Bedford Township,
Michigan                                       

BEDFORD TOWNSHIP
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS (BZA)
MEETING MINUTES
MONDAY, APRIL 7, 2008 OFFICIAL MINUTES 

Present: Korleen Bialecki (Chair), Ron Herr, Richard Brunt, Rick Steiner (Township Board Trustee Representative), and Rollie Abel (Planning Commission Representative), Also Present: Dennis Kolar (Building Official), Duane Tucker (Planning, Zoning, & Building Administrative Assistant, Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Facilitator, Land Division Administrator, and Recording Secretary), and Phil Goldsmith (Township Attorney-Lennard, Graham & Goldsmith P.L.C.). Absent (Excused): None.

Call to Order: Ms. Bialecki (Chair) called the April 7, 2008 “regular” meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ms. Bialecki introduced the members of the Board and Township facilitator(s) to the public present. This meeting was held at 8100 Jackman Road, Bedford Township Government Center, in the Board Room.

Citizen Participation Information: Ms. Bialecki welcomed the audience and shared citizen participation guidelines for public commentary.

Approval of Agenda:  Motion to approve the “agenda” as submitted was made by Mr. Steiner and seconded by Mr. Abel.  Motion passed.

NEW BUSINESS (CHAIRPERSON): Ms. Bialecki opened the new business and public hearing with the first variance hearing.

First (1st) variance petition:

The Appeal of Richard Wolniewicz, 3388 Saint Anthony Road, Temperance, MI 48182, requesting a 666 ± square footage variance (Ordinance 400.1903) for a proposed “accessory building” in an AG District (Agriculture District), on land described as 58-02-007-006-00, 3388 Saint Anthony Road.

Ms. Bialecki swore in the applicant (Richard Wolniewicz, 3388 Saint Anthony Road) and explained the voting process followed by background information presented by Mr. Tucker. Mr. Wolniewicz opted to continue with the variance process. Background information: The previously described parcel is approximately 3.00 ± acres in size while having approximately 99 ± foot frontage on Saint Anthony Road and approximately 1,300.00 ± foot depth. For the record, per Bedford Township records, this residential dwelling was built in 1943 and remodeled in 1996. The following Bedford Township Ordinance is in effect regarding this variance appeal: 400.1903 Accessory buildings. 

3. Accessory buildings shall not occupy more than 25 percent of a required rear yard, provided that in a residential district or for a residential use there shall be no more than one accessory building allowed, not including one detached garage, and provided further that in a residential district or for a residential use said accessory building and any detached garage together shall not exceed the ground floor area of the main building (residence= 1,094 square feet). Variance Calculations Per Building Official: The ground floor area of main residential building per Township records is 1,094 square feet.

Existing garage (24’ by 24’)---minus 576 square feet. Small “attached” shed (8’ by 8’) to existing garage----minus 64 square feet. Proposed accessory building inclusive of (28’ by 40’)----minus 1,120 square feet. Cumulative total of the above---1,760 square feet.

Permitted (1,094 square feet)-requested total 1,760 square feet. Accessory building area variance required of 666 square feet. Note that the Building Official and myself presented miscellaneous proposed “accessory building” amendments at a Bedford Township Planning Commission work session on February 27, 2008.  Mr. Kolar stated that the Building Department is currently looking closer in tying the overall size of assessory building(s) to the total size/area of the parcel/lot rather than the living area of the dwelling first floor.  Mr. Kolar further added that if the Township Board approves the proposed accessory building amendments then the applicant would not need an area variance. Also on file is a letter of variance support from Kenneth and Betty J. Blanford (3380 St. Anthony Road and directly east of Mr. Wolniewicz’s property).

Mr. Wolniewicz stated that he has totally run out of space and room within the existing 24’ by 24’ detached garage. Space is needed for personal woodworking equipment (hobby, not commercial) coupled with teenagers starting to drive this summer, which would require more garage space. Mr. Wolniewicz stated that the driveway (stone) to the proposed garage would be in front of the existing garage going to the east. . Mr. Wolniewicz introduced Rodger Steward (All Phase Builders, 5860 Secor Road, Ste. B, Toledo, OH 43623).  Mr. Wolniewicz indicated that to the west is Monroe County Road Commission property (3498 St. Anthony Road, road salt facility).

Ms. Bialecki opened the BZA meeting to public commentary. 

Ms. Bialecki closed the public hearing while having no further public comment.

Further BZA discussion followed. Mr. Brunt emphasized that this proposed garage couldn’t be used for any commercial enterprises. Ms. Bialecki and Mr. Herr reviewed the Board’s decision-making process reasoning in regard to the “practical difficulty/hardship”, uniqueness of the property, and the issue of an applicant creating a “practical difficulty/hardship”. Further discussion followed regarding the recent proposed changes to the Accessory Building Ordinance (400.1903).  Mr. Kolar reviewed the existing dwelling square footage (1,094): one story with a crawl space (176 square feet), 576 square feet on the 2 story area, 324 square feet (one story over the crawl space), plus 18 square feet over a small roofed area in the front.  Mr. Kolar added that 1,000 square feet residential dwelling on a large parcel is extremely small.  Mr. Kolar further added that the applicant couldn’t add an attached garage to the home due to the placement of the existing swimming pool and garage. Secondly, the proposed garage would provide some privacy from the Monroe County Road Commission’s activities, which would constitute a “hardship”. Mr. Steiner stated that this existing dwelling was built in 1943 before the zoning ordinance was adopted (May 5, 1977).  Mr. Abel stated that this variance would not create an adverse effect on the neighboring parcels within this AG Zoned District and does not alter the current use.  Mr. Abel further noted that the large parcel size (3 ± acres) and the current Accessory Building Ordinance (400.1903) that is under review should be taken into consideration within the Board’s decision-making process.

Motion by Mr. Abel to grant/approve the following variance petition/request: The Appeal of Richard Wolniewicz, 3388 Saint Anthony Road, Temperance, MI 48182, requesting a 666 ± square footage variance (Ordinance 400.1903) for a proposed “accessory building” in an AG District (Agriculture District), on land described as 58-02-007-006-00, 3388 Saint Anthony Road. Reason being and practical difficulty is that we are measuring against the first floor area of a small two (2)-story dwelling.  Other reasons for variance approval are the following: parcel is located in an AG District; the parcel dimension and size of 3 ± acres is of a larger size; the variance would not be materially injurious to surrounding properties nor does it create a negative impact/effect within the existing neighborhood; the variance does not alter the current and permitted AG District uses; a current review (Bedford Township Planning Commission) of the Accessory Building Ordinance (400.1922) is in process, which if amended would not require a variance for the applicant; a letter of support is on file (3380 St. Anthony Road); the residential dwelling was constructed in 1943 well before the zoning ordinance was adopted (May 5, 1977); and the proposed assessory building would create a privacy buffer from the existing uses of the contiguous parcel to the west owned by the Monroe County Road Commission. The proposed accessory building shall be only used for AG (Agricultural Zoned District) purposes that are allowed/permitted in the Zoning District where the accessory building is erected, and no commercial or business uses/activities are allowed. Mr. Steiner seconded the motion for discussion purposes.     

The motion carried on a roll call vote as follows: Voting Aye: Abel, Brunt, Steiner, and Bialecki (Chair). Voting Nay: Herr.   Absent: None.

Second (2nd) variance petition:

The Appeal of Robert Biglow, 7046 Angola, Holland, OH, 43528, requesting a change (Non-Conforming Use of Structure and Premises, Ordinance 400.1902) from a prior legal non-conforming commercial use (nail and hair salon), to a non-conforming commercial “pet grooming” use (C-1, Local Business District, Ordinance 400.1100, # 2) known as the business “Lori’s Pet Grooming”, in an R-3 District (One Family Residential District), on land described as 58-02-029-039-00, 7935 Summerfield Road (Lambertville).

Ms. Bialecki swore in the applicant (Lori L. Houghton, 7434 Dunbar Avenue, Temperance, MI 48182) and explained the voting process followed by background information presented by Mr. Tucker. Ms. Houghton opted to continue with the variance process. Background information: The applicant has petitioned this Board for a “substitute/alternate commercial use” of a prior legal non-conforming parcel and use. The subject’s property is located in an R-3 Zoned District (Single Family Residential District) and under the Master Plan has been designated as Single Family Residential District. The existing Bedford Township Master Plan was adopted on June 19, 2002 and the map was amended and adopted on October 22, 2003. The previously described parcel is approximately .076 ± acre in size while having approximately 31.42 ± foot frontage on Summerfield Road with a parcel depth of 96.00 ± feet to the south.  In addition, the existing structure is 20 feet by 20 feet or 400 square feet being built in 1960. On April 30, 1987, Robert L. Biglow and Delores A. Biglow purchased this parcel as noted on a recorded warranty deed.  For the record, “Robert L. Biglow” has granted Lori L. Houghton, from “Lori’s Pet Grooming”, the “Authorization to Act as Agent/Representative” for this variance appeal. The above-identified real property is situated within an R-3 District pursuant to the Bedford Township Zoning Ordinance 400.400, which does not permit the proposed “pet grooming business”.  For the record, a “pet grooming business” is permitted in a Commercial District (C-1, C-2, and C-3). Per Bedford Township Ordinance 400.1100 Intent for C-1 LOCAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS the following is in effect: Sec. 1100. The C-1 Local Business Districts, as herein established, are designed to meet the day-to-day convenience shopping and service needs of persons residing in adjacent residential areas, and are generally used on small parcels of land.  2.   Personal service establishments which perform services on the premises, such as but not limited to: repair shops (watches, radio, television, shoe and etc.), tailor shops, beauty parlors or barber shops, health salons, photographic studios, and self-service laundries and dry cleaners. The existing structure and previous use was called “The Divine Nail Spa/Beauty Salon/Barber Shop” while being considered or identified to have a “prior legal non-conforming” C-1 (Local Business District) status and use on this parcel. Note, being deemed or having  “legal non-conforming status or use” infers that the use of the building and premises were in existence before May 5, 1977, when Bedford Township adopted the zoning ordinances. Township records indicate that in 1975 “Joe’s Barber Shop” was in existence.  In addition, the name “Kathryn’s Dog Shop” was printed with no other information on the Township property file card. Pursuant to the provisions of the Bedford Township Zoning Ordinance, the Representatives of “Lori’s Pet Grooming” are required to obtain Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) variance approval prior to any expansion, extension and/or modification of a prior legal nonconforming use as per Bedford Township Ordinance: 400.1902 Nonconforming Lots, Nonconforming Uses of Land, Nonconforming Structures, and Nonconforming Uses of Structures and Premises. Also in effect is the following Bedford Township Ordinance: 400.1902 Nonconforming Lots, Nonconforming Uses of Land, Nonconforming Structures, and Nonconforming Uses of Structures and Premises. Sec. 1902. 1.  Intent. It is the intent of this Ordinance to permit legal nonconforming lots, structures, or uses to continue until they are removed but not to encourage their survival. Such uses are declared by this Ordinance to be incompatible with permitted uses in the districts involved. It is further the intent of this Ordinance that nonconforming uses shall not be enlarged upon, expanded or extended, nor be used as grounds for adding other structures or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. A nonconforming use of a structure, a nonconforming use of land, or a nonconforming use of a structure and land shall not be extended or enlarged after passage of this Ordinance by attachment on a building or premises of additional signs intended to be seen from off the premises, or by addition of other uses of a nature which would not be permitted generally in the district involved. 3.     Nonconforming uses of land. Where, at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this Ordinance, lawful use of land exists that is made no longer permissible under the terms of this Ordinance as enacted or amended such use may be continued, so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: a. No such nonconforming use shall be enlarged or increased, nor extended to occupy a greater area of land than was occupied at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this Ordinance;. For the record, Robert L. Biglow signed the “Authorization for a Sign Change” for “The Divine Nail Spa” on 8-22-2006.  In the event the BZA grants the petitioned variance, the non-conforming freestanding sign change cannot exceed 3’ wide and 4’ in height and the Bedford Township Sign Ordinance (400.1922) shall be in effect.  Township photos are on file for “Bedford Family Salon” on January 25, 2003 and  “The Divine Nail Spa” on August 21, 2006.

Ms. Houghton stated that currently her business (Lori’s Pet Grooming) was housed at 8493 Secor Road for approximately 2 years. Due to miscellaneous circumstances or problems (not due to the nature of the business) as a renter coupled with being aware this building would be available, I decided to move my business to 7935 Summerfield Road.  Lori’s Pet Grooming is not a high traffic business (8-12 clients a day) for a Residential District, as individuals are not constantly coming and going.  Basically, clients will drop off and pick up their pets, which will be s short period of time. In addition, Lori’s Pet Grooming does not have any employees other than my children helping at times. Ms. Houghton stated that there would be no modifications (making the building larger) to the existing structure (20’ by 20’), no boarding of animals, and no exterior “dog runs/pens”.

Ms. Bialecki opened the BZA meeting to public commentary. 

Ms. Bialecki closed the public hearing while having no further public comment.

Further BZA discussion followed. Mr. Tucker shared that to the best of Bedford Township’s knowledge, this building was never used for residential purposes. In the event that the BZA does not approve this variance or a similar commercial use extension, change or transfer, the facility would revert back to solely a permitted residential use. Mr. Goldsmith added that MI Court of Appeals case law has clearly stated that regardless of what our Ordinance states, a prior legal non-conforming use does not cease to exist unless a clear manifest intent to abandon the use is demonstrated.  Mr. Goldsmith noted that he does not see an intent to abandon the prior legal non-conforming use in this case, which means that a commercial use can continue at this site.  In addition, Mr. Goldsmith stated that when you have a prior legal non-conforming use, you must provide a means (vehicle) to come before a body (BZA) to at least request an expansion, modification, or extension of a prior legal non-conforming use.  On the other hand, the Court does not state that the body (BZA) must automatically grant an expansion, modification, or extension of a prior legal non-conforming use. The Bedford Township Ordinance (400.1902) does provide this, thus being in compliance with the law. Ms. Bialecki also noted that the “hardship/practical difficulty” decision-making test or rationale is not applicable to this variance petition. Mr. Steiner stated that Mr. Biglow did not manifest intent to abandon the non-conformity and the proposed use is very similar to the historic use.

Motion by Mr. Steiner to grant/approve the following variance petition/request:

The Appeal of Robert Biglow, 7046 Angola, Holland, OH, 43528, requesting a change (Non-Conforming Use of Structure and Premises, Ordinance 400.1902) from a prior legal non-conforming commercial use (nail and hair salon), to a non-conforming commercial “pet grooming” use (C-1, Local Business District, Ordinance 400.1100, # 2) known as the business “Lori’s Pet Grooming”, in an R-3 District (One Family Residential District), on land described as 58-02-029-039-00, 7935 Summerfield Road (Lambertville). Reason being and the practical difficulty is that this structure was built in 1960 well before the zoning ordinance was adopted (May 5, 1977), to the best of Bedford Township’s knowledge this building was never used for residential purposes, no clear manifest intent to abandon the prior legal nonconforming use has been demonstrated, the proposed use “Lori’s Pet Grooming” is very similar to the historic use, the owner (on April 30, 1987, Robert L. Biglow and Delores A. Biglow purchased this parcel) of the parcel has remained the same while only having a very minor commercial use change, and the owner of the parcel has demonstrated a “continued” commercial use by entering into and initiating amendment 44A-228 of the Bedford Township  Sign Ordinance (400.1922). Conditions of variance approval are the following: there would be no modifications (making the building larger) to the existing structure (20’ by 20’ foot print), no boarding of animals will be permitted, the Bedford Township Sign Ordinance (400.1922) shall be followed in whole in compliance, all animal feces shall be picked up and disposed of properly, this use shall not create a public nuisance (116.000), and no exterior “dog runs/pens” will be permitted. . Mr. Abel seconded the motion for discussion purposes.     

The motion carried on a roll call vote as follows: Voting Aye: Brunt, Steiner, Abel and Bialecki (Chair). Voting Nay: Herr   Absent: None.

Third (3rd) variance petition:

3.  The Appeal of Jeff Cunningham, 4045 West Rauch Road, Petersburg, MI 49270, requesting a 21.00 ± foot front yard set-back variance (Ordinance 400.1800) for a proposed “residential dwelling addition”, in an AG District (Agriculture District), on land described as 58-02-006-012-00, 4045 West Rauch Road.

Ms. Bialecki swore in the applicant (Jeff Cunningham, 4045 West Rauch Road) and explained the voting process followed by background information presented by Mr. Tucker. Mr. Cunningham opted to continue with the variance process. Background information: The previously described parcel is approximately 4.00 ± acres in size while having approximately 330.00 ± foot frontage on Rauch Road and approximately 528.00 ± foot depth. For the record, this residential dwelling was built in 1900. Note, the existing residential dwelling is considered a prior legal non-conforming structure due to having a front yard set-back of less than 100 feet from the center of the road, which infers that the residential dwelling was in existence before May 5, 1977, when Bedford Township adopted the zoning ordinances. Per Bedford Township Ordinance 400.1800 Schedule of Regulations for AG Zoning Districts (Agricultural Districts) the following is in effect: “the minimum front yard construction set-back shall be 100 feet from the center of Rauch Road. The proposed front yard set-back variance is for a proposed 30 foot by 48 foot or a 1,440 square feet residential building addition placed on the rear of the existing residential dwelling.

Mr. Cunningham stated that he needs additional living space, for the existing house is very small and congested.  With the proposed addition, the house would have more living space with a recreation room constructed to the rear of the dwelling. Mr. Cunningham added that the existing rooms are so small that it is almost impossible to put furniture in them.  The proposed addition will have a sun-room, a larger laundry room, and a mud room for the kids. Mr. Cunningham added that he is unable to construct either way due to the driveway on one side and the septic on the other side of his house.

Ms. Bialecki opened the BZA meeting to public commentary. 

Ms. Bialecki closed the public hearing while having no further public comment.

Further BZA discussion followed. Mr. Steiner stated that this residential dwelling was in existence before May 5, 1977, when Bedford Township adopted the zoning ordinances. Therefore, practically anything added on to/make a change to the dwelling would need a variance, thus creating a clear hardship. Mr. Steiner added that there would be no physical change/encroachment to the front of the dwelling where it would be encroaching more (21’ closer to the road) on the front yard set-back. Mr. Kolar added that this entire dwelling is within the 100’ front-yard set-back, inclusive of the proposed addition.

Motion by Mr. Abel to grant/approve the following variance petition/request:  The Appeal of Jeff Cunningham, 4045 West Rauch Road, Petersburg, MI 49270, requesting a 21.00 ± foot front yard set-back variance (Ordinance 400.1800) for a proposed “residential dwelling addition”, in an AG District (Agriculture District), on land described as 58-02-006-012-00, 4045 West Rauch Road. The reason and practical difficulty is as follows: this structure was built in 1990 well before the zoning ordinance was adopted (May 5, 1977), the variance would not be materially injurious to MONDAY, surrounding properties nor does it create a negative impact/effect within the existing neighborhood; the existing and entire dwelling was constructed in the front yard set-back, the proposed construction does not encroach any more toward West Rauch Road (21’ closer to the road), there would be no physical change/encroachment to the front of the dwelling, and the existing septic and driveway create side placement limitations but to build onto the rear of the dwelling. Mr. Steiner seconded the motion for discussion purposes.     

The motion carried on a roll call vote as follows: Voting Aye: Herr, Steiner, Abel, Brunt and Bialecki (Chair). Voting Nay: None.   Absent: None.

Fourth (4th) variance petition:

4.  The Appeal of David Hinojosa, 7370 Douglas Road, Lambertville, MI 48144, requesting a 20.00 ± foot front yard set-back variance on Sterns Road (Ordinance 400.1800) for a proposed “roof over an existing patio”, on a corner parcel, with a non-conforming structure, in a C-1 District (Local Business District), on land described as 58-02-430-001-05, 7370 Douglas Road and known as “Magdalena’s Mexican Restaurant.

Ms. Bialecki swore in the applicant (David Hinojosa, 7370 Douglas Road) and explained the voting process followed by background information presented by Mr. Tucker. Mr. Hinojosa opted to continue with the variance process. Background information: The warranty deed on file for this parcel is deeded to Los Hermanos Enterprises, LLC, and a limited liability company, while having David Hinojosa as legal spokesman. The applicant is seeking to construct a roof system over the existing outside dining or patio area. The size of the proposed covered area is 888 square feet (14’ X 22’ and 20’ X 29’), as per Mr. Kolar. This parcel, Lots # 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, is within the platted subdivision called McLains Shelton Park and is a corner lot. The five (5) lots have been combined per the Land Division process, coupled with the implementation of recorded “Combination and Restriction Agreement”.  This “Combination and Restriction Agreement” simply requires the Bedford Township Board formally approve any change or modification of the proposed five (5) -lot combinations. For the record, the previous businesses located in this facility were called “The Bavarian” and “Idle Ours”. The above-described lots were rezoned by the Bedford Township Board, from R-2B (One Family Residential Distinct) to C-1 (Local Business District) on September 18, 2001. The existing Bedford Township Master Plan was adopted on June 19, 2002 and the map was amended and adopted on October 22, 2003.  Note, the land located on the southeast corner of Sterns Road and Douglas Road, known as Magdalena’s, is designated as/for  “local commercial use”.

Per Bedford Township Ordinance 400.1800, “Schedule of Regulations”, the minimum construction front-yard setback in a C-1 Zoned District (Local Business District) is a minimum of 85 feet from the center of Sterns Road to the nearest point of construction on a main building/dwelling.  The 33-foot road right-of-way on Sterns Road, plus the building set-back of 52 feet, gives a total of 85 foot setback from the center of Sterns Road for any proposed construction. The above applicant was awarded two (2) set-back variances on April 3, 2006 by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) as presented within your meeting packet. Per Bedford Township Ordinance 400.1902 the following is in effect regarding the front yard set-backs on a corner lot: 400.1902 Nonconforming lots, nonconforming uses of land, nonconforming structures, and nonconforming uses of structures and premises. Sec. 1902. 1.    Intent. It is the intent of this Ordinance to permit legal nonconforming lots, structures, or uses to continue until they are removed but not to encourage their survival. It is recognized that there exists within the districts established by this Ordinance and subsequent amendments, lots, structures, and uses of land and structures which were lawful before this Ordinance was passed (May 5, 1977) or amended which would be prohibited, regulated, or restricted under the terms of this Ordinance or future amendments. 4.      Nonconforming structures. Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this Ordinance that could not be built under the terms of this Ordinance by reason of restrictions on area, lot coverage, height, yards, or other characteristics of the structure or its location on the lot, such structure may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following provisions: a. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in a way, which increases its nonconformity. Such structures may be enlarged or altered in a way, which does not increase its nonconformity. b.      Should such structure be destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60 percent of its replacement costs, exclusive of the foundation, it shall be reconstructed only in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance. c.  Should such structure be moved for any reason for any distance whatever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the district in which it is located after it is removed. The following is recommended as a condition within the motion:  The applicant satisfactorily meets all Michigan Building Code requirements and Township Ordinances while securing proper building permits. In addition, all Local, State, and Federal Fire Department regulations and building codes shall be satisfactorily met.  Thirdly, the fence shall be maintained in good repair and a neat condition. Any fence (both sides) that endangers life or property, is not in good repair, or is not being maintained in a neat condition shall be deemed a public nuisance.

Mr. Hinojosa stated that the reason he is re-petitioning the BZA again (previously granted variance) is that a building permit was not sought due to financial circumstances (lengthy bidding process of 8 bids) and, therefore, the variance expired (6 months). Now conditions are most favorable to continue with the proposed project for the successful pulling of a valid building permit. Mr. Hinojosa indicated that this variance petition is just seeking to put a roof over an existing patio, which infringes on the Sterns Road front yard set-back. Mr. Hinojosa stated that this would be a translucent paneled roof (green plastic) with wood beams, ceiling fans, while being permanent construction. Mr. Hinojosa noted that they have discontinued the outside live entertainment (every Friday night) at this time although they may have music on special occasions. Mr. Hinojosa also indicated that this roof would be a separate free-standing structure. Future plans are to take the 2 storage sheds and convert them into a garage.

Mr. Tucker indicated that 2 of the previously granted variance conditions have been successfully completed (Lot Combination Land Process and Combination and Restriction Agreement). Mr. Kolar added that this patio is not in the road right of way, the proposed roof over the existing patio is in the front yard set-back area. Mr. Tucker indicated that there were no responses from the residents within 300’ of the lot regarding this variance petition.

Ms. Bialecki opened the BZA meeting to public commentary. 

Ms. Bialecki closed the public hearing while having no further public comment.

Ms. Bialecki stated that the applicant is not asking for a non-conforming use, with the BZA just dealing with the dimensions of the establishment not being in conformance with the set-back ordinance. Further BZA discussion focused on the BZA Minutes of April 3, 2006, the BZA motion to approve, and specific conditions.

Motion by Mr. Herr to grant/approve the following variance petition/request:  The Appeal of David Hinojosa, 7370 Douglas Road, Lambertville, MI 48144, requesting a 20.00 ± foot front yard set-back variance on Sterns Road (Ordinance 400.1800) for a proposed “roof over an existing patio”, on a corner parcel, with a non-conforming structure, in a C-1 District (Local Business District), on land described as 58-02-430-001-05, 7370 Douglas Road and known as “Magdalena’s Mexican Restaurant.

Conditions of variance approval are as follows: The applicant satisfactorily meets all Michigan Building Code requirements and Township Ordinances while securing proper building permits. In addition, all Local, State, and Federal Fire Department regulations and building codes shall be satisfactorily met.  Thirdly, the fence shall be maintained in good repair and a neat condition. Any fence (both sides) that endangers life or property, is not in good repair, or is not being maintained in a neat condition shall be deemed a public nuisance. Fourth, there shall be no parking on the west side of the building (Lot #1) known as the north west corner of the parcel parallel to Douglas Road and Sterns Road whereby this is to be a grass-landscaped area. This no parking compliance shall be in effect on or before October 7, 2008 (6 months).   The no parking compliance area (grass only) is deemed to be north of a line beginning at the southwest corner of the building extending west to Douglas Road. The reason and practical difficulty is as follows: the existing structure is altered in a way that does not increase the non-conformity. In addition, this is a corner lot having 2 front yard set-backs or more restrictive than an interior lot. The practical difficulty is the age of the restaurant, being built prior to May 5, 1977 (adopted Zoning Act), which places the existing structure in violation of the required and existing ordinance for front yard set-backs on a corner lot.  Mr. Steiner seconded the motion for discussion purposes.     

The motion carried on a roll call vote as follows: Voting Aye: Steiner, Abel, Brunt, Herr and Bialecki (Chair). Voting Nay: None.   Absent: None.

Approval of Minutes: Motion to approve the BZA minutes as revised for March 10, 2008 (regular meeting) made by Mr. Brunt and seconded by Mr. Steiner. Motion carried. The minutes of March 10, 2008 are approved and official as so noted. 

Public Comment: None

Board of Zoning Appeals/Township Representative Comments: The next regular BZA meeting is scheduled for Monday, May 5, 2008 with all materials to be submitted by Monday, April 14, 2008. Further discussion followed regarding “alternate BZA members” and the recent change in the law.

Adjournment: Ms. Bialecki duly adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Duane L. Tucker,
BZA Recording Secretary & Facilitator

ANY LOT SPLIT/DIVISION VARIANCE GRANTED MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE MONROE COUNTY REGISTER OF DEEDS WITHIN SIX (6) MONTHS OF THIS BOARD’S MEETING MINUTES APPROVAL. SECONDLY, ANY VARIANCE GRANTED ALLOWING THE ERECTION OF ANY STRUCTURE MUST BEGIN WITHIN SIX (6) MONTHS OF THIS BOARD’S MINUTES APPROVAL OR THE VARIANCES GRANTED WILL BECOME NULL OR VOID.