WATERTOWN CHARTER TOWNSHIP
12803 S. Wacousta Road, Grand Ledge, MI 48837
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING
I. Call to Order - Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll Call Richard Turcotte - present
Janice Thelen - present
Thomas Hineline - present
George Schriver – arrived at 7:05 p.m.
Also present was Andrea Polverento, Planning Director
II. Communications Received - None
III. Agenda Approval
MOTION by HINELINE and seconded by TURCOTTE to approve the agenda as presented.
MOTION passed unanimously.
IV. Public Comment - Non Agenda Items - None
MOTION by HINELINE and seconded by THELEN to approve the minutes as presented.
VI. Advertised Public Hearings
A. Case #07-04 ZBA, Request for variance, Kevin and Denice Jasman, 14553 Lowell Road.
Public Hearing opened at 7:07 p.m.
Turcotte reviewed the Public Hearing process.
Polverento presented the request. The applicant wishes to complete a land division on their property, and create a new parcel behind (east) of their existing home. In doing this, they will require a driveway easement across their existing parcel to reach the newly created one. When combined with the 66 foot driveway easement, the 30 foot side yard setback would impose on their existing home. They are seeking an 8.1 foot variance from the side yard setback requirements.
The subject property is approximately 14.5 acres in size and is currently the location of an existing house and garage owned by the applicant. The applicant has already relocated his garage to the other side of the home to accommodate for this future land split and driveway easement. The subject parcel is located within a strip of properties zoned AG, Agricultural, on Lowell Road between 1-69 to the south and east, and Clark Road to the north.
The proposed driveway easement would be along the north side of this property, and is bordered by a vacant Consumers Energy property. The applicant has an existing residence on the property in which he currently resides. The applicant is taking this first step to receive a variance in order to create a parcel for his son. All other setbacks on the property are currently in compliance and would be maintained.
Kevin Jasman gave a brief history on his property and why he is asking for a variance. Discussion took place regarding how many splits Jasman can have on his property.
Thelen asked if there was adequate land available to build a new home should they receive the variance tonight. Polverento explained that there shouldn’t be a problem with land but that will be dependent on the home itself and the site plan. There is no proposed home at this time although there is sufficient room to build a house. Jasman told Thelen that Fred White made the front lot bigger to make sure it was a buildable lot.
Polverento stated that notices regarding the variance were sent out to the neighboring properties located within 300 feet of the subject parcel. No communications were received from those notices.
Public Hearing Closed at 7:29 p.m.
VII. New Business
A. Case #07-04 ZBA, Request for variance, Kevin and Denice Jasman, 14553 Lowell Road.
A non-use or dimensional variance may be allowed by the Board of Appeals only where there is reasonable evidence of practical difficulty in the official record of the hearing and that ALL of the following conditions are met:
24.8 (A) Granting the variance will not be contrary to the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of this ordinance is observed.
Comments: The requested variance will not be contrary to the public interest.
24.8 (B) Granting this variance will not cause a substantial adverse effect to property or improvements in the vicinity or in the district in which the subject property is located.
Comments: The requested variance will not cause an adverse effect to property or improvements in the vicinity or in the AG, Agricultural Zoning District.
24.8 (C) The variance request is not one where the specific conditions pertaining to the property are so general or recurrent in nature as to make the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions reasonably practicable.
Comments: The variance request is not so recurrent in nature as to require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. The request is specific to the site conditions and location of the house.
24.8 (D) That there are practical difficulties in the way of carrying out the strict letter of these regulations which are caused by exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, that do not generally apply to other property or uses in the vicinity in the same zoning district. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions may include:
(1) exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific property on the effective date of this Chapter
(2) exceptional topographic conditions
(3) by reason of the use or development of the property immediately adjoining the property in question; or
(4) any other physical situation on the land, building or structure deemed by the Board of Appeals to be extraordinary.
Comments: (1) The requested variance is the result of a lot which is long and narrow.
(3) Properties north of the parcel in question have a similar use, reflecting an existing condition.
(4) Property is adjacent on three sides to publicly owned land
24.8 (E) That granting such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district.
Comments: The requested variance is being pursued to allow for a land split. The lot split will require access, by way of a 66’ private driveway easement, which, when combined with the 30’ side yard setback requirement, imposes on the existing home requiring an 8’1” variance.
24.8 (F) That the variance is not necessitated as a result of any action or inaction of the applicant.
Comments: The requested variance is not the result of intentional action taken by the applicant; the existing house is in compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed driveway easement would infringe on the setback requirement but was not anticipated at the time the home was constructed.
MOTION by THELEN and supported by HINELINE that the variance for Kevin & Denice Jasman, located at 14553 Lowell Road, Case # 07-04 ZBA, a request for an 8 foot, 1 inch Variance from the side yard setback requirement for a parcel in the AG, Agricultural District, be approved, based on the findings of fact in accordance with the Section 24.8 above and pursuant to the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (Public Act 110 of 2006), and Sections 3.2 (C) and 6.4 of the Watertown Charter Township Zoning Ordinance.
Conditions of Approval:
1. The applicant shall meet all other requirements for a land division from the Township Assessor’s Office or seek dimensional variance from those requirements where necessary.
2. The applicant shall record the proposed driveway easement with the Office of the County Clerk.
3. The applicant shall remove existing attached garage indicated on preliminary site plan by Fred White Engineering Company, Survey # 052935-1, sheet 2 of 3.
Passed unanimously
With support from THELEN and HINELINE the motion was amended to delete section 125.293 of the Township Rural Zoning Act of 1943 and in its place add Michigan Zoning Enabling Act 110 of 2006
B. Discuss time and date for July meeting.
Polverento explained that Officers need to be elected at the meeting held in July according to the By-laws. The Planning Commission changed the date of their meeting due to the July 4th holiday. The date of the Planning Commission meeting has been published as July 11th. Polverento suggested the Zoning Board of Appeals could meet at 6:30 p.m. on July 11th prior to the Planning Commission meeting to handle the election of officers.
MOTION by THELEN and seconded by HINELINE to waive By-law 2.1 of the Watertown Charter Township Zoning Board of Appeals By-laws for the month of July 2007 to allow the Zoning Board of Appeals to meet at 6:30 p.m.
Passed unanimously
VIII. Committee Reports
A. Planning Director Staff Report – May 2007
B. Planning Assistant’s Report – May 2007
IX. Comments and Questions from Audience, Staff and Commissioners –None
X. Adjournment
MOTION by HINELINE and seconded by SHRIVER to adjourn the meeting.
Passed unanimously
Meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m.
Date approved:
_____________________________ _____________________________
Richard Turcotte, Chair Janice Thelen, Secretary