Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)

ROYAL OAK ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF ROYAL OAK, MICHIGAN Thursday, May 13, 2021 7:00 P.M. Present Absent Clyde Esbri, Chairperson Maggie George Robert Gavin Jeff Klatt Trevis Moore Anthony Offak, Vice Chairperson Arvind Reddy Nancy Robinson Deborah Zukin Joseph Murphy, Director of Planning Ryan Kaluzny, Assistant City Attorney Agenda A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Approval of Minutes for April 8, 2021 D. Unfinished Business 1. Case No. 21-04-16 – public hearing on the appeal of Laurel & Bradley Krueger, petitioner & owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 608 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. (b) waive 1.6% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10% (c) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable height of 15 ft. for an accessory structure. (d) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities in an accessory structure to permit removal of the existing detached garage and construction of a new 1,408 sq. ft., 17 ft. tall, detached garage at 3213 Glenview Ave. (25-08-228-014). E. New Business 1. Case No. F-21-05-03 – public hearing on the appeal of the Action Fence of Michigan, petitioner & Peggy & Michael Simon, owners, for the following variance from the city’s Fence Ordinance: (a) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable permitted 4 ft. fence height within a front yard setback along Baxter Ave. to allow a 6 ft. sight obscuring fence within a front yard setback as defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 2004 Alicia Lane (25-09-357-011). 2. Case No. F-21-05-04 – public hearing on the appeal of Kenneth Meagher & Jordan Berzsenyi, petitioners & owners, for the following variance from the city’s Fence Ordinance: (a) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable permitted 4 ft. fence height within a front yard setback along Tonawanda Ave. to allow a 6 ft. sight obscuring vinyl fence within a front yard setback as defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 3524 Normandy Rd. (25-06-280-017). 3. Case No. 21-05-19 – public hearing on the appeal of Krieger Klatt Architects, petitioner, & Susan and Rocco Franco, owners, for the following variances: Page 1 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 (a) waive 163 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable floor area of 800 sq. ft. for an attached garage / accessory structure (b) waive 10 ft. of the maximum driveway width of 25 ft. along Bassett Rd. to permit construction of a new one-story single-family dwelling with an attached garage at 1125 Vinsetta Blvd. (25-17-279-025). 4. Case No. 21-05-20 – public hearing on the appeal of Susan Scher, petitioner & owner, for the following variance: (a) waive 4.2% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10% to permit construction of a new 681 sq. ft. accessory structure with the following elements: garage and open, covered outdoor entertainment area at 411 Catalpa Dr. (25-16-426-041). 5. Case No. 21-05-21 – public hearing on the appeal of Christine & Justin Reeves, petitioners & owners, for the following variances: (a) waive 64 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. (b) waive 8.3 ft. of the maximum allowable height of 15 ft. for an accessory structure (c) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities in an accessory structure to permit construction a new 864 sq. ft., 23.3 ft. tall, detached, garage / accessory structure at 3408 Durham Rd. (25-05-477-028). 6. Case No. 21-05-22 – public hearing on the appeal of Ledion Shkembi, petitioner & owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 2 ft. of the minimum required 10 ft. north side yard setback (b) waive 6.8% from the requirement that an attached garage / accessory structure be no greater than 50% of the total width of the front façade of the structure (c) waive 155 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable total lot coverage of 1,800 sq. ft. (d) waive 3 ft. of the maximum allowable 30 ft. height of a single-family dwelling (e) waive 586 sq. ft. of the maximum permitted gross usable floor area of 3,500 sq. ft. for a single- family dwelling to permit construction of a new single-family dwelling with a front entry attached garage at 312 N. Washington Ave. (25-16-484-001). 7. Case No. 21-05-23– public hearing on the appeal of Stonecraft Investments, LLC, petitioner & Estate of Clarence E. Kennedy, owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “1” (b) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “2” (c) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “1” (d) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “2” to permit a land division and create two vacant, single-family home sites at 1214 McLean Ave. (25-22-478-051). 8. Case No. 21-05-24 – public hearing on the appeal of Kathleen & Craig Everlove, petitioners & owners, for the following variances: (a) waive 451 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. (b) waive 2.5% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10% (c) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities in an accessory structure to permit construction of a new 800 sq. ft. detached accessory structure with the following elements: storage shed and open, covered outdoor dining and entertainment area at 1103 Royal Ave. (25-09-177-008). 9. Case No. 21-05-25 – public hearing on the appeal of Jessica & Ryan Bagos, petitioners & owners, for the following variances: (a) waive 0.2 ft. of the minimum required 5 ft. east side yard setback (b) waive 3.9% of the maximum allowable lot coverage of 30% to permit construction of a second story addition and rear yard expansion of an existing single- family dwelling at 717 Florence Ave. (25-16-461-001). Page 2 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 F. Other Business G. Public Comment Call to Order Chairperson Esbri called the May 13, 2021 regular meeting of the Royal Oak Zoning Board of Appeals to order at 7:00 p.m. and stated that due to the COVID-19 pandemic the meeting was being held remotely in accordance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, as amended, and the procedures established by the Royal Oak City Commission. He informed the audience that the board does not write the zoning ordinance but does have the authority to grant relief from it where practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship would result. He stated the board will vote on each agenda item following a public hearing. Use variance requests require a minimum of 6 affirmative votes in order to grant the requested variances. Non-use variance requests require a minimum of 5 affirmative votes in order to grant the variances. Petitioners were directed to limit their presentations to 10 minutes. He further pointed out to petitioners the absence of a full board at tonight’s meeting and their opportunity to request that their agenda item be postponed until the next regular meeting due to the circumstances. Roll Call Present Absent Clyde Esbri, Chairperson Maggie George Robert Gavin Jeff Klatt Trevis Moore Anthony Offak, Vice Chairperson Arvind Reddy Nancy Robinson Deborah Zukin Approval of Minutes for April 8, 2021 Moved by: Mrs. Zukin Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the minutes of the April 8, 2021 regular meeting be approved as presented. Motion adopted unanimously. Unfinished Business 1. Case No. 21-04-16 – 3213 Glenview Ave. (25-08-228-014) The board was reminded that the following variance was denied at the April 8, 2021 meeting: (d) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities in an accessory structure. At the same meeting, the board adopted a motion to postpone the following variance request: (a) waive 608 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft., (b) waive 1.6% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10%, (c) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable height of 15 ft. for an accessory structure, to permit construction of a new 1,408 sq. ft., 17 ft. tall, detached garage. Page 3 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 The petitioner provided the board with modified drawings. Based on the modified drawings, the petitioner withdrew the following variance requests: (b) waive 1.6% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10%. (c) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable height of 15 ft. for an accessory structure. Moved by: Mr. Moore Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Laurel & Bradley Krueger, petitioners & owners, for the following variance: (a) waive 360 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. to permit construction of a new 1,160 sq. ft. detached garage at 3213 Glenview Ave., be granted. Motion adopted unanimously. Granting the variance is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variance will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variance. 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variance. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variance. New Business 1. Case No. F-21-05-03 – 2004 Alicia Lane (25-09-357-011) Moved by: Mr. Klatt Supported by: Mr. Moore Moved, that the appeal of the Action Fence of Michigan, petitioner & Peggy and Michael Simon, owners, for the following variance from the city’s Fence Ordinance: (a) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable 4 ft. fence height within a front yard setback along Baxter Ave. to allow a 6 ft. sight obscuring fence within a front yard setback as defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 2004 Alicia Lane, be granted. Motion adopted 7 – 1 (Mrs. Zukin). Granting the variance is based upon the following: Page 4 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 1. Practical difficulties exist in strict compliance with the Fence Ordinance provisions. 2. Granting the variance will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area. 3. Granting the variance is done in light of public health, safety, and welfare concerns. 2. Case No. F-21-05-04 – 3524 Normandy Rd. (25-06-280-017) Moved by: Mr. Gavin Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Kenneth Meagher & Jordan Berzsenyi, petitioners & owners, for the following variance from the city’s Fence Ordinance: (a) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable 4 ft. fence height within a front yard setback along Tonawanda Ave. to allow a 6 ft. sight obscuring vinyl fence within a front yard setback as defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 3524 Normandy Rd., be granted. Motion fails 3 - 5. Yes: Chairperson Esbri, Mr. Gavin, Mr. Klatt No: Mr. Moore, Mr. Offak, Mr. Reddy, Mrs. Robinson, Mrs. Zukin Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mrs. Robinson Moved, that the appeal of Kenneth Meagher & Jordan Berzsenyi, petitioners & owners, for the following variance from the city’s Fence Ordinance: (a) waive 2 ft. of the maximum allowable 4 ft. fence height within a front yard setback along Tonawanda Ave. to allow a 6 ft. sight obscuring vinyl fence within a front yard setback as defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 3524 Normandy Rd., be denied. Motion adopted 5 - 3. Yes: Mr. Moore, Mr. Offak, Mr. Reddy, Mrs. Robinson, Mrs. Zukin No: Chairperson Esbri, Mr. Gavin, Mr. Klatt Denying the variance is based upon the following: 1. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that practical difficulties exist in strict compliance with the Fence Ordinance provisions. 2. Denying the variance will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area. 3. Denying the variance is done in light of public health, safety, and welfare concerns. 3. Case No. 21-05-19 – 1125 Vinsetta Blvd. (25-17-279-025) Mr. Klatt recused himself due to his firm’s relationship with the petitioner. Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mr. Gavin Moved, that the appeal of Krieger Klatt Architect, petitioner & Susan and Rocco Franco, owners, for the following variances: Page 5 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 (a) waive 163 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable floor area of 800 sq. ft. for an attached garage / accessory structure (b) waive 7 ft. of the maximum driveway width of 25 ft. along Bassett Rd. to permit construction of a new one-story single-family dwelling with an attached garage at 1125 Vinsetta Blvd., be granted. Motion adopted unanimously (7 - 0). Granting the variances is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variances will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variances. 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variances. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variances. 4. Case No. 21-05-20 – 411 Catalpa Dr. (25-16-426-041) Moved by: Mrs. Zukin Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Susan Scher, petitioner & owner, for the following variance: (a) waive 4.2% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10% to permit construction of a new 681 sq. ft. accessory structure with the following elements: garage and open, covered outdoor entertainment area at 411 Catalpa Dr., be granted. Motion adopted unanimously. Granting the variance is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variance will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variance. Page 6 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variance. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variance. 5. Case No. 21-05-21 – 3408 Durham Rd. (25-05-477-028) Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Christine & Justin Reeves, petitioners & owners, for the following variance: (a) waive 64 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. to permit construction of a new 864 sq. ft. detached, garage / accessory structure at 3408 Durham Rd., be granted. Motion adopted unanimously. Granting the variance is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variance will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variance. 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variance. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variance. The petitioner withdrew the following variance request: (b) waive 8.3 ft. of the maximum allowable height of 15 ft. for an accessory structure Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mr. Moore Moved, that the appeal of Christine & Justin Reeves, petitioners & owners, for the following variance: (c) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities (electricity and natural gas) in an accessory structure to permit construction of a new 864 sq. ft. detached, garage / accessory structure at 3408 Durham Rd., be granted. Motion adopted 5 - 3. Page 7 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 Yes: Mr. Gavin, Mr. Klatt, Mr. Moore, Mr. Reddy, Mrs. Robinson No: Chairperson Esbri, Mr. Offak, Mrs. Zukin Granting the variance is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variance will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variance. 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variance. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variance. 6. Case No. 21-05-22 – 312 N. Washington Ave. (25-16-484-001) Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Ledion Shkembi, petitioner & owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 2 ft. of the minimum required 10 ft. north side yard setback (b) waive 6.8% from the requirement that an attached garage / accessory structure be no greater than 50% of the total width of the front façade of the structure (c) waive 155 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable total lot coverage of 1,800 sq. ft. (d) waive 3 ft. of the maximum allowable 30 ft. height of a single-family dwelling (e) waive 586 sq. ft. of the maximum permitted gross usable floor area of 3,500 sq. ft. for a single-family dwelling to permit construction of a new single-family dwelling with a front entry attached garage at 312 N. Washington Ave., be postponed. Motion adopted unanimously. 7. Case No. 21-05-23 – 1214 McLean Ave. (25-22-478-051) Moved by: Mr. Reddy Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Stonecraft Investments, LLC, petitioner & Estate of Clarence E. Kennedy, owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “1” (b) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “2” (c) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “1” (d) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “2” to permit a land division and create two vacant, single-family home sites at 1214 McLean Ave., be granted. Page 8 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 Motion fails 2 – 6. Yes: Mr. Klatt, Mr. Reddy No: Chairperson Esbri, Mr. Gavin, Mr. Moore, Mr. Offak, Mrs. Robinson, Mrs. Zukin Moved by: Mr. Offak Supported by: Mr. Gavin Moved, that the appeal of Stonecraft Investments, LLC, petitioner & Estate of Clarence E. Kennedy, owner, for the following variances: (a) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “1” (b) waive 10 ft. of the minimum required 50 ft. lot width for Parcel “2” (c) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “1” (d) waive 1,600 sq. ft. of the minimum required lot area of 6,000 sq. ft. for Parcel “2” to permit a land division and create two vacant, single-family home sites at 1214 McLean Ave., be denied. Motion adopted 6 - 2. Yes: Chairperson Esbri, Mr. Gavin, Mr. Moore, Mr. Offak, Mrs. Robinson, Mrs. Zukin No: Mr. Klatt, Mr. Reddy Denying the variances is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will not unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would not render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variances would prove detrimental to other property owners in the area. 3. There are not circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variances. 4. There is no evidence of practical difficulty and there are not inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variances. 5. The proposed lots would not be consistent with the width, size and general character of the lots in the neighborhood. Further, the proposed lot sizes would not provide adequate “buildable” area to allow the construction of a dwelling which in character with the neighborhood. 8. Case No. 21-05-24 – 1103 Royal Ave. (25-09-177-008) Moved by: Mr. Moore Supported by: Mr. Klatt Moved, that the appeal of Kathleen & Craig Everlove, petitioners & owners, for the following variance: (c) waive the prohibition of a combination of utilities (electricity, ethernet cable, and natural gas) in an accessory structure. to permit construction of a new 800 sq. ft. detached accessory structure with the following elements: storage shed and open, covered outdoor dining and entertainment area at 1103 Royal Ave., be granted. Motion adopted 5 - 3. Yes: Mr. Gavin, Mr. Klatt, Mr. Moore, Mr. Reddy, Mr. Robinson No: Chairperson Ebri, Mr. Offak, Mrs. Zukin Page 9 of 11  Zoning Board of Appeals May 13, 2021 Moved by: Mr. Moore Supported by: Mr. Zukin Moved, that the appeal of Kathleen & Craig Everlove, petitioners & owners, for the following variances: (a) waive 451 sq. ft. of the maximum allowable accessory structure ground floor area of 800 sq. ft. (b) waive 2.5% of the maximum allowable accessory lot coverage of 10% to permit construction of a new 800 sq. ft. detached accessory structure with the following elements: storage shed and open, covered outdoor dining and entertainment area at 1103 Royal Ave., be granted. Motion adopted 7 – 1 (Mr. Offak). Granting the variances is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. 2. Granting the variances will do substantial justice to the petitioner and will not prove detrimental to other property owners in the area, and is the least relief required in order to afford substantial justice to the petitioner or be more consistent with justice to nearby property owners. 3. There are circumstances or conditions inherently unique to the property that necessitates granting the variances. 4. There is evidence of practical difficulty that has not been created by the petitioner and/or property owner but instead results from the inherently unique circumstances or conditions of the property that requires granting the variances. It is further the finding of the board that the spirit of the zoning ordinance will be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice rendered by granting the variances. 9. Case No. 21-05-25 – 717 Florence Ave. (25-16-461-001) Moved by: Mr. Moore Supported by: Mr. Gavin Moved, that the appeal of Jessica & Ryan Bagos, petitioners & owners, for the following variances: (a) waive 0.2 ft. of the minimum required 5 ft. east side yard setback (b) waive 3.9% of the maximum allowable lot coverage of 30% to permit construction of a second story addition and rear yard expansion of an existing single- family dwelling at 717 Florence Ave., be granted. Motion adopted 7 – 1 (Mr. Offak). Granting the variances is based upon the following: 1. Strict compliance with the zoning ordinance provisions will unreasonably prevent the petitioner from use and enjoyment of the property for a permitted purpose, or would render conformity with such provisions unnecessarily burdensome. Page 10 of 11