View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: February 14, 2017
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 February 9, 2016.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Hearing; Case 2017-01: Request for a variance from Sections 404 and 2326 of the zoning
ordinance to allow for construction of a new house that will not meet with minimum lot
width; the front, side and rear setbacks; and the parking requirements, at 3560 Woodlawn
Ct.
IV. New Business
V. Old Business
VI. 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 that a representative dial 231-724-6705
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
February 9, 2016
Chairman R. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Hilt, B. Larson, E. Carter, E. Fordham
MEMBERS ABSENT: S. Warmington, T. Halterman, W. German
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: J. Lewis, J. Lewis, 1686 Beach St.
ELECTIONS
A motion to retain R. Hilt as Chairman and E. Fordham as Vice Chairman was made by B.
Larson, supported by E. Carter and unanimously approved.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion that the minutes of the regular meeting of December 8, 2015 be approved was made by
B. Larson, supported by E. Carter and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARING
Hearing; Case 2016-02: Request for a variance from Section 404 of the zoning ordinance to
allow a property to have 17% of the lot covered in pavement in a R-1, Single Family Residential
district at 1686 Beach St, by Jeff and Julie Lewis. M. Franzak presented the staff report. This
parcel measures 5,410 square feet, which makes it an unbuildable lot by today’s standards.
However, it is considered a legal lot of record because it was a legal lot at the time it was platted,
and no changes to the size of the lot have been made since then. The applicants will be putting
an addition on the home, which will include a garage in the front of the home. Currently, there is
no garage and the only parking pad is located behind the house. This parking pad will be
removed during the addition. They would like to put a new driveway in front of the house that
will lead to the garage. The ordinance allows residential properties to have a maximum
pavement coverage of 10% of the property, which would allow this property to have 541 square
feet of pavement. This property is unique because there is an adjacent easement which serves as
the ingress/egress to five other properties in this block. A portion of this paved alley/easement
is located on the property at 1686 Beach St. and cannot be removed. The amount of pavement
for this alley that is located on 1686 Beach St. totals 440 square feet, leaving only 101 square
feet of additional pavement that can be added to the property. In order to have a driveway that
will reach their garage, they need an additional 440 square feet of pavement on the lot, which
will bring their total pavement allotment up to 17% of the property. In addition, one reason for
allowing only 10% for pavement coverage is due to drainage. That is not a concern on this
property, since it is all beach sand.
E. Fordham asked if there was a height restriction in that area. M. Franzak stated that there was,
and that would be addressed when a site plan is submitted. J. Lewis stated that the house behind
them on Nelson St. was at a higher elevation than the houses on Beach St.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Larson, supported by E. Carter and
unanimously approved.
Board members discussed the review standards. The following findings of fact were offered: 1)
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, specifically the easement on the property; 2) 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; 3)
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, 4) 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, 5) 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 6) That the requested variance is the minimum action required
to eliminate the difficulty.
A motion that the variance request to allow 17% of the property at 1686 Beach Street to be
covered in pavement be approved, was made by B. Larson, supported by E. Carter and
unanimously approved, with R. Hilt, B. Larson, E. Carter, and E. Fordham voting aye.
OLD BUSINESS
None
OTHER
None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.
CITY OF MUSKEGON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
STAFF REPORT
February 14, 2017
A. Hearing; Case 2017-01: Request for a variance from Sections 404 and 2326 of the zoning
ordinance to allow for construction of a new house that will not meet with minimum lot size
and width, the rear setback, and the parking requirements, at 3560 Woodlawn Ct.
BACKGROUND
1. The house at 3560 Woodlawn Ct is for sale. The potential new owner has applied for
several variances so that he may demo the home and rebuild it in the same footprint.
2. The parcel does not abut an active street, however, Nelson St is platted as a right-of-way to
the east of the property, so that is considered the front of the property.
3. The variances necessary to rebuild the home in its current location are as follows:
a. Lot size. The lot must be at least 6,000 sf. It is only about 5,663 sf.
b. Lot width. There must be at least 50 ft of road frontage. There currently is not
any road frontage and the lot is only 22ft wide on the side nearest to Nelson St.
c. Rear setback. It is currently only 6ft, but 30 ft is required.
d. Parking. Homes are required to have at least two parking spaces. This parcel
cannot provide any parking spaces. The current home owner is allowed to park in
the adjacent parcel at 1767 Nelson St.
4. Please see the answers by the applicant to the variance questions that are enclosed.
5. Please see the enclosed site plan of the property.
3560 Woodlwan Ct, looking north from Woodlawn Ct.
Looking northwest from the porch at 3560 Woodlwan Ct
Aerial Map
DETERMINATION:
The following motion is offered for consideration:
I move that the variance requests for:
1. A reduced minimum lot size of 5,663 sf.
2. A reduced lot width of 22 ft.
3. A rear setback of 6 ft.
4. And no provided parking on site.
at 3560 Woodlawn Ct be (approved/denied), based on the following review standards listed
below (found in Section 2502 of the Zoning Ordinance) and subject to conditions (if any):
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.
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails