Chairperson BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA 0BCity Hall Council Chambers- Lower Level 1B611 E. Grand River - Howell, MI 48843 Visit us online at www.cityofhowell.org Board members and other officials normally in attendance: 1. Jeannette Ambrose Board Member 2. David Holmes Board Member 3. Ken Keith Co-Chairperson 4. Victoria Hertrich Board Member 5. Sean Munsey Chairperson 6. William Flattery Board Member 7. Randall Mattson Board Member 8. Deanna Robson Recording Secretary 9. Timothy R. Schmitt Community Dev. Director 10. Dennis Perkins City Attorney 11. Vacant Board Member-Alternate 12. Vacant Board Member-Alternate Wednesday, June 1, 2016 7:00 p.m. 1. Approve minutes of the May 4, 2016 Meeting 2. #16-013 304 Maple Street Variance for height of fence in front yard 3. #16-015 321 West Street Variance for rear yard setback for construction of new home. 4. Adjourn WELCOME! Visitors are cordially invited to attend all meetings of the Board of Zoning Appeals. If you wish to address the Board, you will be recognized by the Chairperson. NOTE: Please turn off or silence pagers and cell phones during meetings. In the case of An emergency, if page/call needs to be taken, please leave the Council Chambers.
City of Howell Board of Zoning Appeals Wednesday, May 4, 2016 City Council Chambers 611 E. Grand River Howell, MI 48843 The meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals was called to order by Chairman Munsey at 7:02 pm. Present: Sean Munsey, Ken Keith, William Flattery, David Holmes, Victoria Hertrich, Randall Mattson, City Attorney Dennis Perkins, Community Development Director Timothy Schmitt, and Recording Secretary Deanna Robson. Absent: None. Guests: Douglas and Debra Mitchell, Mike and Linda Dinoff. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 25, 2015 MOTION by Flattery, SUPPORTED by Mattson to approve the minutes of the August 25, 2015 meeting. MOTION CARRIED (6-0). #16-011 1167 LAKESIDE DRIVE - SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (3 REQUIRED V. 1 PROPOSED) Chairman Munsey opened the public hearing at 7:03 pm and invited the applicant to address the Board. Mike Dinoff, 1167 Lakeside, stated that the request is for a carport to store his secondary vehicle. Deborah Mitchell, 1145 Lakeside, informed the Board that she attended the meeting because she is concerned with runoff from the structure onto her property. Mr. Dinoff responded that gutters will be installed on both sides of structure in order to direct the water flow. Discussion followed regarding the overhang and its proximity to the property line, and the Board determined that there will be no adverse impact on the neighboring property. City Attorney Perkins addressed Linda Dinoff because her name was not listed on the request and asked her if she also owns the property and joins her husband in seeking the variance. Mrs. Dinoff conferred. There were no comments from the public. Chairman Munsey closed the public hearing at 7:05 pm. MOTION by Mattson, SUPPORTED by Flattery to approve the request of a side yard setback variance to allow construction of a carport located 1 from the property line at 1167 Lakeside Drive based on the following findings of fact: A. That the restrictions of this Zoning Ordinance unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose of would render conformity unnecessarily burdensome;
Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting May 4, 2016 B. That the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners in the district and a lesser relaxation than that requested would not give substantial relief to the owner of the property or be consistent with the justice to other property owners; C. That the plight of the landowner is due to the unique circumstances of the property. D. That the alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. MOTION CARRIED (6-0). SET DATE AND TIME FOR JUNE MEETING The Board set the June meeting for Wednesday, June 1 st at 7:00 pm. ADJOURN MOTION by Mattson, SUPPORTED by Flattery, To adjourn the meeting at 7:08 p.m. MOTION CARRIED (6-0). Deanna Robson, Recording Secretary 2
CITY OF HOWELL VARIANCE ANALYSIS APPLICANT INFORMATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: Adam Kreeger 304 Maple Street PROPERTY ID #: 17-35-404-063 ZONING: R-1, One-Family Residential DATE: May 26, 2016 VARIANCE REQUESTED The applicant is requesting height variance from Section 5.11 Fences and Walls to allow a new fence to be constructed in the front yard of the property along Gregory Street. The fence is proposed to be six feet tall when only four feet is permitted in the yard adjacent to a street. SUMMARY The property in question is an occupied corner lot, located at the northeast corner of Maple and Gregory Streets, just north of West Street and Railroad Street, just north of the main railroad tracks that bisect town. The current owner purchased the property in 2002. The property is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential. The parcel is a standard sized City lot, 66 feet wide and 145 feet deep. The narrow dimension is along Maple Street and the wider dimension is along Gregory Street. There is a detached garage to the rear of the house, facing Gregory, with a deck between the house and garage. There is also a deck and a concrete sidewalk around a pool, that is located partially in the rear yard and partially in the front yard along Gregory Street. There was previously a three foot tall wooden fence, covered in vines, that surrounded the backyard pool area. The vines appear to have died and the new owners removed them and the fence and applied for a new fence to be installed. All of the properties in the surrounding area are single-family detached homes. RELEVANT ZONING ORDINANCE STANDARDS Section 5.11 Fences and Walls sets out the following standards for this property in the R-1 district: Front Yard fence height: 48 inches permitted in the nonaddressed front yard of a corner lot Proposed: 6 feet (72 inches)
#16-015 - Variance Request 321 West Street Rear Yard Setback Page 2 The applicant has already received a permit to replace the fence on the property, subject to requesting a variance for the additional height in the front yard. Currently, the permit that was issued only permits a 48 inch fence along Gregory Street. The applicant stated at the time that they would install taller posts to allow for future fence height, if approved, or would cut down the posts to the 48 inch height if the variance was denied. VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS Section 12.04 (Powers and Duties) of the City of Howell Zoning Ordinance gives the BZA the power to review applications for variances and grant variances from the strict provisions of the Zoning Ordinance when extraordinary or exceptional conditions exist for which the strict application of the regulations enacted would result in peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional undue hardship upon, the owner of property. Relief from the Zoning Ordinance may be granted, but only without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. To grant a use variance, the BZA must state the grounds upon which it justifies the granting of a variance, which is commonly called finding of fact. The BZA must provide findings of fact to show that if the Zoning Ordinance is applied strictly, practical difficulties are held against the applicant, including the following (from Section 12.04 (e)): A. That the restrictions of this Zoning Ordinance unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose of would render conformity unnecessarily burdensome; The restriction on the fence location does not unreasonably prevent owner from using the property, nor does it render conformity unnecessarily burdensome. A fence is still permitted, it simply has to be slightly shorter, given the location in question. B. That the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners in the district and a lesser relaxation than that requested would not give substantial relief to the owner of the property or be consistent with the justice to other property owners; The variance request would allow the owner to have full use of their rear and front yards as part of their pool area. Corner lots, however, are relatively common in any community and fences are generally not permitted in the front yard. They break up the streetscape and create barriers throughout a neighborhood, as opposed to some continuity of yard or landscaping. Additionally, there are least two lesser options available to the owner in this case, a 48 tall fence in any location or to push the six foot tall fence as far towards the pool deck as possible, thereby lessening the variance request substantially. C. That the plight of the landowner is due to the unique circumstances of the property. The plight of the landowner in this case is based partially on the circumstances of the lot, given the location of the existing pool and the nature of the corner lot. There are,
#16-015 - Variance Request 321 West Street Rear Yard Setback Page 3 however, less intrusive options available, including putting the fence closer to the pool or only installing a 48 fence, which is permitted under the Zoning Ordinance. D. That the alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The hardship is based largely on two parts. The double fronted nature of the lot causes an increased setback requirement and/or lower fence height. The location of the pool on the lot is also problematic for fencing, as the pool actually protrudes slightly into the front yard, which would not be permitted under today s standards. The current owner of the lot did not create either of these situations. STAFF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION Six foot tall fences in front yards are generally not permitted. They are visually jarring on a street full of green front yards and break up the feeling of a neighborhood, by creating a visual obstruction. They also create blind spots for drivers, as the fence blocks all cars exiting the driveway from the view of drivers heading south. However, the pool is located partially in the yard adjacent to Gregory Street and effective screening and fencing of pools is important. A 48 inch tall fence is permitted by ordinance and does provide some screening and meets the requirements for fencing pool. Additionally, there is a lesser variance that would be supported more by Staff, moving the fence to the edge of the concrete pool deck, which is ten feet into the property. Although this still does not meet the ordinance requirements, it is a lesser request that would eliminate the vision issues for the southbound drivers and would provide some yard in the area, lessening the visual obstruction generally. Based on the findings of fact presented above, staff cannot recommend approval of the requested variance. If the Board of Zoning Appeals were to consider the lessened variance of having a six foot fence at the edge of the concrete pool deck, ten feet into the property, Staff would be able to support such a variance. Given that it is a lesser variance than was noticed to the public, no new public hearing would be required.
HOWELL MICHlG.AN CITY OF HOWELL REQUEST FOR REVIEW 611 E. Grand River Ave. Howell, MI 48843 (517) 546-3861 FAX: (517) 546-6030 Date_---=O:... (i_'?_o;_-_zo_l_b - - Permit#_l--- f g_,_g_- o_~_( Location of Property ----"3'---o.y_.J_;lA_-' GI\+d_,{... e~-=s_.f_,_<..:... t 7 City Charter, Ordinance Chapter, Section and Paragraph you are petitioning under (ARTICLE 7 SIGNS) _:._{- Body(s) to be Addressed Noning Board of Appeals 0 Planning Commission PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION Name A'---'--'J=--01 =--.-v} --=--~'<::_/' ---=(..'--"t..,.t.. ).:..._ t- v Address ~_o_y.:.. +-jl/l...o..._~ VI7 nl.!./.~.- r Property Owners Signature giving conse Phone ( ) (7 ) { / 2 - { J),Y c Y_'1_. City Yo vvc I( State;Vli Zip {( lj Y (" etjtjon LAND USE Nature of Petition 0 Site Plan 0 Appeal 0 Rezoning 0 P.U.D. 0 Sign Approval 0 Other Zoning 0 Present 0 Proposed Corner Lot 0 Yes 0 No Lot Size width depth sq. footage Property Setbacks from rear right side left side Barrier Free 0 Yes 0 No Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Handicap Spaces PROJECT NARRATIVE State your case, be specific. If you desire a type of special consideration or special use, so state. If additional space is needed, attach as EXHIBIT A. 7?_ I( Fc V) C e. 5 V- vv U la J.lJ (. 0 { "'-.) >~ fl{y If c "'?o-'1 ) - ;IJ0.Ac L, II n f fta.c,~ ol c I c.""? c e_ Cc/l-k.,.5f, Attach the following documentation with your request: 0 Legal Description of the Property (EXHIBIT A-1) 0 Architect/Engineering Drawing (EXHIBIT A-2) 0 Location Map (EXHIBIT A-3) Continued on back.
NON-USE/DIIVIENSIOI'JAL VARIANCEREQUEST NARRATIVE Section 12.04(e) of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the applicant present evidence to show that if the Zoning Ordinance is strictly applied, practical difficulties will result to the applicant. Please provide a narrative and evidence concerning how all four (4) of these practical difficulties apply to your property. The Board of Zoning Appeals may nor grant a variance unless it determines that each of the following circumstances exist. If additional space is needed, attach as EXHIBIT B. 1. That the restrictions of the Zoning 0 rdinance would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose. 3. That the plight of the landowner is due to the unique circumstances of the property. 2. That the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners in the district and a lesser relaxation than that requested would not give substantial relief to the owner of the property or be more consistent with justice to other property owners. 4. That the alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. Attach the following documentation with your request: 0 Survey of Property depicting the use/dimentional request (EXHIBIT B-1) 0 Construction Drawing(s) of Proposed Structure, if applicable (EXHIBIT B-2) APPLICANT INFORMATION Narne ~z1 ~~o/--~-~~--~"-r~~c~c-~~{~~------------------------------------------------------------ Phone clq_) 6 7 2. - { 3 7 y Cell ( ) Email C1. i,t ~Ieee?C.~ e o/ """"''/.C-.-, I Address _ )_ a_y=--...;v{ c. VI+- /-'-' (e ;> "---'- f -'- City {1 o vv-e- { f State jill.[ Zip <(!; (z (> I hereby certify that the proposed work is authorized by the owner of record and that I have been authorized to make this application as his/her authorized agent, and we agree to conform to all laws of the State of Michigan. All information submitted on this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Section 23a of the State Construction code Act of 1972, Act No. 230 of the Public Acts of 1972, being Section 125.1523a of the Michigan Complied Laws, prohibits a person from conspiring a circumvent the licensing requirements of this state relating to persons building or a residential structure. Violators of Section 23a are subject to civil fines. l:;:;;;l Signature of Applicant -~..c:;..--+--;;r""---------------------- Date Please Print.A'----'-"--'------'---'=-"-;::~,...=---------- Title,[""' J_ (A...- v"l _ C_ _v- LIVINGSTON COUNTY& STATE OF.MICHIGAN. ~F::RMITS & INS~ECTIONS Local governmental agency to complete this section. Inspection Required? Approved Date Number By Appeal is hereby: 0 Yes 0 No 0 GRANTED 0 REFUSED for the followingreason(s): Approval Signature _ I Title Date _
66.0 J_ ~ Tfl \,_J ~ r r4 '\ ~~: ;3/ LOT 79 LOT 80 ~I ' I Ji ~) 0 0 0 y: N Ou Ow :S:o 'v o u z -~I 0 z ::::> 0 cr. ' <.:>3 zc _ o.. 14.0 u z ~ 8,., n / I L CAR /::, WOOD SID. FRiv\. GAR n N N ASPH. DR IVE VIOOD DECK 0 r-- 4 7 / 37.0 / /f304 2 STORY wooo' SID ""/ FRM. RES / " 1 W/ f:jsm't / / / 3_2.5 10.0 16.6' (\,.,_ ' \ -.::. ~ ) 66.0 4' WALK ASPH.PAV'T MAPLE AVE. 56' ; ;;; -.er edy cer tify that we hove surveyeo the above -. : ~ ~ : :>=r~ y f Qccordonce with the description furnished for : :~c :-' ::..,-_,:;,tgoge 100n to be mode by th e forementioned _ - :r::::~:::-. c.~c U10t the buildings located lr1ereon do =-= :_:- : ::= -:c_ cc:ng properly, nor do the buildings on the, :.:..::- :_. :: - ~-:..::cr. ~pan the property heretofore described, _ - o 5_-.c:y s not lo be used for the purpose of.. ~ - 'or construcl;on purposes, no stokes ~o-noory corn ers. WD......,.'.- -...- JS r:;ju~&a --- -
CITY OF HOWELL DEPARTf\!lENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY OWNER OF PROPERTY: KREEGER, MICHELLE PERMISSION IS HEREBY GIVEN TO: :Privacy fence around pool. Stipulations: 48" in front yard, 6' in rear and side yards.will need to fill out a ZBA application to allow for increase in height. CLASS OF WORK: FENCE Parcel#: 4717-35-404-063 AT: 304 MAPLE PERMIT NO.: PB16-062 DATE: 04/29/16 THIS CARD SHALL BE DISPLAYED ON SITE AT ALL TIMES UNTIL FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE. INSPECTIONS SHALL BE REQUESTED A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. Permits shall become INVALID AFTER 180 DAYS of work being stopped or abandoned Phone Howell (517) 546-3861 If you dig... You must notify MISS DIG 3 full working days before beginning your project (800) 482-7171 Fax No. (517) 546-6030 POSSIBLE INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: Footing (Open rail, Trench, Posthole), Backfill, Compaction Rough Frame, Insulation, Drywall, and Final. NOTICE: This permit covers building construction only Plumbing, Electrical and Mechanical Permits must be obtained from Livingston County Building Dept. A Soild Erosion Permit or waiver may be required from the Livingston County Drain Commission.
HOWELL MI<CH]6AN CITY OF HOWELL APPLICATION FOR BUilDING AND ZONING PERMIT 611 E. Grand River Ave. Howell, Ml 48843 (517) 546-3861 fax (517) 546-6030 Property Tax ID#: City Permit#: APR \.0' '' 5 Date: b) /2 ') r?. u i b Name: AJ ()IVV\ F HOWEll Property Address: ]o;~( ;/t"'f(l )t,..~ri City: Hu 'l.jt (f - State: fill-j Zip: V ff R Y) Name: /\Jc-..., ~.r (ii:jr..r Address: ) 0 ~ Jll~rlc. 51-.rt.--et City: lic.'-""vtf _:_::.--. --.. ~. -_--- _,-~" -.--.-. - - -o..--: :; --:-'-'-_.:--~ Phone: C 5 ( 7) b 7 C - f J 7 {{ State: fi!'l-1- Zip: V [ { <( J Owner's Signature: ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER if applicable (required for commercial work} Name: Phone: Address: City: State: Zip: Email: License#: II CONTRACTOR II Name: Phone: Address: City: State: Zip: Email: License#: Exp. Date: Federal Employee ID: II TYPEOF IMPROVEMENT II D New Building D Addition 0Aiteration D Foundation Only D Porch/Deck ~nee D Repair Osign D Demolition D Roof D Garage/ Accessory Structure LJ Site work D Other (please specify): D Mobile Home Set-Up D Pool Project narrative- Describe current and proposed use of property and structures: 1g 11 f r: ;/CI(cy fc/\((.. C'11r/lW... J I(),) ( J A. frd/,.,_jr V;ArJ/& I i A (f.a{ t ~~t f /"J) Estimated cost: Plan Review Fee: Permit Fee: Performance Bond: dod TOTAL DUE: Continued on back
Zoning ~-1 bhl-1 OR-2 OHL-2 OR-M 0PUD OB-1 0MXD OB-2 01-1 OcBD 01-2 Do-1 Lot Size: Corner lot? Setbacks: Height (of building, sign, or fence): Lot Dimensions: Width: ISJ:Yes 0No fro~t: N~---. 1/ Rear: I~ r L I Right Side: c Minimum distance between buildings: {6 ( Length: 6 i Left Side: { { I Easement or right-of-way on property? DYes ~-No Tree Clearing? ~es DNo Grading or excavation which changes site elevation b/~e teee feet? DYes 1 ~o Excavation or grading over 100 cubic yards of earth? DYes ~o Storage of hazardous materials? DYes Qo Number of off-street parking spaces (for non-residential projects): Barrier-free spaces: II BUILDINGINFORMATION- Type of foundation: Building size: Basement House Garage Other General type of construction: Existing Alterations New Total Sign Information: Type of sign: 0Freestanding Dwall Owindow 0Projecting Sign area (measured as smallest rectangle that can be drawn around the advertising): Dimensions: Length: Width: Height: II APPLICANT INFORMATION II Name: Phone: Email: Address: City: State: Zip: I hereby certify that the proposed work is authorized by the owner of record and that I have been authorized to make this application as his/her authorized agent, and I agree to conform to all laws of the State of Michigan. All information submitted on this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Section 23a of the State Construction Code Act of 1972, Act. No. 230 of Public Acts of 1972, being Section 125.1523a of the Michigan Compiled Laws, prohibits a person from conspiring to circumvent the licensing requirements of this state relating to persons who are to perform work on are "dential building or residential structure. Violators of Section 23a are subject to civil. / fines.
--- ~-- - ;. -- " - - - - -----..; - - - ~-- _-c ~. ~- Permit/Inspection Required~ Approved Date By Site DYes []]No Electrical DYes []No Mechanical DYes 0No Plumbing DYes DNo Water Supply DYes DNo Sewer DYes DNo Variance DYes 0No Special Land Use DYes []No Other DYes [I]No ~ 0 t.iii Zoning ApBr-oval: J, j ;;L ~ A _ Signatur~;/ L ~~.~, \() y f,r---- ~- ff~_jc~fj A-\ -r--- <07v~~ fi,j Building Approval: Signature: Title: Date: CTY BLD:
JEWETT Date: 5/27/2016 MAPLE BROOKS Subject Property WA L NU T LIV I NG ST ON BR OO KS #16-014 - 304 Maple Street - Front Yard Fence Variance CENTER
\ \ \..
CITY OF HOWELL VARIANCE ANALYSIS APPLICANT INFORMATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: Mefail Telias 321 West Street PROPERTY ID #: 17-36-102-011 ZONING: R-1, One-Family Residential DATE: May 25, 2016 VARIANCE REQUESTED The applicant is requesting a side yard setback variance from Section 4.07 Permitted Schedule of Area, Height, Width and Setback Regulations to construct a new house on the vacant lot at 321 West Street. The new home would be setback only thirteen feet from the neighboring property in the east, where thirty-five feet are required SUMMARY The property in question is a vacant corner lot, located at the southeast corner of West Street and Railroad Street, just south of the railroad tracks that bisect Howell from the southeast to the northwest. The property has been vacant since 2007 when the house was demolished by a previous owner. The previous home had deterioriated substantially and the City was beginning demolition proceedings on the home, before the owner decided to resolve the situation. The property is zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential. The parcel is a standard sized City lot, 66 feet wide and 132 feet deep. The narrow dimension is along Railroad Street and the wider dimension is along West Street. Given that the property is addressed on West Street and that is the predominant development pattern in the area, the front yard is considered the one along West Street, with the one along Railroad considered a side yard with street frontage and is therefore treated the same as a front yard. The rear yard is to the east and the interior side yard to the south. The area in residential in nature, with single-family homes in the immediate vicinity. The property to the east is a duplex that is a rental property. RELEVANT ZONING ORDINANCE STANDARDS Section 4.07 Permitted Schedule of Area, Height, Width, and Setback Regulations sets out the following standards for this property in the R-1 district:
#16-015 - Variance Request 321 West Street Rear Yard Setback Page 2 Rear yard setback: 35 foot setback required Proposed: 13 feet In reviewing the plan that was provided, City Staff has noted no additional variances that are needed as the applicant has sited the house on the lot in such a way as to meet all other setback requirements and the plan for a modest sized house meets all other applicable ordinance standards as well. VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS Section 12.04 (Powers and Duties) of the City of Howell Zoning Ordinance gives the BZA the power to review applications for variances and grant variances from the strict provisions of the Zoning Ordinance when extraordinary or exceptional conditions exist for which the strict application of the regulations enacted would result in peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional undue hardship upon, the owner of property. Relief from the Zoning Ordinance may be granted, but only without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. To grant a use variance, the BZA must state the grounds upon which it justifies the granting of a variance, which is commonly called finding of fact. The BZA must provide findings of fact to show that if the Zoning Ordinance is applied strictly, practical difficulties are held against the applicant, including the following (from Section 12.04 (e)): A. That the restrictions of this Zoning Ordinance unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose of would render conformity unnecessarily burdensome; The lot is standard size and shape and would normally be a very easy lot to build a new house on. However, with the front yard having been established as West Road, meeting all the setback requirements for the lot would allow for only a 6 foot wide home. Changing the front yard to Railroad Street would be possible, but would change the predominant pattern in the area and in order to get a garage on the lot, would require the nearly the entire frontage on Railroad Street to be take up by garage, instead of a front porch or entrance to a house. It would also push the house closer to the property in the east, as the setback would only be eight feet. B. That the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners in the district and a lesser relaxation than that requested would not give substantial relief to the owner of the property or be consistent with the justice to other property owners; The variance is a reasonable request while still allowing for a house with reasonable dimensions. The setback being proposed is actually larger than would be required if Railroad Street was considered the front yard, pushing the structure slightly further away from the neighboring duplex. It would not confer onto this applicant any relief that would be inconsistent with other property owners in similar circumstances.
#16-015 - Variance Request 321 West Street Rear Yard Setback Page 3 C. That the plight of the landowner is due to the unique circumstances of the property. The hardship in this case is based entirely on the fact that the parcel has two frontages, leading to increased setback requirements. The applicant will require a variance for almost any house design, absent an extremely narrow one that would be unfeasible to construct or even live in. The property was originally platted with a house facing West Street as the front yard and when the previous house was removed from the property, it was extremely likely that future construction on the lot would require a variance. D. That the alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The hardship is based entirely on the two frontage situation on the lot. The hardship itself was not created by the current ownership, but by the original platters of the lot. STAFF REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION The setback variance request is the only viable option for the applicant to be able to build a new home on the lot. With West Street as the front yard, a new house on the lot would only be able to be six feet wide to meet all the setback requirements on the property. The fact that the development patterns of the area make West Street the preferred front yard create the situation. Additionally, the proposed location of the house is actually setback more than it would need to be if the front yard was Railroad Street. It should also be noted, that as shown on the attached drawing, the house on the lot previously was substantially more non-conforming that what is being proposed at this time. Based on the findings of fact presented above, staff recommends approval of the requested variance.
HOWELL MICHIGAN CITY OF HOWELL REQUEST FOR REVIEW 611 E. Grand River Ave. Howell, MI 48843 (517) 546-3861 FAX: (5 17) 546-6030 Date J-_-_G_-_2- _ o_ /_-6 Permit# Location of Property 3 ~_(,.., _----=.W_'=.:...-_s_..._ { _~s'-j- "------------------------------- City Charter, Ordinance Chapter, Section and Paragraph you are petitioning under (ARTICLE 7 SIGNS) Body(s) to be Addressed Zoning Board of Appeals 0 Planning Commission. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION Name MeF=Ar it.. Tt=t:.-t.:tf-5 Address Ss (, r -.oe t L- S t at e~ Zip 4J!'t8 S' Property Owners S ig~on=-ti-ri_o_n Signature ~ LAND USE Nature ofperirion ~ P l an r{;..ppeal 0 Rezoning Zoning grresem 0 Proposed -~ - ~ 0 P.U.D. 0 Sign Approval 0 Other _ Corner Lor 0 Yes 0 No Lor Size width.,"-.-:;(,~--- depth,/. S==----2. =--- sq. foo tage - ---bi;'-r--7---'t_'(_=-- Property Setbacks from L...: =--c5"~--- rear,_ I ""- 5 right side Lf 0 left side ----'--'~'--"--=-,..,S'-"0""------ Barrier Free lffi ry~ 0 No Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Handicap Spaces PROJECT NARbTIVE Stare your case, be specific. If you desire a type of special consideration or special use, so state. If additional space is needed, attach as EXHIBIT A Attach the following documentation with your request: 0 Legal Description of rhe Property (EXHIBIT A-1) 0 Architect/Engineering Drawing (EXHIBIT A-2) 0 Location Map (EXH IBIT A-3) Continued on back.
NON-USE/DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE REQUEST NARRATIVE Section 12.04(e) of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the applicant present evidence to show that if the Zoning Ordinance is strictly applied, practical difficulties will result to the applicant. Please provide a narrative and evidence concerning how all four (4) of these practical difficulties apply to your property. The Board of Zoning Appeals may not grant a variance unless it determines that each of the following circumstances exist. If additional space is needed, attach as EXHIBIT B. 1. That the restrictions of the Zoning Ordinance would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose. 3. That the plight of the landowner is due to the unique circumstances of the property. 2. That the variance would do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners in the district and a lesser relaxation than that requested would not give substantial relief to the owner of the property or be more consistent with justice to other property owners. 4. That the alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. Attach the following documentation with your request: 0 Survey of Property depicting the use/dimentional request (EXHIBIT B-1) 0 Construction Drawing(s) of Proposed Structure, if applicable (EXHIBIT B-2) APPLICANT INFORMATION Name ~~~~-~---~~~~7_L=----- '--~-L~;'-~~3~'--------------------------------------------------- Phone C2:i~) ]o 6 /)? 2 I Address 1{] lfy'j- ~-tz: Cell L_) Email t' City,(""-"=C=<--+'(ttCL_ 1 _c_i.=~="""-,<f----- State ~_Zip ~-3f7--- I hereby certify that the proposed work is authorized by the owner of record and that I have been authorized to make this application as his/her authorized agent, and we agree to conform to all laws of the State of Michigan. All information submitted on this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge. Section 23a of the State Construction code Act of 1972, Act No. 230 of the Public Acts of 1972, being Section 125.1523a of the Michigan Complied Laws, prohibits a person from conspiring a circumvent the licensing requirements of this state relating to persons who are to perform work on a residential building or a residential structure. Violators of Section 23a are subject to civil fines. Signature of Applicant _7 Please Print /_ /.. ---------- ~'-:7--=-z-:s-~"------------------------ Date._y-~,- w7 6 J_VZ_::~! 1:=---~!'--~.,;=1'--'--'1 C~~ -_t',c~7--=--. r'--clj:s~'---------- LIVINGSTON COUNTY & STATE OF MICHIGAN PERMITS & INSPECTIONS Local governmental agency to complete this section. Title ---''-"9--=-0-------".n=+---'c._J---''-',,c../_"".1:>=--.;t<~I_-_/J"----''~""'----- Inspection Required? Approved Date Number By Appeal is hereby: 0 Yes 0 No 0 GRANTED 0 REFUSED for the following reason(s): 7 Approval Signature Title Date
Mefail Telias BUILDER 2101207943 May, 6 2016 VARIANCE REQUEST To the City of Howell Board of Zoning, thank you for your review. The proposed project is for a new single family house construction, to be build on the lot addressed at 321 West street. This lot has been permitted for residential use, records would indicate that a single family home has stood on the lot till2007. The home has been demolished and the lot has remained vacant and undeveloped since 2007. The lot size is 132 feet frontage on West street, and 66 feet deep. (132x62) The proposed project is to construct a new single family house, 1 story, measuring 62x28. This particular lot is unique in its size, and location. With a 66 foot depth, there is a serious limitation on the type and size of house that can be constructed on this site. The selected house that is being proposed is the absolute minimum size that can be constructed, but can still be a practical, and ideal house for this specific area. I am requesting one variance on the rear yard for a setback of 13 feet. An approval would allow for a new house to be constructed on this lot. The lot is suited for a house, it is zoned residential, and a house once stood on this lot. However, the lot is disadvantaged by its size, and location. Where neither its size, nor location can change, a variance is the only way to transform this vacant lot from something that looks abandoned and out of place to a property with a new house and a new family. Also, with many houses in the area, wether looking at the sides, or front, have less than 13 feet setback. This variance would yield a net positive for all neighbors in the area. I am a licensed builder/investor, and will commit to building a home that will benefit the area in the most positive way, and further more, this type of project can serve as a catalyst to attract other investors and investment into the area. Thank You /;1 A"/,,,>",. ~--,~ I' ~/e.. /"
Mefail Telias Builder License 2101207943 SITE PLAN 321 WEST ST VARIANCE REQUEST COPY Existing structure Duplex apartment ~ Property line 11321===------------ @) ~13 teetval"lance! Railroad dr 66' ~-----~~------~ ~ Proposed house 1097 sq/f Slab l ~ 129' 11"1 rop 16' ncdrlve ~ ' ~ Drain West street PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 321 West st, Howell, Livingstone County, Michigan, Lot 150
Purchase agreement for property located on 1. City approval to build single family home. 2. Land to pass soilloompaction inspection for building, with no additional engineering, or any residual underground clean up from previous structure. Buyer requests 14 days, from date of signed agreement to inquire with city, and inspect the land. (buyer) MEFAIL TEUAS Date Date
-----. - - ~ I ~ ~------oa. ~J 'S- 'Z ~ l...,.. ~---'::-:;---'--t---7- ~-~---;-.J;;I;-::Q:;-~ ---, r l'...-$ ~l r I - ~ a~~~o~~~o~-~0~--~..._ l /,\lfl\:1(\l'~fj I ) I ) I J /'-- <(, 3 u) \ 7 / q : L:l I \9 tu ~ 2 { l - 0 1- :r: VI - - X L!J ~ 'l 1-~~ V):i)(t- U-)3~ < 0 \..j -N~ -?('() (\)\P~ \()., ~ ri\ ::,. L._ v RJ.\IL ~0 A:t:> ~~
Date: 5/26/2016 0 WE TM O 37.5 RE 75 150 Feet 321 West Street - Rear Yard Setback BZA request Subject Property RA ILR OA D CH ES T NU T WE ST