Walker Home PageSite Map
Contact Us

 

 
Advanced Search

Click here for Income Tax Forms

Resources Section
Assessment Data/Property CharacteristicsBids and ProposalsBus ScheduleCalendar of EventsCity CharterConstruction UpdatesCounty Oil Drop SitesEmployment OpportunitiesForms and PermitsFrequently Asked QuestionsLatest NewsLinksMaps and DataMinutes and AgendasNew Business InformationNewsletterOrdinancesPublic NoticesREGIS Public MappingSchedule of FeesStrategic Plan

Minutes and Agendas
Overview  |  Building Board of Appeals  |  City Commission  |  Mineral Mining Review Board 
Planning Commission  |  Standale Downtown Development Authority  |  Zoning Board of Appeals
50th Anniversary Committee    
 

ZBA Minutes

MEETING
CITY OF WALKER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Thursday, January 11, 2007
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; Charles Deshaine; Rebecca Haven; James Hickey; Ken Fex; and Tyler Korfhage. Also present: Jeff Nelson, Building Department; Dick Denney, Building Department; and Bonnie Antcliff, Recording Secretary.

DECISION AND ORDER

Legal Description

Property located at 2070 Waldorf St. also known on the tax rolls as 41-13-10-327-011. Hearing requested by James Burns.

On June 10, 2004, the applicant requested a variance, which was granted to the Haunt, a professional Halloween attraction, to operate in an industrial zoned district. The Haunt not wishes to add an outdoor attraction in conjunction with their current indoor attraction. All activities in the industrial district are required to be conducted in a wholly enclosed building.

Finding of Facts

Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan submitted. He then read a letter from the Fire Inspector dated January 4, 2007. No citizens appeared with respect to this application.

James Burns, owner of the Haunt, stated that he wants to expand to meet competition in the area. Last year attendance dropped because of the weather, the Walker Ave. exit on the expressway was closed, and we had a power outage. Consequently, we had a drop in attendance of about 4,000 people. Being a seasonal operation, and only open 24 nights, we cannot afford to take hits like that. We do attract about 30,000 people annually. We do not feel that increasing the attraction will increase our attendance. We are offering another opportunity for entertainment. On the weekends we sometimes have a 2 to 3 hour wait to get in, which is outdoors, and we feel this would be an accommodation or a second attraction for people to do while they are waiting in line. This will be temporary. To the southeast corner of the property there is a field that is relatively level. We have no use for that property. We would level the property to insure proper footing and we will lay down green indoor – outdoor astro turf, which will insure proper footing for people going through the maze. The maze will be constructed fully free standing with 4 x 4 landscape timbers or posts and 4 x 8 sheets of ¾ in. OBS plywood horizontally attached. We will have security of course. We will continue to work closely with City officials as we have in the past. We have a great track record. This will operate in conjunction with the Haunt and will operate the same days and same hours. It will not be a disturbance to the area. We are considering working on Saturdays, for a couple of hours, a fun house maze for younger kids. There will be a couple of actors working in the maze otherwise it is just a big labyrinth, with dead ends and one way to get out. There is no theming or electrical requirements. Any type of lighting will come from the generator tower lights that we have to light our parking area.

Rebecca Haven asked what the hours of operation are?

Mr. Burns replied that Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday we are open 7:00 p.m. til 10:00 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays our hours are from 7:00 p.m. until midnight and Sunday from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. He went on to say that the tops of the walls will be 8 ft. and then from 4 ft. to the ground is open. That way people can crawl underneath to find another way or catch up with their friends.

Rebecca Haven questioned the hours. She stated that the hours of operation were from 10:00 a.m. to 8 p.m. Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday and Sunday from 12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on conditions imposed on this address when the original variance was granted.

Tyler Korfhage replied that those hours are unreasonable for this type of operation. Their hours were until 10:00 p.m. during the week and 12:00 p.m. on the weekend.

Mr. Burns felt that those hours were for the Christmas show that we did not 2535 Waldorf Ct. and had nothing to do with the Haunt.

Jim Hickey asked how do you cut off the line that is there at 10:00 p.m. at night?

Mr. Burns replied that the majority of people know they need to get there before closing so typically we have seen our lines diminish to practically nothing just before closing. If people pull into the parking lot, and it is 5 til closing, we do sell tickets up to closing time. At closing time, security will not allow anyone to hop into the line.

Rebecca Haven asked if there will be a sound system on the outdoor attraction?

Mr. Burns stated that no, there will not be a sound system outside.

Tyler Korfhage stated that The Haunt was operating next door to his business and Mr. Burns was a very good neighbor. The operation is only operating one month out of the year. He is always careful about his neighbors and safety and he puts on a quality show.

Roger Crabtree asked if they felt the existing parking lot lighting was sufficient to light the maze?

Mr. Burns replied that we have halogen fixtures on the east side of the building and we also rent two tower lights with 4 adjustable heads that are gas generator lights and we can position them to shine in any direction.

Rebecca Haven stated that she saw people crossing the street from the Andy Egan parking lot across the street on Waldorf. She was concerned with traffic going through there.

Mr. Burns replied that is something that we have tried to address. He stated he has talked with the City, as far as the police go. As individuals, we cannot go out there and stop traffic. That is why we try to light this up as much as possible. This is a safety concern that we are aware of.

Motion

Tyler Korfhage moved and Ken Fex supported the motion to grant the applicant’s request to add an outdoor attraction in conjunction with their current indoor attraction at The Haunt. All activities in the industrial district are required to be conducted in a wholly enclosed building.

There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. This is in an industrial zone but this is not an industrial operation.

The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the vicinity. The objective for an outdoor attraction is to keep up with rising competition in the industry and to offer a second venue of entertainment for patrons waiting in line for the indoor attraction. This could be considered to be similar to outdoor storage that is allowed in the industrial district.

Authorization of the variance will not be of a substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the intent and purpose of the ordinance or public interest. The proposed property would only require a minor amount of surface excavating in order to assure a level walking surface. The outdoor attraction would be constructed only as a temporary structure using free- standing 4 x 4 landscape timbers and ¾ in. OBS plywood.

The condition or the situation of the piece of property or the intended use of the property for which the variance is sought is not so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable for the formulation of a general regulation. This is not a general problem in that the ordinance should be changed.

Does not apply.

The Board imposed the following conditions:

1. Hours of operation Monday thru Thursday 7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. & Friday and Saturday 7:00 p.m. – 12:00 p.m. and Sunday 7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m.

2. Tickets not to be sold after operation hours but lines may exist at the time.

3. Attempt to put in a cross walk from across the street to the north.

Motion carried 6 to 1. Rebecca Haven opposed.

 

DECISION AND ORDER

Legal Description

Property located at 1320 Maplerow, NW also known on the tax rolls as 41-13-17-327-18. Hearing requested by Eric Kaiserlian.

The applicant’s request is to erect a detached accessory structure in the front yard instead of the rear yard as required. Existing detached accessory building is to be demolished.

Finding of Facts

Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan submitted. No other citizen appeared with respect to this application.

Mr. Kaiserlian stated that he moved from a 900 sq. ft. house into this house which is about 2,000 sq. ft. It is a good sized house but has almost zero storage. It has a very small garage that is full of yard maintenance equipment. He stated the small out building is very old and needs to be demolished and we plan on doing that. The new pole barn will be 1500 sq. ft. and we would like a gabled style roof to maximize the storage above. It will be 30 x 50 and a gabled style roof.

Jeff Nelson stated that the variance is for the location of the building. He will still have to meet all the requirements as far as size and height of the building, total area for the size of his lot, and the barn style roof can be done as long as he does not exceed the maximum allowed in the ordinance.

Mr. Kaiserlian stated that the wall height will be 12 ft. finished. It will be 19 ft. from the lot line so he has a lot of room.

Jim Hickey asked if the building was going to be placed where the stakes are placed on the property?

Mr. Kaiserlian stated yes that is correct. The other building will be torn down.

Roger Crabtree stated that the building is 30 ft. wide and the building will cover half of one lot.

Mr. Kaiserlian stated that the new building will not be seen from the property on any of the four sides in the spring and summer due to the vegetation that is there.

Motion

Chuck Deshaine moved and Rebecca Haven supported the motion to grant the applicant’s request to erect a detached accessory structure in the front yard instead of the rear yard as required. Existing detached accessory building is to be demolished.

There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district. Our house is built at the back of the property leaving very little room for any structure. The front yard from house to street measures approximately 550 ft.

The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the vicinity. 1729 Kinney, 2726 Bryanwood, and 3653 Grand Bluffs have similar situations.

Authorization of the variance will not be of a substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the intent and purpose of the ordinances or public interest. The home and yard is completely hidden from all sides thanks to very thick vegetation facing the street and wooded lot lines.

The condition or the situation of the piece of property or the intended use of the property for which the variance is sought is not so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable for the formulation of a general regulation. This is not a general problem in that the ordinance should be changed.

Does not apply.

Motion carried 7 to 0.

 

DECISION AND ORDER

Motion

Ken Fex moved and Chuck Deshaine supported the motion to remove 4787 Lake Michigan Dr. from the table.

Motion carried 7 to 0.

Legal Description

Property located at 4787 Lake Michigan Dr., NW also known on the tax rolls as 41-13-19-351-39. Hearing requested by Faro Uccello.

The applicant’s request is to construct an 880 sq. ft. dining room to Uccello’s Restaurant with 38 fewer parking spaces than the required under the new off street parking ordinance.

Finding of Facts

Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan submitted. He stated that this application was tabled because we needed a correct count on what the shortages were for parking. He then read a letter from Tim Alspach dated January 4, 2007.

Mr. Alspach stated that Frank Wash wants to keep the 11 parking spaces on the retail. Retail is calculated on 75% useable which is very close to a restaurant type use. It could go down as much as 50% and we could gain another 11 cars. If we are going to keep the 11 in reserve, based on the 75% it is almost like a double dip. Why couldn’t we use what would be a 50 or 60% count and keep that as a reserve and still count the 11 that are left over from the retail center? This is a percentage game. We have a patio that is equal to what this banquet facility will need and it is our contention that there will never be a full use of the entire facility because of the minimal use of this patio. We calculated and we can get 10 spots on the side to the north.

Robert Marz asked that this agreement lease you have on the property to the west, is that for 6 years?

Mr. Alspach replied yes, with options to renew with rights to purchase. Frank Wash does not have a problem with using those numbers on the spots available in Tallmadge.

Robert Marz stated that his concern is that if the property is not purchased, the agreement goes away in 6 years. Once we grant the variance, it goes with the property forever. He felt that if they lost the parking to the west, the banquet facility and the patio should be shut down. He did not feel that the 11 spots at the retail center should be counted at all since that is a variable factor.

James Hickey stated that there is 9100 sq. ft. of retail space here and none of it is rented. There are five units here. If one person parks there that works in the retail, and one customer comes in, that is 10 parking spots so those should not be considered. If the west side goes away there will be a dire shortage.

Roger Crabtree stated that if they owned the parking area on the north side, there would be no problem here.

Robert Marz felt there should be some compromise here because they did fulfill the parking requirements until the ordinance changed so some of this is created by the City.

Charles Deshaine stated that if you drive in, and all the parking spots are full, you drive out and leave.

Rebecca Haven felt that maybe the DDA should consider some kind of common parking lot. Right across the street from here is a large parking lot on the northwest side of Meijers that is barely utilized.

Mr. Alspach stated that Mr. Uccello was approved under the old ordinance and that was based on the usable program. He pursued 48 parking spots because he knows it is good for business. The gas line runs through the property so it can only be used for parking on this lot.

Tyler Korfhage asked what happens if they lose this parking? Can we come back and say they have to close the banquet room?

Jeff Nelson stated he felt the variance should either be given or not but do not attach conditions on this, as it would be difficult to enforce.

Jim Hickey stated that we gave you approval to enclose the patio and you opted not to do that and now you want to put an addition on the building that is about the same size as the patio. Your parking would have been ok had you done that. It seems obvious that you would enclose the patio and not have to put on this addition since the patio is not used that much.

Mr. Alspach replied that in the summer when it is slow, people like to sit outside. It is used 15% of the time. We tried to enclose it with windows but the price was outrageous.

Roger Crabtree stated that D & W came to us to get approval for outside dining and they never used it. Shots had a variance to have outdoor dining and you rarely see anyone sitting out there. The National Pastime also got a variance for a deck outside and it was rarely used. For 15% use he felt they should get rid of the outdoor dining and enclose it.

The manager of Ucellos stated that the patio is used. When it is nice outside people like to be outside. He stated we need a separate room for private parties.

Motion

Ken Fex moved and Tyler Korfhage supported the motion to deny the applicant’s request to construct an 880 sq. ft. dining room to Uccello’s Restaurant with 38 fewer parking spaces than the required under the new off street parking ordinance. The Board failed to find extraordinary circumstances to modify the new parking ordinance.

Motion carried 4 to 3. Robert Marz, Rebecca Haven, and Charles Deshaine opposed.

Motion

Roger Crabtree moved and Jim Hickey supported the motion to approve the Zoning Board of Appeals minutes from December 14, 2006.

Motion carried 7 to 0.

Motion

Ken Fex moved and Jim Hickey supported the motion to adjourn the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting at 8:50 p.m.

Motion carried 7 to 0.

______________________

Roger Crabtree, Secretary

 

 

 

Government  |  Departments  |  Community  |  Resource Center
Contact Us  |  Search  |  Site Map  |  Home  |  
Site Use Policy

Bringing the World to Your Corner of the WorldThe 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.