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 8, 2009
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; Brian Boelens; Randy Smith; James Hickey; and Beth Rogers; Also present: Jeff Nelson, Building Official; and Tammy Freedman, Recording Secretary.

3731 Northridge the meeting was left on the table per owner’s request he will be attending the January 22, 2009 Zoning Board of Appeal Meeting.

DECISION AND ORDER

Legal Description

Property located at 1616 Kinney, NW also known on the tax rolls as 41-13-17-151-033. Hearing requested by Bruce Miedema.

The applicant’s request is to split existing parcel creating one parcel with 90 ft. of frontage that is interrupted and leaving the house on Kinney without the required garage.

Finding of Facts

Robert Marz, Chairman reviewed the application and site plan submitted.

Jeff Nelson stated that this parcel would not be part of the proposed plat. The reason the applicant is here tonight is because the plat has only tentative preliminary plat approval which would leave 30 ft of frontage on Stark and 60 ft of frontage on Mission this would not be interrupted.

Robert Marz referred to the letter that was written by Frank Wash, Planning Director. Frank has some concerns that the piece of property that would be split does not have enough area which is required.

Jeff Nelson stated that he reviewed this and said that Frank Wash wasn’t sure if the measurements where from the right of way line or the property line. Jeff Nelson stated he scaled this property from the property lines not to the right of way line. They actually have a total of 18,000 sq ft. in area and they are required to have 11,880 in area. Frank Wash wasn’t sure at the time because it’s metes and bounds description if the lot was measured from the right-of-way line or the property line.

Robert Marz asked Jeff Nelson if Frank had some concerns about this property? Jeff Nelson indicated that he had not talked to Frank about this. He had obtained a copy of the plat from his secretary and scaled out the area of this property. Jeff Nelson indicated that the applicant is going to need more then this drawing to split the property he will have to have a survey or a legal description on the parcel to show he has the minimum area that is required.

Robert Marz asked if the survey would be a requirement of this split and Jeff Nelson indicated that he thought it should be one of the conditions. Jeff Nelson indicted that a formal survey or a legal description would be required before the property is split or otherwise the Assessor’s office would not accept the split.

Robert Marz asked if the applicant was present and if he had anything to add.

Bruce Miedema stated that he will have to have a survey completed on the property.

Jean King of 3845 Mission asked if the applicant or the Board if they could explain what is being proposed for the property.

Jeff Nelson stated that this lot would have been a separate lot from the proposed plat. The applicant is proposing to split off the lot now instead of later because the house is in poor condition and someone would like to buy the house and renovate it.

Jeff Nelson showed on a map where the existing garage is located. He indicated that the split could not be made with the garage on the other property. A principle building has to be located on a piece of property with a garage.

Robert Marz asked if the applicant is asking for the split to be made without a garage located on this piece of property.

Jeff Nelson stated this was correct.

Robert Marz asked why the garage could not be built on this piece of property?

Bruce Miedema stated that he has an offer to sell the house. He has not talked to the individual about putting a garage on this piece of property. Bruce Miedema would like to sell this house as is. Bruce Miedema stated that the house that is located to the North of his property at 1630 Kinney is a house without a garage, they share the same driveway.

Robert Marz stated that he understood what the applicant was asking for, but he sees no reason why the applicant could not put a garage there is plenty of room on this property.

Bruce Miedema stated that this house has been here for 75 years without a garage and he would just like to split the parcel and sell the house.

Robert Marz stated that he understood what the applicant was doing, but anytime something is changed or altered it should be in accordance to today’s standards.

Jim Hickey stated that when he was before the Planning Commission about a 1 ½ years ago the Planning Commission approved the plat with a connection between Mission and Stark for the road to go through. This request went before the City Commission and City Commission denied what the Planning Commission had approved. Jim Hickey stated that what Mr. Miedema wrote on his application under letter (a) for tentative preliminary plat approval was not approved and it is not correct. Jim Hickey stated the applicant would need to go back before the Planning Commission for plat approval and then the City Commission would have to approve final plat approval.

Jeff Nelson stated that the only part of this property that has 90 feet of street frontage is on Kinney.

Jeff Nelson showed on the aerial map that the applicant has 30 feet of street frontage on Stark, 60 feet on Mission and street frontage on Kinney. Jeff Nelson stated that if the property at 1616 Kinney is split the applicant will have less than 90 feet of uninterrupted street frontage which the ordinance requires.

Robert Marz asked if the application is correct.

Jeff Nelson indicated that the application is correct.

Jim Hickey stated in order to grant this variance the Board should have a better indication of what the street frontage or the area of the property is on Kinney.

Jeff Nelson asked Mr. Hickey if he would like to see more detail of how they are going to hook up to Mission and they have the required frontage before you would want to split this parcel?

Jim Hickey replied that was correct.

Randy Smith asked what the status is of the 50 x 100 easement?

Jim Hickey asked Bruce Miedema if they had purchased that easement on Stark.

Bruce Miedema replied that they had not purchased that easement.

Jim Hickey stated that the Board cannot land lock the property behind 1616 Kinney.

Charles Deschaine asked if we would be land locking the property behind?

Robert Marz stated that the Board would not be land locking this parcel if the applicant owns the access on Mission?

Bruce Miedema stated that they did own that access on Mission.

Randy Smith stated that if someone wanted to take the piece of property behind 1616 Kinney and not plat this property, Mr. Nelson could not give a building permit for that parcel because they would not have enough street frontage is this correct?

Jeff Nelson replied that they could build one house with a variance because they do have street frontage on Mission.

Robert Marz stated that the Board will need some information on how much right-of-way there is on the property at 1616 Kinney to see if that has a factor on how much area the lot will have.

Jeff Nelson stated that he scaled the property with a 50 scale the dimensions of the 18,000 sq. ft. of area was measured on the property line not from the right-of-way.

James Hickey asked if it would be easier for the applicant to have a meeting with Frank Wash and Jeff Nelson and determine how much area is on the property at 1616 Kinney?

The Board members agreed.

Robert Marz asked if the Board members were comfortable with that large of a piece of property and not having a garage on it?

The Board members said they were not

Jim Hickey asked if there was an ordinance that says they have to have a garage?

Jeff Nelson stated that at least a 12’ x 22’ garage is required.

Roger Crabtree asked if the applicant would have to have a garage in order to sell the property?

Jeff Nelson stated that in the past we made stipulations that within in 1 year after the variance was granted a 12’ x 22’ garage would have to be built.

Roger Crabtree asked the applicant if he had someone that wants to purchase the property?

Bruce Miedema stated that he did.

Randy Smith asked if the applicant has a purchase agreement?

Bruce Miedema stated that he did.

Motion

Charles Deschaine moved and Brian Boelens supported the motion to table the applicant’s request to split existing parcel creating one parcel with 90 ft. of frontage that is interrupted and leaving the house on Kinney without the required garage.

There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that does not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district.

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.

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 in that

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

Does not apply.

The Board proposed the following conditions:

Applicant to meet with Jeff Nelson and Frank Wash to go over with the applicant of how much area the lot on Kinney has.

Motion carried unanimously.

Motion

Charles Deschaine moved and Jim Hickey supported a motion to keep the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals Officers the same.

Motion carried unanimously.

Motion

Roger Crabtree moved and Jim Hickey supported a motion to adjourn the Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting at 7:45 p.m.

Motion carried unanimously.

___________________________

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.