Reference Desk

 

Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - February 23, 2011

THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CHESTERFIELD

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

February 23, 2010

On February 23, 2010, a regular meeting of the Chesterfield Township Zoning Board of Appeals was held at the Township Hall located at 47275 Sugarbush, Chesterfield, 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

James Klonowski, Vice-Chairman

Thomas Yaschen, Secretary

Carl Leonard, Planning Commission liaison

Gerald Alexie

Wendy Jones

Absent: Michelle Ficht, Township Board liaison, excused

Mr. Shawn Shortt attended the meeting as the representative of the Building Department.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

Chairman Stepnak explained the procedures to the audience.

4. ZBA PETITION #2011-01: Mike Shellie, 1587 Mansfield, Bloomfield, MI 48009. Requesting a 15’ front yard setback variance and a 2’ side yard setback variance

on a proposed new residence at 49790 Compass Pointe Drive.

Mike Shellie, 1587 Mansfield, Bloomfield, MI 48009 addressed the board.

Petitioner stated that he was building a new home and was requesting a setback variance of 15’ in the front and 2’ setback in the side yard. He explained that he was building his home on a cul-de-sac and he had letters from the Lottivue Homeowner’s Association and from his immediate neighbor concerning their approval of the granting of the variance. He stated that the letters should have been presented to the board with the paperwork, but he had copies that he could give the board. He asked if the board received the letters?

Chairman Stepnak stated that the board had that information in front of them.

Petitioner mentioned that the board may not have the side neighbor’s letter.

Chairman Stepnak stated that the petitioner could give the letter to them at that time.

Petitioner explained that his property is located on a cul-de-sac, surrounded with water on two sides. He has a side canal and a front canal with a significant portion of his property is in the water. He has been working extensively with the DNR and DEQ with respect to positioning the walls. He stated that the position of the walls now was the best that they could work out. The property is pie-shaped being very narrow in the front. He stated that his home is tilted which is consistent with other homes in the neighborhood and the corner of the garage is the portion of it that is on the front where he needs the variance. He mentioned that he had larger prints available if the board was interested in looking at them. He stated that the wall tie-backs are 20’ into the property, so the house would be in a position to miss those. He added that the excavation would have to be 20’ plus 5’.

Ms. Jones verified that the petitioner needed the setback to build the house because there is too much water back there.

Petitioner stated that the position of the house from side to side would be positioned to clear the tiebacks. He explained that the lines are coming back from the wall. He stated that they also have placed anchors in the ground to keep the walls stable. He explained that it would be 5’ inside of that.

Mr. Alexie stated that he was out there that afternoon looking at the property. He mentioned hat it was very hard to see with all the snow everywhere. He asked if the petitioner already had the footings in place?

Petitioner answered no. He explained that what can been seen there is from the dredging of the property. He stated that no work on the home has been started as of yet.

Mr. Alexie stated that he did not see any problems with the variance?

Mr. Klonowski stated that the petitioner had to deal with the 100 year flood plain line and if the home would be moved; it would be closer in to that area. He stated that he did not think that would be a good idea. He felt that the variance would be justified.

Mr. Leonard stated that he agreed with James. The petitioner lost a significant portion of property to the water because the DNR and the DEQ made him push the seawall back. He mentioned that the petitioner has an irregular shaped lot and if he did not have some of these elements working against him; he would not even be in front of the board. So, he does not have any problems with the variance. He added that the neighborhood is pretty unique with a lot of different style home in there. He mentioned that he would like to see the house plans with all the elevations. He stated that it is not a huge house, so the petitioner is not trying to overbuild on the property. He reiterated that he did not see any problems with granting the variance.

Mr. Yaschen had no questions.

Mr. Yaschen read a letter in favor of the board granting the variance from Mr. John Peralta, 49774 Compass Pointe Drive, Chesterfield, MI. The letter was retained for the Zoning Board’s records.

Mr. Yaschen read another letter from the Lottivue Improvement Association stating that they approved the petitioner’s plans for Lot 128. That letter was also retained for the ZBA’s records.

Chairman Stepnak stated that Lottivue was probably the most active Homeowners Association in the Township. He explained that the Board looked at and highly considered their recommendations.

Mr. Shortt stated that the Building Department did not have a problem with it. He stated that the tie-backs were the only thing that really concerned him on this property. He asked the petitioner if he knew for a fact that they were 20’ back?

Petitioner answered yes. He stated that he had all that information documented.

Mr. Shortt commented that the petitioner had a real good builder, Mr. Frank Agrussa. He stated that the builder had been out there before and he does nice house. He stated that he is looking forward to working on it, with the Board’s blessings.

There were no public comments.

Mr. Leonard asked to see the petitioner’s plans.

Petitioner brought up the plans and the Board members looked them over.

Motion by Mr. Leonard to approve Petition # 2011-01 for the property located at 49790 Compass Pointe Drive, for a variance to the side of 2’ and a front yard variance of 15’. He stated that his reasons to make the motion would be that it is an irregular-shaped lot, there are flood plain problems, and the petitioner lost 20’ of property to the canal because of the government issue. He commented that the house will blend in with other homes in the neighborhood. He stated that none of the neighbors have complained and the Homeowners Association also approved the plans.

Supported by Mr. Klonowski

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

5. OLD BUSINESS: Dan Mazur, 48787 Sugarbush, Chesterfield, MI 48047. ZBA #2010-19, approved August 11, 2010. Requesting a six month extension on his variance to obtain plans and submit them to the Building Department.

Petitioner stated that he came in front of the board about six month ago and his plans had been approved. He stated that at the time he was not aware that he only had a six month time frame to get the building permits. He mentioned that a lot of things happened in his personal life and he was just coming in front of the board to see if he could extend the variance for another six months.

Chairman Stepnak stated that the board was looking at six months. He stated that six months from February would be August. He informed the petitioner that a six month extension would not mean the petitioner had to start work in August it only meant that he had to visit the Building Department and pull the permits by that time. He stated that August would be well into the building season.

Mr. Leonard mentioned that the letter submitted by the petitioner indicated that he had a second architect. He asked how far along the petitioner was with the project?

Petitioner stated that the prints are ready and he is going to review them this weekend.

Mr. Leonard stated, so the petitioner should be able to pull the permits within the next couple of months.

Petitioner answered yes.

Mr. Leonard asked the petitioner if he planned to build in the Spring?

Petitioner answered yes.

Chairman Stepnak stated that the time could be extended to August 1st.

Mr. Yaschen mentioned that 6 months would be August 23rd.

Chairman Stepnak stated that someone was welcomed to make a different motion.

Motion by Mr. Yaschen to approve an extension for Mr. Dan Mazur, 48787 Salt River Drive for a period of six months until August 1, 2011.

Supported by Mr. Alexie

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

6. NEW BUSINESS:

There was no new business.

7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PRIOR MEETING:

Motion by Chairman Stepnak to approve the minutes from the prior ZBA meeting of December 8, 2010.

Supported by Mr. Alexie

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

8. COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR:

Chairman Stepnak mentioned that the March 9th meeting had been cancelled and the next scheduled meeting would probably be March 23, 2011. He welcomed Mr. Carl Leonard back to the ZBA as the new liaison from the Planning Commission.

Mr. Shortt mentioned that there was another new home being built in Lottivue.

9. ADJOURNMENT:

Motion to adjourn by Mr. Yaschen at 7:27 PM.

Supported by Mr. Alexie

Ayes: All

Nays: None Motion Granted

Thomas Yaschen, Secretary

Grace Mastronardi, Recording Secretary

Go To Top