Zoning Board of
Appeals Minutes
MINUTES
Cascade Charter Township Zoning Board of Appeals
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
7:00 p.m.
ARTICLE 1. Chairman Vaughn called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Members Present: Beahan, Casey, Lewis, Alternate Neal, Vaughn
Members Absent: Crawley (excused), 2nd Alternate Richards (excused)
Others Present: Planning Director Peterson, Admin. Assistant Hern, and
members from the public.
ARTICLE 2. Pledge of Allegiance
ARTICLE 3. Chairman Vaughn requested a motion for approval of the
March 13, 2007 Agenda.
Member Beahan motioned for the approval of the March 13th ZBA
Agenda with support from Member Casey. All were in favor, none
opposed. The motion carried, March 13, 2007 Agenda approved.
ARTICLE 4. Chairman Vaughn requested a motion for approval or
corrections of the February 13, 2007 Meeting Minutes.
Member Casey noted that Article 5 was a Public Hearing and the
minutes do not reflect that the Public Hearing was opened but do show
the Public Hearing was closed, Page 2, fifth paragraph. There seems to
be a piece of the minutes missing from the meeting.
Member Lewis recalls that he made the motion to open the Public
Hearing at the February 13th ZBA Meeting and Member Beahan had
supported the motion and asked that be added to the minutes.
Member Beahan supported adding the motion and the opening of the
Public Hearing and said there needs to be a correction to the name of
"Jane Belding" on Page 2, second paragraph; her name is
"Janel Belding". He also noted that Mr. Chuck (?spelling?)Dykehuizen
on behalf of the Gaylord's House and expressed his comments during the
Public Hearing.
Member Lewis recognized that the Zoning Board does not have a copy
of the recorded February Board Meeting and recommended that the
corrections to the February 13, 2007 ZBA Minutes reflect:
1) Adding the opening of the Public Hearing noting Member Lewis
motioned to open the Public Hearing supported by Member Beahan and all
were in favor of the motion and the Public Hearing was opened.
2) Correcting the name of "Jane Belding" to "Janel
Belding" on Page 2, second paragraph.
Chairman Vaughn asked if the representative's comments from
Gaylord's House also be added to the minutes and Member Lewis noted
the recording does not have the representative's comments available.
Chairman Vaughn asked if it would be appropriate to add that Mr.
(?spelling?) Dykehuizen spoke favorably of the project.
Member Lewis agreed to accept the two (2) items and add in the
February Minutes that:
3) Mr. (?spelling?) Dykehuizen represented the Gaylord's House and
spoke favorably of the project.
Member Lewis motioned to approve the February 13, 2007 ZBA Meeting
Minutes with the three (3) corrections listed, supported by Member
Casey. All in favor with none opposed. February 13, 2007 Zoning Board
of Appeals Meeting Minutes approved as corrected.
ARTICLE 5. Case #07-2856: Doug DeVos
Property Address: 2020 Devonwood Lane
(PUBLIC HEARING)
Chairman Vaughn noted the Applicant is requesting a variance to
construct an accessory building with a height of 34'3". The
maximum height allowed by the Zoning Ordinance is 22-feet.
Planning Director Peterson referred to the two (2) pictures of the
site on the screen and within the Board's packets. The property is
located on Devonwood Lane that connects to Forest Shores that connects
to Cascade Road. The property is just east of Cascade Road, north of
Burton Ave and west of Spaulding Avenue.
The Applicant is reconfiguring his property lines as a result of
this application. The new distances reflected on the map are all
coming from the proposed building. The new property line where the
house and the proposed building sit would be to the south where the
green fields are, and square off the property. The house, proposed
building and current accessory building sit on approximately
thirty-four (34)-acres and the rest of the property, that is still
owned by the Applicants, still includes property south towards Burton
Street and the pond.
The current regulations for building height were done in 2002 to
allow for taller accessory buildings. The logic was that you could
build taller, provided the Applicant had an increase in the setback
from the property lines. Currently the maximum height is 22-feet tall
with a minimum setback of 60-feet from the side and rear property
lines. When referring to building height, the height is measured from
the building's midpoint to the eave of the roofline. The Applicant
plans to construct this building with the smallest setback being
300-feet to the south property line.
Planning Director Peterson said that the proposed building does
comply with all other regulations in terms of placement but does also
require a Special Use Permit because it is larger than 832-square feet
and that is planned to go before the Planning Commission at their
March 19, 2007 Meeting.
Staff has reviewed the past six (6) years for other height
variances and found three (3) other cases. All three (3) variances
predated the amendment to the Township's Zoning Ordinance to allow for
taller buildings. With the change in the Zoning Code in 2002 to allow
for taller accessory buildings, none of these previous cases would
require a variance. In one case, Jack Curtis on Grand River and
Buttrick Ave., a minimum setback of 300-feet was required to be
maintained due to the size of the building.
Planning Director Peterson reviewed the Standards for Variance
noting the exceptional conditions to this case is the large piece of
property that is involved and large setbacks involved. The Township's
Amendment in 2002 used a sliding scale to allow for taller buildings
when moved further away from the property line. If the Zoning Board
continued with this formula, it is likely the building would be
permitted due to its large setbacks.
The large setbacks and property are controlled by the Applicant and
they have increased the size of their property in order to accommodate
this building. Planning Director Peterson also noted that the size of
the property would allow for the construction of another building.
The variance shall not be harmful to the neighborhood given the
large size of the property and the distance away from the property
line it would be placed.
The size of this property in the R1 Zoning District is rather
unique. Since it is not the normal size the Township's regulations may
not address these unique sized parcels. The Zoning Regulations are
written to accommodate the Township's "normal" residential
lots; noting that having 100-acres within an R1 Zoning is rather
unique in the Township.
Staff recommends that the Zoning Board approve the Variance request
due to the unique aspect of the large parcel and the excessive
setbacks being provided. Staff would propose that a condition be
placed on the approval that would require that the buildings always
maintain at least a 300-foot setback to a property line in all
directions.
Chairman Vaughn opened the meeting for questions of Staff by the
Zoning Board.
Chairman Vaughn asked if 2002 amendment is used as a sliding scale
and understands that the building could be as tall as 22-feet if
60-feet away from the property line and wondered if there were any
underlying statements that if 100-feet away could go to 25-feet tall,
etc. Planning Director Peterson said that there is no underlying
definition for the sliding scale and did not continue beyond the
60-feet away but infers that the further away from a property line the
larger a building could be.
Member Lewis noted that the building's use is not listed within
Staff's report and asked if the building would be used for business
and if not, could this be an added condition? Planning Director
Peterson noted that this issue is typically addressed with the
Planning Commission and is within the Zoning Code. Member Lewis said
that the condition that the building is not used for commercial use
could be an added condition and Planning Director Peterson agreed.
There were no other questions of Staff and Chairman Vaughn invited
the Applicant to add any comments.
Jack DeBruin of Design Plus introduced himself and Pete Lazdins
also of Design Plus and Bruce Heist, project contractor, who were
representing Applicant DeVos at the meeting.
Mr. DeBruin noted the use of the building is for a basketball and
volleyball court along with some personal vehicle storage. There will
also be a kitchen and lounge area. Applicant DeVos asked they design a
building that would be a compatible design with the current buildings.
The gymnasium is high school sized, not full-sized, and designed
less than the 35-foot height allowed for a residential site and have
gone with a 4/12 roof pitch and measures 34-feet, 3-inches to the
midpoint.
Member Lewis requested a clarification regarding the 34.3-foot roof
at midpoint, does that include the tower at the top of the roof?
Planning Director Peterson said the Township does allow for copulas,
etc. to accede that and do not measure to the top of that
architectural feature. Mr. DeBruin said those are actually skylights
that will allow adequate lighting indoors.
Pete Lazdins further explained the features on the site. The
distances to neighboring properties is a significant distance from the
buildings. He referred to the buildings and a county drain that
divides the north property with the south property being discussed.
Their intent is to use the same crossing and in the process with the
DEQ in the proper requirements needed. They have proposed an
additional crossing to the east as a back door into the material
storage area. The area will store woodchips, gravel, etc. and will be
significantly screened with a berm and additional evergreens. Mr.
Lazdins referred to a proposed footpath from the house and proposed
bridge. The two (2) additional crossing are being proposed as
non-culvert and the crossing will be pre-fabricated and not interfere
with the flow of the existing drain.
The activity barn is placed on an angle utilizing the existing
roads and crossing and proposing a parking area for twelve (12) cars
of guests.
There are possible soccer and baseball fields with mowed areas and
a pond south, southwest to the area with significant berming and
evergreen trees for screening. Member Lewis asked how long the berm
would take to fill in and Mr. Lazdins said they would plant eight to
ten foot evergreens that should reach 30-feet within five years.
Member Beahan asked for clarification of the interior of the
proposed building. Mr. Lazdins said full-court basketball and
volleyball. Member Beahan asked how much of the building will be used
for storage and any other amenities.
Mr. DeBruin noted the storage area is approximately 20-feet by
24-feet. Another use is a small kitchen with a gathering area and a
fireplace to watch television, there is a billiards area as well as
bathrooms for the guests.
Member Lewis asked the total square-footage of the building and Mr.
DeBruin said approximately 17,000-square feet.
Chairman Vaughn asked if there would be anything that makes noise
besides people that would be in the building. Mr. DeBruin said there
would not be anything. Member Lewis asked what Mr. DeVos has that
sounds loud, motorcycles or motor cross bikes?
Don Mallory, DeVos Property Manager, said that Mr. DeVos has had a
motor cross track on the property over the past few years. In
conversations with Mr. and Mrs. DeVos, they are looking to eliminate
the cross-country track. He also noted that the soccer and baseball
fields would not be lighted.
Mr. Mallory further commented that guests will not be using the
motor cross track anymore and he only road his dirt bike a couple of
times last year. Member Lewis asked how old Mr. DeVos' children are
and Mr. Mallory said he has four (4) children, the oldest being a
sophomore in high school and range down. Member Lewis noted that as
children get older, they want to ride the bikes too. Mr. Mallory noted
they all have bikes now and occasionally ride.
Bruce Heist said he has been working with Staff in coming into
compliance with the exception of the height of the building and is
open to answer any more questions.
Member Beahan asked if the building would have a fire suppression
system and Mr. Heist said no, it is not required. Planning Director
Peterson said that the building code does not require a system.
Member Lewis asked if there is city water on the site and Mr. Heist
said it would be connected to city water. Member Lewis asked if there
is a fire hydrant close to the building and Mr. Mallory noted the
hydrant that is on the north side of the property. Member Lewis asked
if the Fire Department will review the proposed building and Planning
Director Peterson said they could but normally do not review accessory
buildings. This may be a good discussion point for the Planning
Commission.
Member Casey asked if the Board is to assume that primarily the
family would use the building. Mr. Heist said it would be for family
and friends but nothing organized that they would sell tickets to or
other forms of tournaments/competitions.
Member Beahan asked when the construction would begin and Mr. Heist
said they would like to begin next month. Member Beahan asked when
they foresee the project being completed by and Mr. Heist said next
year and targeting occupancy of the building in twelve (12) months.
Member Beahan motioned to open the Public Hearing, supported by
Member Lewis. All in favor with none opposed, the Public Hearing was
opened.
Chairman Vaughn asked Staff if they received any public comments,
phone calls or letters regarding the project. Planning Director
Peterson said just phone calls of inquiry but no written or oral
comments.
Chairman Vaughn invited any public members to speak regarding their
comments of the project.
Ray Carey of 2656 Wyndham asked if there would be living quarters
in the new building and Chairman Vaughn responded no. Mr. Carry asked
if there was any aircraft that would be coming in and the Applicant
will not have aircraft.
No further comments from the public.
Member Lewis motioned to close the Public Hearing, supported by
Member Beahan. All in favor to close the Public Hearing, with none
opposed. Public Hearing closed.
Chairman Vaughn opened the meeting for Board Members' discussion.
Member Lewis noted this case is an interesting situation and
recognizing that the building is an accessory building because that is
what it is though it is 17,000-square feet. The Planner makes a point
about the height of the building and it is a big building and
worthwhile to have discussion on it. Sound goes beyond 50-feet or more
and some of the concerns by the public members. In this particular
case, this building does not have noise and signage concerns. Member
Lewis noted the property is also in an R1 area. He only asks that the
Zoning Board recognize that this is a unique situation and does not
believe that others could make the same request.
Chairman Vaughn noted that the size of the building is not charged
of this committee, correct? Member Lewis noted that is correct but
there is coalition between the building's height and size.
Member Vaughn questioned the sliding scale and if that should be
built into the ordinance and Member Lewis recalls that a building of
this size could not be foreseen but can be accommodated due to the
size of the property and does not believe a precedence would be set
because it is surrounded by R1 and meets setback requirements.
Member Beahan noted he is in favor with the building because of the
parcel's size and concerned if the owner sold part of the property and
the buildings being close to the setbacks. Planning Director Peterson
noted the Curtis property, previously discussed, and Mr. Curtis did
sell part of his property but maintained the 300-foot setback.
Member Lewis said he appreciates the Applicant showing the
different configuration of the property and solves part of Member
Beahan's concerns. He also agrees with Staff's recommendation of
maintaining a 300-foot setback from all buildings to all property
lines.
Member Casey's only concern was that the Applicant would hold
Macker Tournaments or other events at the facility and the Applicant
does not wish to use the building for these purposes.
Member Lewis motioned that the Applicant's request for a variance
to allow the construction of an accessory building with a height of
34'3" with the condition that the buildings maintain a 300-foot
setback to all property lines in all directions be approved supported
by Member Beahan.
Chairman Vaughn opened the meeting for discussion and asked if the
condition be added that the building not be used for commercial
purposes. Member Lewis said that could be a condition of the Planning
Commission.
Member Lewis then amended his motion for approval to add the
condition that the building not be used for commercial use and Member
Beahan supported the additional condition.
Member Lewis noted that adding that condition would note that the
Zoning Board is assisting the Planning Commission in their processes.
Being no further discussion from the Zoning Board, all were in
favor with none opposed. Motion carried and the variance was approved.
ARTICLE 6. Any Other Business
Chairman Vaughn opened the meeting for other Zoning Board business.
Member Lewis noted he will be missing next month's Zoning Board of
Appeals Meeting.
ARTICLE 7. Member Beahan supported by Member Neil moved to adjourn.
The motion carried and the meeting was adjourned at 7:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Gary Crawley, Secretary
Lisa Hern, Recording Secretary
Government
~ Departments ~
Community
Business ~
Reference Desk ~
What's Happening
Help ~
Home ~ Search ~ Site Map
Comments? Feedback? Questions? Click here to send an email.
Site Use Policy
This page last modified
06/08/04.
All information © 2003-2004Cascade Township, Michigan
|
Site
Design/Development by
 |
|
