Reference Desk

 

Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - January 14, 2009

THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

January 14, 2009

On January 14, 2009, a regular meeting of the Chesterfield Township Zoning Board of Appeals was held at the Township Hall located at 47275 Sugarbush, Chesterfield Twp., MI 48047.

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Stepnak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL: Present: Marvin Stepnak, Chairman

Carl Leonard, Vice-Chairman,

Nancy Orewyler, Secretary Robert Kohler, Planning Commission liaison

Brian Scott DeMuynck, Township board liaison

Gerald Blake

James Klonowski

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Chairman Stepnak explained the procedures to the audience.

4. ZBA PETITION # 2009-01: Mark Hawkins, 32719 Coach Drive, Chesterfield, MI 48047. Petitioner is requesting a 2' variance for separation between a main structure and accessory building. The request would make the structures 8' apart instead of the required 10'. Located at the above address.

Mark Hawkins, 32719 Coach Drive, Chesterfield, MI 48047 addressed the board.

Petitioner stated that he was requesting a variance between structures from the required 10' to 8'.  He was planning to build and addition on to his home and the garage would be 8’ from the structure instead of 10’.

Chairman Stepnak asked Mr. Shortt for any information he could share with the board on the petition?

Mr. Shortt stated that if the petition would be approved the garage must be completely enclosed in drywall. He asked the petitioner if the structure was being put on a slab and if the footing was at least 42" deep?

Petitioner stated that the footing was 42" x 12" with a 4" slab on top.

Mr. Shortt verified with the petitioner that the addition would be on a slab?

Petitioner answered that was correct.

Mr. Shortt stated that the Building Department did not have a problem with the variance.

Mr. Leonard commented that he noticed in the petitioner's letter that the building contractor he hired did not pull a permit.

Petitioner stated that he was under the impression that the contractor pulled the permit but later found out in a letter from Mr. St. James that the permit was never pulled.

Mr. Leonard asked the name of the company?

Petitioner answered it was D & A Contractors. He commented that he has tried to contact the

people about the matter, however, the phone number of the company has been disconnected and he was told by the person who referred him to them that the company was now out of business.

Mr. Leonard asked if the company just did the rough construction?

Petitioner answered yes.

Mr. Leonard asked who installed the slab and the footings?

Petitioner answered that the foundation work was done the beginning of April.

Mr. Leonard asked if the petitioner did that work or was it hired out?

Petitioner stated that he hired that work out as well.

Mr. Leonard asked it was done by a different company?

Petitioner answered yes.

Mr. Leonard asked if the petitioner is piecemealing the job then?

Petitioner explained that his intention was to just do the foundation and not put up the addition till a later date. However, the price was right on the addition so he decided to follow through with it in the fall.

Mr. Leonard commented that if the petitioner put in the slab and it was oversized then the contractor was just following what was already there. The company built on the footprint of the slab. So before they even got involved, it was oversized.

Petitioner stated that when he originally called the Township in April to replace the concrete  driveway and the back slab, the girl who answered the phone told him that he did not need a permit.

Mr. Leonard asked if the inside of the addition is finished?

Petitioner explained that he stopped work on the project when he received the stop-work order back in November. At this point, the addition is just roughed it with the windows, doorwall and the roof.  There is no drywall, insulation or electrical.

Ms. Orewyler stated that she did not really have any questions. She commented that the only problem was that the petitioner did not pull a permit. A good deal of the addition is already up and it is only a 2’ variance. She does not really have a problem with the variance.

Mr. Blake asked how the petitioner was planning to heat the structure?

Petitioner answered that he would not be putting in any heat because the structure would be a three-season room off the kitchen.

Mr. Blake asked what was in back of the addition? He asked if it was a bedroom?

Petitioner explained that the room was off the kitchen and there was a doorwall there.

Mr. Kohler did not have any questions.

Mr. Klonowski had no comments.

Mr. DeMuynck asked if the petitioner could still get in and out of the garage okay?

Petitioner answered yes.

There were no public comments.

Chairman Stepnak stated that the board had not received any correspondence on this matter and that the petition was mailed out and published in the Voice.

Mr. Shortt asked the petitioner if the structure would be insulated?

Petitioner answered yes and he stated that he would also be putting electricity in the addition.

Mr. Shortt asked if the doorwall between the kitchen and the addition would stay?

Petitioner answered yes. He explained that originally there was a window in that spot and he turned it into a doorwall.

Mr. Shortt stated that if the structure was approved, it would have to be completely dry walled because of the lack of separation between the room and the garage. He also explained that the Building Department would have to drill test holes to check the depth of the footing and slab to make sure the foundation is 42" deep.

Chairman Stepnak asked the petitioner if he had a problem working with and complying with all the requirements requested by the Building Department?

Petitioner answered no.

Motion by Ms. Orewyler to approve Petition # 2009-01 for the variance at 32719 Coach Drive, Chesterfield. The 2' variance would be for the separation between a main structure and accessory building; which would make the structures 8' apart instead of 10'. The approval would be granted with the stipulation that the petitioner pull all the necessary permits and follow all the Township building codes and instructions of the Building Department.

Supported by Mr. DeMuynck

Ayes: All

Nay: None Motion Granted

5. OLD BUSINESS

There was no old business.

6. NEW BUSINESS:

Chairman Stepnak welcomed Mr. Robert Kohler, Mr. James Klonowski, and Mr. Brian Scott DeMuynck the new Township Board liaison to the ZBA

7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PRIOR MEETING.

Motion by Ms. Orewyler to approve the minutes from the 12-10-08 meeting.

Supported by Mr. Klonowski

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

8. COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:

Chairman Stepnak went through and explained some general instructions and procedures to the new board members concerning how petitions are handled by the ZBA. Chairman Stepnak then thanked Mr. Shortt from the Building Department for attending the meeting.

Mr. Kohler made some comments concerning the Planning Commission possibly meeting only once a month. He commented that he was against the proposal and wondered if a meeting only once a month was being considered for the ZBA.

There was a discussion among the members about the matter.

9. ADJOURNMENT:

Motion by Mr. Blake to adjourn at 7:29 PM.

Supported by Chairman Stepnak

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

Nancy Orewyler, Secretary

Grace Mastronardi, Recording Secretary

 

 

 

Go To Top