Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES July 11, 2017 4:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mr. James Moreno, Vice-Chairperson called meeting to order at 4:04 P.M. ATTENDANCE: Members Present: Deland Davis James Moreno Bill Hanner Carlyle Sims Mark Jones Members Excused: Becky Squires and John Stetler Staff Present: Marcel Stoetzel, Deputy City Attorney Glenn Perian, Senior Planner, Planning Dept. Eric Feldt, Planner, Planning Dept. Leona Parrish, Admin. Assist., Planning Dept. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA: None CORRESPONDANCE: Email received from Ms. Weideman, 922A Capital Ave., S.W. (adjacent property owner) in support of variance request for #Z-03-17 (920 Capital Ave., S.W.) OLD BUSINESS: None OPENING COMMENTS: Mr. Jim Moreno, Vice-Chairperson stated the meeting procedure where everyone present may speak either for or against an appeal and that, he will ask for a staff report to be read and then open the public hearing. At the public hearing, persons may come forward and state their name and address for the record as it is being recorded and then speak either for or against an appeal. The public hearing will then be closed and the zoning board will discuss and make a decision. If a petition has been denied the petitioner has the right to appeal to Circuit Court. NEW BUSINESS A. Z-03-17 (920 Capital Avenue, S.W.): Petition from Mr. Matthew Bruski, 920 Capital Avenue, S.W., Battle Creek, MI 49015, requesting a use variance to allow a parking area to cover more than 40% of a front-yard for a property zoned “R- 1B Single Family Residential”. The permit application is requested pursuant to Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1278.03. Mr. Glenn Perian, Senior Planner stated he received a call approximately one hour ago from zoning board member, Mr. Mark Jones who brought to his attention something that staff had not considered in the past. Stated in Chapter 1278.03(g) regarding “setbacks” the front yard would be established between the front property line and Capital Avenue S.W. and the first supporting member of the house and that everything in front of the house to the road would be considered front yard. Stated that Mr. Jones brought to his attention a section of the code that makes it confusing at best and if you refer to page 3 of 4 in the staff report regarding Chapter1278.03, paragraph (g), where a “parking use for an accessory building 1 of 4  Zoning Board of Appeals June 13, 2017 Minutes Page 2 of 4 has been established between the street line and the main building line extending to the property line in accordance with this zoning code the required front yard for a new buildings or parking uses shall be determined by such established parking use for accessory building rather than the main building.” Therefore, after some quick discussion in trying to determine exactly what this means; what they believe this section of the code means is that since this particular property has an accessory building that fronts up onto Capital Avenue, that in essence, that area the appellant wishes to pave is actually a side-yard. Mr. Perian stated a way to explain this would be if you imagined the accessory building itself as a house or principle building as opposed to an accessory building and anything in front of the accessory building, or for example this house, on the side would be side-yard and behind would be either side-yard or rear- yard; in this case they believe it is a side-yard and do not believe a variance is required in this particular case. However, because of such short notice in speaking with attorney Mr. Stoetzel they are of the opinion they should proceed and review and ultimately approve it even though a variance is not required, so if another applicant comes along they have justification to say that it went through the process. Stated if the board has questions, it would be prudent to ask questions and for procedural, he would refer to our city attorney. Vice-Chairman Moreno stated he understood the basis of the conversation and it does put them in a quandary and as it was published to the public, it would be prudent to follow their normal procedures and not have any potential concerns from the public of not being given information in a timely manner. Vice-Chairman Moreno asked Mr. Stoetzel, Deputy City Attorney if the board should proceed to approve this variance even though it might not be required, so in the future there were no doubt in allowing it to be paved. Mr. Stoetzel stated yes he was comfortable with what was explained procedurally we should still consider the report and recent explanation as part of the staff report and follow-up with the process as normally as it was properly noticed and a member in the audience who might wish to speak. Mr. Matthew Bruski, 920 Capital Avenue, S.W., stated he moved there just over one-year ago and is proposing some additional parking as it is needed to make it safer entering and exiting his residence. Stated the curb was removed between his garage and neighbor, which made it a little bit safer, but last July 4th, his son was in an accident because of shifting of cars and being difficult to pull out onto Capital Avenue. Said he would like to bring vehicles closer to the house as they have also had thefts and it would also allow him to park the same as his neighbors and have the additional parking space. Mr. Deland Davis asked where he had gotten his photos. Mr. Bruski stated they were from Google Earth. Mr. Carlyle Sims asked regarding the concrete causing possible water run-off when there is a heavy rain and creating a problem with the neighboring properties. Mr. Bruski stated he has the lowest level of land and has a catch drain installed with green-scape to control water run-off. Mr. Mark Jones stated he suggest a channel drain between the driveway and house, because it might not be your neighbor’s house but yours that gets flooded. Mr. Bruski stated he currently has gutters that already drains the water away from his home.  Zoning Board of Appeals June 13, 2017 Minutes Page 3 of 4 Mr. Glenn Perian wanted noted for the record that we received an email from Ms. Karen Weideman, who is the adjacent owner to the south at 922A Capital Avenue, S.W. stating her full support of this variance request. Mr. Mark Jones asked staff clarification regarding his concern in evaluating this front yard parking and what is the reason for ordinances and if it was safety issues, health issue, or for appearance are they setting these regulations to establish an appearance type of thing. Mr. Glenn Perian stated he believed it is an appearance also a safety issue, so you do not have vehicles entering properties and then having access to the entire front-yards of properties. Stated in this case is unique enough that the 40% should be waived, as outlined in the staff report. Mr. Mark Jones stated if everything is paved, there are people essentially walking in the middle of the street where a car can turn at any time and create a safety issue, and would like safe zones for persons to walk. Mr. Jones stated his second question had to deal with (g) was it a front-yard or vs other and what the requirements are. His last question is what the requirements are when it is adjacent to an ally, can they pave the entire width. Mr. Perian said those are considered rear-yards and he is not aware of any area in the code that would prevent paving of a side-yard or rear-yard. Vice-Chair Mr. James Moreno asked if there was any further discussion; seeing none, he would close the Public Hearing and entertain a motion. MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. CARLYLE SIMS TO APPROVE APPEAL #Z-03-17 FOR AN VARIANCE; TO ALLOW A PARKING AREA TO COVER MORE THAN 40% OF A FRONT YARD AS STATED IN THE APPLICATION AND FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR PROPERTY ZONED “R-1B SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL”, LOCATED AT 920 CAPITAL AVENUE, S.W.; SECONDED BY MR. DELAND DAVIS. VICE-CHAIR MR. JAMES MORENO ASKED FOR ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, SEEING NONE A VOTE WAS TAKEN; ALL IN FAVOR BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF REPORT; NONE OPPOSED MOTION APPROVED. Mr. Carlyle Sims stated he would not be in favor of this request if not for the fence in the front-yard hiding the concrete. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION MADE BY MR. BILL HANNER TO APPROVE THE JUNE 13, 2017 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, SECONDED BY MR. DELAND DAVIS. VOTE ON MINUTES APPROVAL: ALL IN FAVOR; NONE OPPOSED; MINUTES APPROVED. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC: None COMMENTS BY THE MEMBERS / STAFF:  Zoning Board of Appeals June 13, 2017 Minutes Page 4 of 4 Mr. Mark Jones stated he was thankful for receiving the 2016 Planning Department Annual Report as it was helpful, used it at their NPC meeting, and appreciated the information it contained. Mr. Carlyle Sims stated he thanked the staff for the information provided and Vice-Chair Moreno for doing a good job chairing the meeting today. Mr. Glenn Perian stated the Annual Report provided in today’s meeting packet list all actions etc. for the Planning Department year 2016, lists the actions the Planning Commission, Zoning Board and Historic District, has taken, in addition to other work the department is involved with throughout the year and is handy to review and reference. Mr. Mark Jones asked if there were any agenda items for the next few month’s meetings. Staff stated each month has a petition deadline date and as of today, we did not have any petitions submitted for next month’s meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Vice-Chair James Moreno made a motion for the meeting to be adjourned; all stated in favor, meeting was adjourned at 4:28 P.M. Submitted by: Leona A. Parrish, Administrative Assistant, Planning Department