ZBA Minutes
MEETING
CITY OF WALKER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Thursday, October 26, 2006
7:00 p.m.
The meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by
Robert Marz, Chairman at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall 4243 Remembrance Rd.,
N.W., Walker, Michigan.
Members present: Robert Marz, Chairman; Roger Crabtree; Randy Smith,
Alternate; Rebecca Haven; Charles Deshaine; Ken Fex; and Tyler Korfhage.
Also present: Jeff Nelson, Building Department; John Stuyfzand, Building
Department; and Bonnie Antcliff, Recording Secretary.
DECISION AND ORDER
Motion
Ken Fex moved and Roger Crabtree supported the motion to remove 1522
Marlin from the table.
Motion carried 7 to 0.
Legal Description
Property located at 1522 Marlin also known on the tax rolls as
41-13-17-427-012. Hearing requested by Paul Matthews.
The applicant’s request is to maintain a chain link fence located in
a drainage easement.
Finding of Facts
Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan
submitted. He then read a letter from the City Engineer dated October
10, 2006.
Mr. Matthews pointed out the site plan with explanations showing
pictures of the fence and surrounding area. He went on to say that he
talked with the County Engineer, Brad Boonstra and he indicated that
normally they do not allow fences in easements but in some instances
they have surveyed the situation and allowed fences where the main drain
is fully enclosed but there is no detriment to surface water flow. He
went on to say that his fence is located at the same elevation as the
fence detaining wall storage shed that is located directly behind him
and the City does not seem to show any concern for those issues. This
property is located at the extreme high end of the drain area and the
elevation, on which the fence is located, is well above the point where
the water will flow across the road at Werner, where the culvert is 24
in.wide. The neighbors do not feel that the fence will pose a problem.
He went on to say that he had nothing in writing from the County Drain
Commission.
Larry Kieffer, 1558 Marlin stated that when the easement was put in
he was told he could have the wood from the trees they took out and he
never got it. The City took our chain link fence down and said they
would use the same posts when they put it back up and they did not do
that. He said he was told he could put a fence there and now they say it
is not allowed. He felt he should be able to enjoy his property.
Robert Marz, asked how long has the fence been in the drainage area?
Mr. Matthews replied several years with no blockages. The fence goes
20 ft. into the easement.
Charles Deschaine stated that the City Engineer recommends that the
fence come down.
Rebecca Haven stated that there is a letter dated 1998 and it was
noted that there were wooden boards across the bottom of the fence.
Mr. Matthews replied that there were boards across the bottom because
he connected his fence to the neighbors and needed to keep the dog in
the yard.
Charles Deshaine asked how many feet should the fence be moved to be
out of the easement?
The answer was 20 ft.
Roger Crabtree stated that he moved there in 1980 and at that time
there was ditch there that took care of the water. During heavy rains it
would flood. When development occurred on Remembrance, the water could
no longer go into the ground by D & W so it filled the detention pond
and came through and some of these houses had water from the creek up to
the back of the house. That is what prompted burying this to take care
of the water from Remembrance and Mullins. Mullins is up hill from
Marlin. They offset the drain so they could get the drain buried and the
surface ditch within the easement. So it was centered between the two.
When you get to Blanford Nature Center there is very little swale left
because the pipe is underground. When the County contracted the
Engineers, they went and got easements from everyone that were at 20 ft.
When the fences were put back they were roughly 8 ft. into the easement.
Mr. Crabtree is concerned about setting a precedent here if the Board
grants this variance.
Randy Smith stated that there should be no obstacles in the easement.
He stated he would like to see all of these things out of the easement.
This is to ensure the safety of the homeowners from flooding yards,
basements, and properties. Everything in the easement should be removed.
Mr. Matthews felt that the homeowners did not know the restrictions
of the easement and that is why these fences and sheds etc.went in
there.
Tyler Korfhage stated that we are trying to balance an easement here
with property rights. He does not feel that a fence is a permanent
fixture. He is worried about setting a precedent here.
Motion
Tyler Korfhage moved and Randy Smith supported the motion to deny the
applicants request to maintain a chain link fence located in a drainage
easement. The Board failed to find extraordinary or exceptional
circumstances with this property.
Motion carried 5 to 2. Robert Marz and Roger Crabtree opposed.
DECISION AND ORDER
Legal Description
Property located at 2740 Kinney also known on the tax rolls as
41-13-08-100-030. Hearing requested by Brad and Al DeKock.
The applicant’s request is to reduce the front yard setback from 200
ft. to 100 ft. and a side yard from 20 ft. to 10 ft. for DK Electric
Storage.
Finding of Facts
Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan
submitted. He then read a letter from Dave Visser, Builder dated October
24, 2006 opposing this project and a letter from the City Engineer dated
October 10, 2006.
Al DeKock stated that we are proposing a light industrial project
here with a warehouse. This will be a 1,000 sq. ft. unit for contractors
and home owners that need boat storage and those type of things. It will
be entirely enclosed with no outside storage. It will be low impact upon
the area because it is primarily a daylight hours type of operation. We
believe this building will be a good fit for this property. It will be a
good buffer between the heavy industrial to the north and the condos
proposed to the south. We would like a variance to meet the requirements
of a light industrial area.
Kurt Kunst 2175 Lincoln, Real Estate Broker stated he has had this
piece of property for sale for a couple of years. The triangular piece
on the plan is zoned light industrial and is owned by D & K
Construction. You have a light industrial site, a heavy industrial site,
and south of that you have a multiple family dwelling coming in.
Currently, if left alone, we could put a heavy industrial factory here.
He went on to say that he wanted the Board to consider this when you are
considering this request. This fits in the ML zoning and is not a heavy
industrial use. You could not stop a heavy industrial use from coming in
here.
George Maves and Yvonne Maves 2760 Kinney. They own the property that
adjoins the north side of this property. They oppose this request and
feel the applicant should adher to the variance on setbacks. They are
also opposed due to the amount of water that passes through the natural
water drain on the north side of the railroad bed. On the south side of
the railroad bed and under Kinney Ave. to the west, it drains across HB
Fuller property where it empties into the Nolan drain. She brought many
photos to show the flooding on this property. She stated she has lived
on Kinney for 58 years. They would like to see a bike trail go in here.
John Kinney 2412 Kinney stated that he is opposed to this project.
Charles Deshaine stated that there were lengthy discussions with the
Planning Commission and the City Commission when the condo project went
through. We were hoping that Dave Visser and this land owner would get
together with the City to discuss what would work here. He went on to
say that he disagrees that this property is unsellable. He would like to
see a bike path and a green space area. He would like to see something
that would benefit both property owners and not put in a large building
in that area. He would like to see Dave Visser, the property owner, and
the City to meet to talk about this.
Robert Marz did not feel that there is a hardship to adher to the
setbacks on this property.
Mr. DeKock stated that the heavy industrial area requires 200 ft. of
road frontage and a light industrial requires a 100 ft. so we are asking
to use the property as it would be zoned light industrial.
Roger Crabtree stated you are not asking for a setback, you are
asking for road frontage. This was not noticed properly.
Jeff Nelson stated this is frontage instead of a front setback and
then we have a side yard setback so this was not noticed properly.
Rebecca Haven stated that she felt that the site plan review at the
City would address any issues related to drainage. She would like to see
comments from the Planning Dept. and the Engineering Dept.
Jeff Nelson replied that they did not comment because this is just a
preliminary plan so they have not seen any drainage calculations or any
formal site plan. The variance is not for the use, it is for the
setbacks. We are going to have to renotice this. He went on to say that
he did not feel that anything could be built in that area without a zone
retention area.
Roger Crabtree asked what is the percentage of the piece of property
that you can actually cover?
Jeff Nelson replied it is 60%.
Charles Deshaine stated that he would like to see both property
owners work with the City to come up with some sort of proposal that
will work there.
Randy Smith asked the applicant what type of exterior they plan on
putting on the building?
Mr. DeKock replied that he have not formalized any plans yet. The
drainage issue will be addressed at the planning stage. He went on to
say that we need to know are we able to proceed further because without
the 10 ft. we cannot get comfortable access with vehicles into the
building.
Randy Smith commented that this is a really odd shaped piece of
property and there are a lot of special circumstances here and he stated
that the water problems can be addressed by the engineers.
Rebecca Haven stated that the building could be flipped around with
the back of the building on the south end which would allow a little
more flexibility on the edge of the parking lot.
Charles Deshaine was concerned about granting a variance on this
property. He felt the applicant should work with the Planning Dept. and
the City.
Motion
Ken Fex moved and Charles Deshaine supported the motion to table this
request to reduce the frontage from 200 ft. to 100 ft. and a side yard
from 20 ft. to 10 ft. for DK Electric Storage. The Board would like some
feedback from City staff on this request. This request will have to be
renoticed for the front yard requirements.
Motion carried 7 to 0.
Motion
Ken Fex moved and Randy Smith supported the motion to approve the
minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals minutes of October 12, 2006.
Motion carried 7 to 0
Motion
Ken Fex moved and Roger Crabtree supported the motion to adjourn the
Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at 9:00 p.m.
-----------------------------------
Roger Crabtree, Secretary
Government |
Departments | Community
| Resource Center
Contact Us |
Search |
Site Map |
Home | Site Use Policy
 The City
of Walker, Michigan
4243 Remembrance Rd. NW
Walker, MI 49534
(616)453-6311
City Hall hours: Mon-Thursday from 7:30am to 5:30pm. Closed Fridays
All information © 2012 City of
Walker
Contact Us!
If you would like to leave general
comments about the website, click here.
Click here to report technical problems with the website.
|
