is confined to the development site.
b. All light sources and light lenses are shielded.
c. No light sources or light lenses are directly visible from beyond the boundary of
the site.
d. Lighting fixtures shall be a down-type having one hundred percent (100%)
cut off. The light rays may not be emitted by the installed fixture at angles
above the horizontal plane, as certified by the manufacturer's photometric
test.
e. Light sources shall be high-pressure sodium or halogen. Approved exceptions
shall use warm white or natural lamp colors.
f. Lighting shall be equipped with baffling or other devices to assure that the above
requirements are achieved.
g. The applicant shall submit the specifications for the lights, poles, fixtures and
light sources to the City for approval prior to installation.
h. The height of light poles shall not exceed twenty-five (25) feet as measured from
average grade.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
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 light fixtures that emit light above the horizontal plan and are
not down type 100% cut-off fixtures, 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. Site plan approvals are received.
O:\Planning\COMMON\Zoning\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Meeting Documents\ZBA 2007\2007 ZBA staff reports\ZBA 02 13 07\ZBA 02
13 07 staff report.doc
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails