Zoning Board of Appeals

1 of 27 AGENDA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING Date: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 Time: 4:00 P.M. Where: City Hall, Room 301 1. Call to Order 2. Attendance 3. Approval of Minutes: October 11, 2022 4. Additions or Deletions to the Agenda 5. Unfinished Business 6. New Business A. Election of Officers B. 2023 Calendar Approval C. Z01-23 ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST: Petition from Signcraft for property located at 5550 Glenn Cross Rd, Battle Creek, MI 49015. Requesting a variance to allow exterior signs that are larger than allowed in MFR- High Density Multiple Family Residential. District. Pursuant to the City of Battle Creek’s Zoning Ordinance Section 1240.10 and Chapter 1263. Parcel #0636-42- 093-0. D. Z02-23 ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST: Petition from Calhoun County Land Bank Authority for property located at 356 E Burnham Street, Battle Creek, MI 49014. Requesting a variance from the 100 foot lot depth requirement in order to proceed with a purposed division. Pursuant to the City of Battle Creek’s Zoning Ordinance Section 1240.21 (7). Parcel #3230-00-018-0. 7. Comments by the Public 8. Comments by Staff and commission Members 9. Adjournment 10 N. DIVISION ST. P.O. BOX 1717 BATTLE CREEK MICHIGAN 49016-1717 PHONE (269) 966-3320 FAX (269) 966-3555 WWW.BATTLECREEKMI.GOV  2 of 27 Page |2 Agenda, cont. 10.28.20 PC 10 N. DIVISION ST. P.O. BOX 1717 BATTLE CREEK MICHIGAN 49016-1717 PHONE (269) 966-3320 FAX (269) 966-3555 WWW.BATTLECREEKMI.GOV  3 of 27 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 10 North Division, Battle Creek, MI 49014 MINUTES FOR MEETING -TUESDAY, OCTBER 11, 2022 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: By Chairperson Moreno at 4:06p.m. This meeting was held in person. ATTENDANCE: Chair Moreno asked for attendance. A roll call was taken: PRESENT: CHAIRPERSON JAMES MORENO BOARD MEMBER MICHAEL DELAWARE BOARD MEMBER BILL HANNER BOARD MEMBER MARK JONES ABSENT: BOARD MEMBER NORRIS LINDSEY EXCUSED: BOARD MEMBER CHRIS ROGERS STAFF PRESENT: TRAVIS SULLIVAN, CITY PLANNER, SUSAN CRONANDER, PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR;; MARCIE GILLETTE, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR; CRYSTAL BAX, CUSTOMER SVC. REP II.; MARCEL STOETZEL, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY CORRESPONDENCE: None PUBLIC HEARINGS/DELIBERATIONS: NEW BUSINESS: A. Z-06-22 ZONING DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE REQUEST: Petition from Angona Construction for property located at 533 W Columbia Ave, Battle Creek, MI 49015 and 110 WaWeeNork Drive, Battle Creek, MI 49015. Requesting a variance to allow for alteration of a dimensionally non-conforming building. Pursuant to the City of Battle Creek’s Zoning Ordinance Section 1270.04 Alteration of Buildings. Parcel#: 6460-11-479-0, and Parcel #: 6460-11-486-0 Staff Presentation: Travis Sullivan, City Planner, gave the staff report: Petition from Angona Construction on behalf of Bajco Real Venture II, LLC located at 533 W Columbia Ave. Requesting to demo a portion of the existing dimensionally nonconforming building, followed by the construction of an addition to the remaining portion of the building following the demolition process. The building on the site currently houses a Papa John’s Pizza location, with the proposed demolition and addition to the building intended to create space for a new commercial tenant. The proposed demolition would eliminate  4 of 27 the portion of the building on the southernmost end of Parcel 6460-11-479-0 (brown roof visible in Figure 1), with the proposed addition to be built attached and to the east of the remaining building, with a small portion of the addition to be located immediately south of the remaining building. Applicant Presentation: Applicant was not present. Public Comments: None. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER JONES TO APPROVE THE ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THE CONDITIONS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER DELAWARE. ALL IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED, MOTION APPROVED. ZONING BOARD DISCUSSION: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 MEETING: MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER HANNER TO APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2022. SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER DELAWARE. ALL IN FAVOR, NONE OPPOSED, MOTION APPROVED. ZONING BOARD DISCUSSION: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Chairperson Moreno adjourned the meeting at 4:15p.m. Submitted by: Crystal Bax, CSR II, Planning and Zoning M:\Planning Files\Planning Dept\1. Zoning Board\2.Minutes\Year 2022\ZBA 06.14.22 DRAFT.docx  5 of 27 Battle Creek Zoning Board of Appeals Staff report for the May 9, 2023 Meeting To: Zoning Board of Appeals From: Travis Sullivan, Planner Date: May 1, 2023 Subject: Variance Request: Z01-23 Petition from Signcraft on behalf of Bronson Acadia Joint Venture located at 5550 Glenn Cross Road, requesting to install monument and building signs that exceed the allowable square footage within a Residential zoning district as prescribed by Section 1263.08 Agricultural and Residential Zoning Districts with regard to Chapter 1263 Signs. Summary The applicant (Signcraft) has applied for a sign permit for the installation of two wall signs and one monument (freestanding) sign associated with the new Bronson Behavioral Health hospital located at 5550 Glenn Cross Road. Construction of the building began in 2022 and is nearing completion. The property is positioned at the southwest corner of M-66 and Glenn Cross Road, and is set to consist of a single-story 96 bed behavioral health hospital with associated parking, on a parcel with an area of 24.84 acres. The applicant is proposing two internally illuminated channel letter sets on the building, with the first set near the south end of the building facing M-66, and the second set along the northern face of the building facing Glenn Cross Road. The applicant is also proposing a new monument sign near the entrance to the parcel on the south side of the driveway off of Glenn Cross Road. The subject property is located within the MFR High Density Multiple Family District. The Sign Ordinance (Chapter 1263) disciplines signage based upon the zoning district in which the property is located. Section 1263.08 addresses signage in Agricultural and Residential Zoning Districts. While Section 1263.08 does provide a category allowing for wall signs and freestanding signs for multi-family apartment complexes and permitted non-residential uses, the sizes of those signs are limited to the following dimensions: Wall Sign Maximum Number – One (1) per frontage along rights of way. Maximum Area – Eight (8) square feet.  6 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Freestanding Sign Maximum Number – One (1). Maximum Area – Twenty-four (24) square feet. For properties having a street frontage of more than 300 feet, an additional 25% of sign area shall be allowed for each additional 150 feet of street frontage. However, the maximum size allowed for a sign shall not exceed forty-eight (48) square feet. Setbacks: Shall not be closer than ten (10) feet from the street’s right-of-way line, or ten (10) feet from any interior property line. Twenty-five (25) feet from any street intersection, measured from the intersection of the street’s right-of-way lines. Maximum Height: Six (6) feet. Based upon these standards, the signage proposed by the applicant as depicted in the plan set included within this meeting packet would exceed the maximums for area and height, and would not be permitted. The property is surrounded to the north (across Glenn Cross Road), to the east (across M-66) and to the west by MFR High Density Multiple Family zoning, with the vacant parcel to the south located outside of the City (Leroy Township). Also in the general vicinity of the subject site are parcels zoned B-2 Regional Commercial and G Green. Figure 1 on page 3 displays the zoning district information for the subject site, as well as the surrounding area. It is important to note that the parcel which is the subject of this request is a child parcel resultant of a recent split of the parent parcel (as depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2 in this report). The resultant parcel (Parcel #0636-42-093-0) is the only portion of the former parent parcel included within this request. Figure 3 below displays the official survey which was used to approve the split, and accurately represents the subject parcel (the northern of the two “child” parcels) as it exists today. 2  7 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Figure 1: Zoning districts of the subject site and surrounding area. Blue star indicates the parcel that is the subject of this application. Background/Project Information The subject property is located at 5550 Glenn Cross Road and includes a single parcel with an area of 24.84 acres. As has been stated, new Bronson Behavioral Health Hospital is nearing completion on the site, and the applicant is attempting to secure a permit to allow for the placement of two wall signs (one facing M-66 and one facing Glenn Cross Road) consisting of internally illuminated channel letter sets, and one freestanding sign positioned near the entrance to the property off of Glenn Cross Road. Due to the residential zoning classification of the property, the signs as proposed exceed the square footage and height requirements of Section 1263.08, and would require a dimensional variance in order for the permit to be issued. 3  8 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Please see Figure 2 below for an aerial view of the site and parcel information in its pre- construction configuration. Note that the parcel, as depicted, is the parent parcel of Parcel #0636- 42-093-0, which is the subject of this application. Parcel #0636-42-093-0 consists of the northern 24.84 acres, immediately at the corner of Glenn Cross Road and M-66. Figure 2: Aerial view of the subject site at 5550 Glenn Cross Rd. (pre-construction). It is important to note that the parcel as it appears currently in BS&A represents the entirety of a recently split parcel. The subject of this variance request (Parcel #0636-42-093-0) is the northern 24.84 acres of this parent, and is depicted in Figure 3 below. 4  9 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Section 1263.08 addresses sign regulations within residentially zoned districts as follows: Plans submitted for the signage by the applicant indicate that each of the wall signs will measure 133.8 sq. ft. in area, exceeding the maximum area of eight (8) sq. ft. allowed by ordinance. The plans indicate that the freestanding monument sign will measure an area of 55.2 sq. ft., exceeding the maximum of 48 sq. ft. Additionally, the plans indicate a total height (including the masonry base, sign and decorative cap) of 9’-3” from grade, exceeding the height limit of six (6) feet. It is important to note that the applicant received approval from the City Commission in 2020 for the construction of the new 96 bed behavioral health hospital, as hospitals of greater than 20,000 sq. ft. are permitted within the MFR High Density Multiple Family District as a special use. It is also important to note that the parcel which is the subject of this request is a child parcel resultant of a recent split of the parent parcel (as depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2 in this report). The resultant parcel (Parcel #0636-42-093-0) is the only portion of the former parent parcel included within this request. Figure 3 displays below the official survey which was used to approve the split, and accurately represents the subject parcel (the northern of the two “child” parcels) as it exists today. 5  10 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Figure 3: Official survey of Parcel #0636-42-093-0, which is the site of the new Bronson Behavorial Health Hospital and the subject of this variance request. Public Hearing and Notice Requirements An advertisement of this public hearing was published in the Battle Creek SHOPPER NEWS on April 20, 2023, not less than the 15 days before the hearing as required by State Law and ordinance. 6  11 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 Notices of the public hearing were also sent by regular mail to property owners and occupants located within 300’ of the subject parcels. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any calls or correspondence commenting on this application. Variance Requested The applicant is requesting a non-use variance for the placement of three signs, each of which exceeds the dimensional requirements prescribed by Section 1263.08 for signage in a residential zoning district. The property received approval of a special use permit in 2020 for the construction of a new behavioral health hospital, as the current ordinance permits hospitals of greater than 20,000 sq. ft. as a special use in the High Density Multiple Family District. Section 1263.08 regulates signage within agricultural and residential zoning districts. This section does contemplate uses beyond “residential,” and carves out stipulations for signage in association with “multi-family apartment complexes and permitted non-residential uses.” However, given the underlying residential zoning of the district, the ordinance is quite restrictive in the number and sizes of signs allowed within the applicable districts. The variance requested by the applicant would allow for signage in excess of that which prescribed by Section 1263.08 and in accordance with the attached plans. Applicable Zoning Ordinance Provisions Section 1280.03 “Zoning Board of Appeals”, subsection D. 2) states: 2) The Board shall have the authority to grant the following variations: a) Nonuse. If there are practical difficulties for nonuse variances relating to the construction, structural changes, or alterations of buildings or structures related to dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance or to any other nonuse-related standard in the ordinance in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance, then the Board may grant a variance so that the spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice is done. The Board may impose conditions as otherwise allowed under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act;…. 3) Variance Standards. In consideration of all appeals and proposed exceptions to or variations from this Zoning Code, the Board shall, before making any such exceptions or variations, in a specific case, first determine that the applicant has met all of the following conditions as set out for the specific type of variance requested: a) Nonuse (dimensional) Variances: 7  12 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 i) When it can be shown that a practical difficulty would, in fact, exist if the strict non- use requirements of this zoning ordinance (e.g., lot area, width, setbacks, building height, etc.) were applied to a specific building project, the Board may grant a variance from these requirements. The practical difficulty from a failure to grant the variance must include substantially more than a mere inconvenience or a mere inability to attain a higher financial return. ii) The practical difficulty must be exceptional and peculiar to the subject parcel of land which do not generally exist throughout the City and may not be self-imposed or the result of an earlier action by the applicant. If the parcel of land could be reasonably built upon in conformance with the requirements of this zoning ordinance by simply relocating or redesigning the structure(s), then a variance shall not be granted. iii) A variance shall not be granted when it will alter or conflict with the intent of this Ordinance considering the public benefits intended to be secured by this Zoning Code and the rights of others whose property would be affected by the allowance of the variance. iv) Any variance granted shall be the minimum necessary to provide relief for the practical difficulty of the applicant. Analysis Staff has reviewed the application and finds that it meets the requirements for submittal and is considered complete. Staff has included in this packet plans from the applicant detailing the proposed signage which is the subject of this variance request. This item is before the Zoning Board of Appeals for consideration of non-use (dimensional) variance as the proposed signage exceeds the area and height permitted by Section 1263.08 in an agricultural or residential zoning district. Findings and Recommendation The Zoning Board of Appeals can approve, approve with conditions, or deny this request. The Zoning Board of Appeals can also table or postpone the request pending additional information. In consideration of all variations from the Zoning Code, the Board shall, before making any such exceptions or variations, in a specific case, first determine that the conditions listed below are satisfied. Planning staff has reviewed these conditions and believes that each condition can be justified in an affirmative manner. Rationale for each condition is provided below and planning staff recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the dimensional variance (Z-06-22) request for the alteration of an existing dimensionally nonconforming building which involves the area and bulk of the building. A) Staff finds that a practical difficulty does in fact exist if the strict requirements of the ordinance are applied to this specific project and that the Board is authorized to approve the variance in this case. The subject property lies at southwest corner of M-66 and Glenn Cross Road, and is set to host the new Bronson Behavioral Health Hospital for which a special use permit was obtained in 2020. Section 1263.08 is restrictive regarding the size of signage allowable in a residential zoning district. In this instance, the subject property consists of more than 24 acres, and is located along state highway in a rural setting. The 8  13 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 use (behavioral health) requires highly visible signage to provide confirmation of location during times of duress and urgency. It is the opinion of staff that the unusually large size of the parcel, positioning of the building on the subject parcel, and the location of the parcel along a state highway and the needs of the use itself (for which a special use permit was granted) provide the basis for a practical difficulty. B) Staff finds that the practical difficulty in this case is exceptional and peculiar to the subject parcel of land which does not generally exist throughout the City and is not self-imposed or the result of earlier action by the applicant. The applicant’s use of the property as behavioral health hospital is permitted as a special use within the MFR High Density Multiple Family District. The parcel which is the subject of this request is relatively large compared to other residentially zoned parcels, and is located adjacent to a state highway and in a rural setting. The ability to quickly and accurately identify the hospital and the location of its entrance are vital to the use. Staff finds that the set of circumstances around this request are unique, and do not generally exist throughout the City, nor is the practical difficulty self-imposed or the result of earlier action by the applicant. C) Staff believes that if the Board were to grant the proposed non-use variance, such variance would not conflict with the intent of this Ordinance considering the public benefits intended to be secured by the Zoning Code and the rights of others whose property would be affected by the allowance of this variance. The proposed use requires highly visible signage, and is located on a large parcel in a rural setting. Staff does not anticipate the proposed signage having a negative impact on the vacant surrounding parcels, nor upon the hospice care use immediately adjacent to the east or upon the Minges Creek Village Apartments complex immediately across Glenn Cross Road to the north. The proposed signs will be positioned to face Glenn Cross Road and M-66 and are set back far enough from the both roads that the size and illumination of the signs at night will not disturb any nearby residences or other uses. It is also important to note that any illumination will be subject to Section 1260.03 (Exterior Lighting) in the same fashion that all other lighting in the City is regulated. D) Staff believes that the applicant’s request and proposed plans represent the minimum necessary to provide relief of the practical difficulty of the applicant. The applicant is proposing signage which is necessary for the hospital use, especially given the size and location of the subject parcel (particularly along a state highway). Signage in accordance with the area and height prescription of Section 1263.08 would likely be inadequate for the use. Given the information provided by the applicant and the above conditions, staff recommends approval of Z01-23, Petition from Signcraft on behalf of Bronson Acadia Joint Venture located at 5550 Glenn Cross Road (Parcel #0636-42-093-0), requesting to install monument and building signs that exceed the allowable square footage within a Residential zoning district as prescribed by Section 1263.08 Agricultural and Residential Zoning Districts with regard to Chapter 1263 Signs. Attachments 9  14 of 27 Petition No. Z01-23 5550 Glenn Cross Road #0636-42-093-0 The following information is attached and made part of this Staff Report. 1. ZBA Petition Form (Petition #Z01-22) 2. Sign Plans 3. Survey of New Parcel (Parcel #0636-42-093-0) 4. Section 1263.08 (Agricultural and Residential District Sign Requirements) 10  15 of 27 Battle Creek Zoning Board of Appeals Staff report for the May 9, 2023 Meeting To: Zoning Board of Appeals From: Susan C. Cronander Date: April 26, 2023 Subject: Variance Request: Z02-23 Petition from Calhoun County Land Bank Authority, 315 W Green St. Marshall Michigan, for property located at 356 E Burnham Street, Battle Creek, MI 49014, requesting a variance from the 100-foot lot depth requirement in order to proceed with a proposed land division. Pursuant to the City of Battle Creek’s Zoning Ordinance Section 1240.21 (7). Parcel #3230-00-018-0. Legally described as: FRISBIES ADD LOTS 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 & 23; FONDAS ADD LOT C, EXC E 100 FT OF LOT C; ALSO BEG NW COR OF LOT 23 OF FRISBIES ADD - SELY ALG W LI OF SD LOT 103.29 - W 3.16 FT - SELY ALG WLY LI OF LOT C OF FONDAS ADD 422.07 FT - W 44 FT M/L - NLY ALG ARC TO RT TO S LI OF BURNHAM ST - E ALG SD S LI 44.78 FT M/L TO POB CONT 2.57 ACRES M/L Summary The Applicant wishes to divide parcel #3230-00-018-0 at 356 E Burnham St into two parcels. This address and the parcel lie within the Spark Zoning District, which is a district, intended to encourage and facilitate redevelopment in an area defined by the Master Plan as a “Challenged Neighborhood.” The larger of the remaining parcels after division would meet all of the dimensional requirements of the Spark Zoning District and Section 1240.21 7) which requires a new lot to be “…not less than 100 feet in depth….”. The second remaining lot, the subject of this variance petition, after the proposed division would meet all of the dimensional requirements except for the fact that the new lot would be 99 feet in depth and therefore 1 foot less than the 100- foot requirement for new lots. Mt. Olivet Cemetery lies directly behind the proposed second remaining parcel, which negates any possibility of adding additional footage. Staff is recommending approval of this petition request. Background Information This petition is from the Calhoun County Land Bank Authority, 315 W Green St. Marshall Michigan, for property located at 356 E Burnham Street which lies in the Spark zoning district. The Land Bank Authority is requesting a variance from the City’s current 100-foot lot depth requirement for new parcels in order to proceed with dividing parcel 3230-00-018-0 into two parcels. One of the child parcels from this proposed land division of 3230-00-018-0 will be 99 feet  16 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 in length instead of the 100 feet in length required by the City’s Zoning Ordinance for new parcels (see the proposed parcel highlighted in blue with a star in Figure 1, below.) Otherwise, the proposed child parcel would meet all of the other dimensional requirements for the Spark zoning district in which it lies. The proposed child parcel that is the subject of this variance request is located east of I-94 and Fonda Avenue and west of South Avenue on the south side of Burnham Street E. (Figures 3-5.) The current large parcel 3230-00-018-0 that is proposed to be split into two child parcels is part of the original Frisbie’s Addition Plat of 1885 in which all of the parcels were (and most still are) 99 feet in length. Frisbie’s Addition of 1885 lies directly adjacent to Mt. Olivet Cemetery, which was established in 1875, predating Frisbie’s Addition. The proposed new child parcel that is the subject of this petition would be 19,602 square feet, more closely resembling the original three lots of Frisbie’s Plat numbered 11, 13 and 15. The smaller size child parcel would encourage smaller scale development more compatible with the residences remaining in this section of the neighborhood. Figure 1: Illustration of the child parcel that is the subject of this petition – Frisbie’s Addition Lots 11, 13, 15. 2  17 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 Figure 2: Original Frisbie’s Addition Plat of 1885. Figure 3: 356 Burnham St E Zoning - aerial view 3  18 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 Figure 4: Street view. The proposed subject parcel is on the left adjacent to the grey residence. The old Stamping Plant and I-94 are in the background. Figure 5: Street view looking east. The proposed subject parcel is on the right in the foreground. Several residences can be seen in the background that are located across the street and adjacent to the subject proposed child parcel. 4  19 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 Figure 6: 356 Burnham St E Zoning – Subject property is Spark; surrounding zoning is Spark, Green and R-1B Figure 7: 356 Burnham St E – adjacent lots to the east and lots across Burnham St E are also 99 feet in depth. All of these lots are part of the Frisbies Addition Plat of 1885. 5  20 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 Public Hearing and Notice Requirements An advertisement of this public hearing was published in the Battle Creek Shopper News on Thursday, April 20 2023, not less than the 15 days before the hearing as required by State Law and ordinance. Notices of the public hearing were also sent by regular mail to property owners and occupants located within 300’ of the subject parcel. As of the writing of this report, we have not received any calls or correspondence commenting on this application. Variance Requested and Analysis The Applicant is requesting to divide the large parcel 3230-00-018-0 into two parcels, one of which would need 1 foot of variance from the currently required length of 100 feet for new parcels, resulting in a new child parcel that is 99 feet in length. The proposed 99-foot new child parcel is the subject of this petition. Because the current parcel 3230-00-018-0 and the proposed subject child parcel lie directly adjacent to a cemetery to the south created in 1875, subdividing the current large parcel inevitably would create parcels on Burnham Street which would be 99 feet in length, as there is not an effective method of gaining additional property length from the existing cemetery. In addition, parcel 3230-00-018-0 and any resulting splits are part of the Frisbie’s Addition plat of 1885 in which almost all of the parcels were and are 99 feet in length or less. Staff has reviewed the application and finds that it meets the requirements for submittal and is considered complete. In addition, the proposed parcel meets all of the other City Code and Zoning Ordinance dimensional requirements. The Appellant has supplied support material for the request for appeal and they are included with the application and part of this report. Applicable Zoning Ordinance Provisions Section 1240.21 (7) “Zoning Districts. A. Conformity with District Regulations Required” states: Every building hereinafter erected or structurally altered shall be on a lot, provided that a lot may be subdivided or a series of lots may be increased in number and decreased in size, so long as each new lot is not less than 100 feet in depth and in conformity with the width requirements of 0…. (Staff believes the “0” is a typo and should have been “the respective zoning district”.) Section 1280.03 “Zoning Board of Appeals”, subsection D. 2) states: 2) The Board shall have the authority to grant the following variations: a) Nonuse. If there are practical difficulties for nonuse variances relating to the construction, structural changes, or alterations of buildings or structures related to dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance or to any other nonuse-related standard in the ordinance in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance, then the Board may grant a variance so that the spirit of the zoning ordinance is observed, public safety secured, and 6  21 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 substantial justice is done. The Board may impose conditions as otherwise allowed under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act;…. 3) Variance Standards. In consideration of all appeals and proposed exceptions to or variations from this Zoning Code, the Board shall, before making any such exceptions or variations, in a specific case, first determine that the applicant has met all of the following conditions as set out for the specific type of variance requested: a) Nonuse (dimensional) Variances: i) When it can be shown that a practical difficulty would, in fact, exist if the strict non-use requirements of this zoning ordinance (e.g., lot area, width, setbacks, building height, etc.) were applied to a specific building project, the Board may grant a variance from these requirements. The practical difficulty from a failure to grant the variance must include substantially more than a mere inconvenience or a mere inability to attain a higher financial return. ii) The practical difficulty must be exceptional and peculiar to the subject parcel of land which do not generally exist throughout the City and may not be self-imposed or the result of an earlier action by the applicant. If the parcel of land could be reasonably built upon in conformance with the requirements of this zoning ordinance by simply relocating or redesigning the structure(s), then a variance shall not be granted. iii) A variance shall not be granted when it will alter or conflict with the intent of this Ordinance considering the public benefits intended to be secured by this Zoning Code and the rights of others whose property would be affected by the allowance of the variance. iv) Any variance granted shall be the minimum necessary to provide relief for the practical difficulty of the applicant. Findings and Recommendation The Zoning Board of Appeals can approve, approve with conditions, or deny this request. The Zoning Board of Appeals can also table or postpone the request pending additional information. In consideration of all variations from the Zoning Code, the Board shall, before making any such exceptions or variations, in a specific case, first determine that the conditions listed below are satisfied. Planning staff has reviewed these conditions and believes that each condition can be justified in an affirmative manner. Rationale for each condition is provided below and planning staff recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the dimensional variance (Z02-23) request for the proposed subject child parcel that is one foot less than the required length of 100 feet for a new parcel based on the following findings contained in this staff report. A) Staff finds that practical difficulty does in fact exist if the strict requirement of the ordinance is applied to this specific child parcel and that the Board is authorized to approve the variance in this case. The proposed child parcel that is the subject of this 7  22 of 27 Petition No.Z02-23 356 E Burnham St 3230-00-018-0 petition cannot gain an additional foot in depth from the cemetery that lies adjacent to it on the south side, therefore, more than likely the large existing parcel 3230-00-018-0 could never be divided back into parcels that would more closely resemble the original platted parcels, encouraging a scale of development more appropriate to the remaining residential parcels that are adjacent and across the street, all of which are also 99 feet in depth. B) Staff believes that the practical difficulty is exceptional and peculiar to the subject parcel and the conditions associated with the property generally do not exist throughout the City. This proposed parcel is a portion of an original plat from 1885, and many of the properties in this plat were, and still are, 99 feet in length or less. Granting this variance would return the proposed child parcel that is the subject of this petition to its original length. In addition, this subject parcel, as stated in A), is adjacent to a permanent cemetery that was created in 1875, which predates the 1885 Frisbie’s Additional Plat that included the subject parcel and proposed child parcel, and could be the reason for all of the 1885 Frisbie’s Addition platted parcels that border the cemetery to be 99 feet in length. C) Staff believes that if the variance is granted that the intent of the Ordinance will not be altered. A map of the adjacent parcels and parcels across Burnham St. E clearly illustrates that most, if not all of the properties that are also part of the Frisbie’s Addition plat are still only 99 feet in depth; therefore matching the petitioners proposed parcel depth request. Allowing the same depth as all of the other parcels in this section of the neighborhood would not alter the intent of the Zoning Ordinance for this section of the City that was already divided into 99-foot long parcels in an 1885 plat. D) Staff believes the Applicant’s request of one foot less in length than required by the City of Battle Creek Zoning Ordinance fulfills the requirement for the minimum necessary variance to provide relief for the practical difficulty of the applicant. Attachments The following information is attached and made part of this Staff Report. 1. ZBA Petition Form (Petition #Z02-23) and supplemental materials 8  23 of 27 Appeal No. _______________ Date: _______________ City of Battle Creek Community Services – Planning and Zoning Division City Hall  10 N. Division Street, Ste. 117  Battle Creek, Michigan 49014 Ph (269) 966-3320  Fax (269) 966-3555  www.battlecreekmi.gov APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS An Appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals to authorize a variance from the requirements of the Planning and Zoning Code (Part Twelve) of the City of Battle Creek. Name of Appellant: CALHOUN COUNTY LAND BANK AUTHORITY ___________________________________________________________________ 315 W GREEN ST, MARSHALL MI 49068 Address: ____________________________________ 269-781-0822 Phone: _____________________________ Name of Owner (if different from Appellant): ______________________________________________ Address: ____________________________________ Phone: _____________________________ TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Request is hereby made for permission to: (Choose One) Extend Erect Appeal Use Convert Enclose Description: __________________________________________________________________________ Divide existing lot into 2 smaller lots, one of which has a fixed lot depth of 99' ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 1240.21(7) Contrary to the requirements of Section(s) ___________________________ of the Planning and Zoning Code, upon the premises known as 356 Burnham St E ____________________________________ Battle Creek, MI, in accordance with the plans and/or plat record attached. The proposed building or use requires Board action in the following area(s): _____________________________________________________________________________________ To seek exception to the 100' lot depth requirement in order to proceed with the proposed division _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ proposed lot size Property/Tax I.D. # No. 3 2 30 - 0 ________ 0 - 01 ____ 8 ________ - 0 ___ 198' Depth ____ Size of the Lot: Width _____ 99' Size of Proposed Building: Width _________ Depth ________ Height ________ The following reasons are presented in support of this appeal (complete each section): (a.) This property cannot be used in conformance with the ordinance without the requested variance because: Form Rev. 06/21/16  24 of 27 The lots in question are platted at 99' deep. See attachment. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ (b.) This problem is due to a unique situation not shared in common with nearby property owners because: We are seeking to divide a larger parcel with several lots, the review of which has highlighted ___________________________________________________________________________________ that the platted lots are 1' too short for the current requirements. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ (c.) Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the area because: Neighboring property owners have the same lot depth of 99' as specified when the plat was developed. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ (d.) The problem is not self-created because: ____________________________________________________________________________________ The issue is the discrepancy between the plat of 1885 and the current zoning ordinance requirements. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ (e.) USE VARIANCES ONLY It is not possible to use this particular property for any other use currently allowed in the zoning district because: ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ I hereby affirm that, to the best of my knowledge, all the above and accompanying statements and drawings are correct and true. In addition, I give permission to the City of Battle Creek’s Planning Department staff to access my property, if necessary, to take photographs of the subject of this appeal. CALHOUN COUNTY LAND BANK AUTHORITY __________________________________________________________________ (Print Appellant Name) __________________________________________________________________ (Signature of Appellant) Krista Trout-Edwards, Executive Director 315 W Green St, Marshall MI 49068 __________________________________________________________________ (Address of Appellant) If you require additional information or assistance in filling out this application, please contact the Planning Department at (269) 966-3320. Form Rev. 06/21/16  25 of 27 CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN OFFICE OF THE CITY ASSESSOR APPLICATION TO SPLIT TAX PARCELS LOCATED WITHIN A RECORDED SUBDIVISION The applicant will submit this form with a processing fee (see schedule below). In turn, the City will review the proposal’s conformity to 1) the minimum size and building setback provisions of the local zoning ordinance and 2) the below listed criteria. The fee is non-refundable even if the City finds the proposal is nonconforming, and it cannot approve the application. Submit it only if . . . • . . . you wish to create one or more new parcels from an existing parcel, which is located entirely within a recorded subdivision. (This form is not a request to split section land outside of a recorded subdivision. Further, the State of Michigan forbids the splitting of a condominium unit.) • . . . you have shared your proposal with the City Planning Department (Room 117, City Hall) and found that the proposal would conform to the local zoning ordinance. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Effective tax year ________, I request the City Assessor’s Office split the following parcel (write the 10digit parcel identification number (PIN), below): 3 ____ #____ 2 ____ 3 ____ 0 -- ____ 0 ____ 0 -- ____ 0 ____ 1 8 0 ____ -- ____ Attach legal descriptions and preferably a sketch of the proposed parcels you wish to create. Describe in each blank, below, any proposed or existing improvements that will be associated with each child parcel. Write the word, “vacant,” if no improvements would be on the parcel: Child parcel 1: *PROCESSING FEES— vacant _____________________________________________ IF THE RESULTING PARCELS WILL ALL FRONT Child parcel 2: ON A PUBLIC ROAD: $100 FOR THE FIRST TWO PARCELS vacant _____________________________________________ CREATED; $25 FOR EACH ADDITIONAL Child parcel 3: PARCEL OVER THE FIRST TWO. _____________________________________________ IF ONE OR MORE OF THE RESULTING PARCELS WILL HAVE A PRIVATE DRIVE OR EASEMENT AS ITS ONLY ACCESS TO A PUBLIC ROAD: Signature______________________________ Date 04 12 23 ___/___/___ $150 FOR THE FIRST TWO PARCELS CREATED; Angela Whitesell, Office & Program Coordinator $50 FOR EACH ADDITIONAL PARCEL OVER THE Calhoun County Land Bank Authority Phone#: ______________________________ 269-781-0822 FIRST TWO WITH A PPRIVATE DRIVE OR EASEMENT PROVIDING SOLE ACCESS TO ONE OR MORE OF THE PARCEL(S). 26 of 27 27 of 27