Minutes: June 8th, 2011

JUNE 8, 2011
The regular meeting of the Catawba Island Township Board of Zoning Appeals was called to order by Chairman Bryan Baugh at 7:30 p.m. in the conference room. Other Board members present were Jack Devore, Tom Anslow, Dale VanLerberghe and jack Ziegler alternate; asked to sit on the board. Secretary for the meeting was Sandra Erwin. Walt Wehenkel is the zoning inspector, but is not here at this meeting.
The meeting began with the Pledge of Allegiance followed by the introductions of the Board Members and a brief overview of the meeting proceedings by Chairman Bryan Baugh. All those in attendance were asked to sign in by Chairman Baugh.
The Secretary, Sandra Erwin, read the summary of case #543651, said request is to allow for a use variance to allow for an accessory building with a principal building as well as a variance from the maximum square footage allowed for accessory buildings. Said applicant is proposing to place an additional 12 foot x 12 foot accessory building on the site.
No conflict for board members.
Tab Smith was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. I would like to put a 12x12 storage shed on my property. 2 ½ garage – for storage – no residence.
Board asked facilities restroom – shower in garage. (Put in 4 years ago) Went thru county – tied to other house 2 owners ago. Sleep on boat – 30 ft. boat.
Peter Batterton was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Peter is Treasurer of Harbor Estates Association. The Board has concerns for shed. The association would like a residence before another accessory building is added.
Sharon Smith was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Sharon asks if Pete is speaking for himself or the board. Pete states that he is speaking for the board.
William Lehner was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. A member of the association, he would like to state that he supports the association stand on this matter.
Board - Dale VanLerberghe read from the Catawba zoning book on what a variance on this should consider. (See book)
Condition – hardship is what we look for. Dale VanLerberghe does not see this as a hardship. It looks like a convience – but the simpler term as a hardship; his opinion. Jack DeVore also agrees to the statement this is not a hardship but more a need or want. No primary residence already has a storage building. Tom Anslow – also agrees with the other Board Members.
Jack Zeigler – association has a lot of nice homes and this goes against the association rules. He does not agree with the variance.
Bryan Baugh – on item # 3 of finding facts. The devaluation of the adjoining property. 2 sheds are on the lot.
Tom it would look at lot less congested, this is the deck of cards we have. This does not fall into our guidelines. I cannot go against the rules.
Bryan – looking for a motion.
Jack DeVore made motion for approval of #543651. Seconded by Jack Zeigler.
Vote: Jack DeVore-no, Jack Zeigler-no, Tom Anslow-no, Dale VanLerberghe-no.
Sorry Mr. Smith you request has been denied.
Case#543654-Said request is to allow for an area variance to allow the applicant to place an addition and a separate accessory building five feet from the side lot line instead of ten feet, and to allow the shed to be four feet from the home instead of five feet and two foot from the addition instead of five feet. All fees have been paid and we do have notarized correspondence.
There is no conflict of board members.
DeeDee Kramer was sworn in by Chairman Baugh.
Dee introduced the owners of the home, Jeff & Betty Roberts. We put up the original home for the Roberts in 2004. Back in 2004 when we went for the zoning permits there were some conforming problems with the lot. Then the street was moved and caused more problems with the lot. In reading the Deed it was never clear to what the side set backs were. In that time Pat Cerney told, Dee that setbacks for them was 10 feet and for their neighbor to the south 5 feet. We have never been clear for the side setbacks for the Roberts. But when I looked at the Deed it stated that they had setbacks of 5 feet. If that is the case we did not need a variance but, I was not comfortable with it, so I applied for a variance. The shed was put up in 2005 after the home was built. 10x11 shed. The new shed was replaced in 2005 by JDM without a permit. I am trying to make the shed legal now. Right now it stands at 2 feet. We are going to move the shed 4 feet from the home. But the regulations state 5 feet. That is the max I can do to make the setbacks of 5 feet. Again the lot is totally uncomforting. He does not have the ability to put a garage up, because his neighbor has to use his driveway to get to his house. I did make copies of different sheds in the neighborhood for your consideration. Neighbor behind has their shed 6 inches from home; others are 2 feet, 3 feet. The Roberts are moving up here permanently. They are selling their home in Mansfield. They need a little more room to live comfortable in their home. Again the lot is non-conforming does not allow for any changes or additions beyond. Again I am not sure about the setback, with the non-conforming lot. If you notice on the drawing made by the surveyor their lot extends out and includes some of the bulk heads of docks. And when the street was moved the street was required to put in the sewer and power lines in his lot. He is totally hindered, he cannot do a garage, cannot do anything. We are hoping that this addition will have the ability to make the Roberts live there comfortably.
Dale – what is the size of the addition? Dee states that the addition is going to be 12 x 32; it is going to be their bedroom. Dale – what about the long shed that is there now. Dee – we are moving that shed toward the end of the house; toward the driveway and away from the house. I believe the shed is too close to the home. Even thou some sheds in the neighborhood are close to their homes. Dale – how close with the shed be to the new addition – Dee states that the shed will be about 2 ½ feet from the new addition. Dale – how close now to the house? Dee states that the shed is now 2 feet from the house. The shed from the main part of the house will be 4 feet away. If you allow us to move it within the 5 foot setback I will move the shed where ever you want me to move it.
Bryan – vinyl shed what is happening with that shed. Dee states that the shed will be gone.
Richard Hurley was sworn in by Chairman Baugh.
My mom owns property to the south of the Roberts. That drive way is the only way to get to the house. That driveway does not belong to the Roberts it was right-a-way. If they move that shed to where they want to go, I am going to have trouble moving around in my driveway. That shed was to big when they put it in and I agreed to let them move it out a little where it is sitting right now. I am not trying to start an argument, but this woman if she asks for a foot she will take a mile. She is trying to get as much as possible. Jeff I am sorry but you will never stick up for yourself. She is trying to build this took close to the property line. My mom is upset with the plans; she wanted to come up but is not able to come up. That is why I am here. She put a front porch on the place and then turned around and put another porch on. Then the next thing I knew it was enclosed. So now she has 2 enclosed porches on it. And I don’t know if that was supposed to be done or not. There are a lot of things going on that we don’t like.
Dale asked Mr. Hurley if he is part owner of the house. Mr. Hurley stated that his mother is the owner. Mr. Hurley stated that is working on being the owner but there is this problem.
Jerry O’Connor was sworn in by Chairman Baugh.
Mr. O’Connor lives behind the Roberts. Dale asked if that is to the west, away from the water. Mr. O’Connor stated yes that is correct. As long as my view is not impacted anymore that it is currently I don’t have a problem with the addition. Looking at the stakes, I can see where the addition will be and I don’t have a problem.
Dale is asking how much higher the roof line will be. Dee states that the roof will actually be a little lower. The roof line on the addition will be slightly lower than the roof on the house. The addition will have a 3/12 and the house is 5/12. Dale – the addition will be higher than the shed that is there now. Dee would have to look at the photos, that the shed is 16 feet long so and the shed has a 5/12 pitch and we are going with a 3/12 pitch.
Tammy Hurley was sworn in by Chairman Baugh.
That shed is coming out how far from the property line. Dee states that the shed is going to be 5 feet from the property line and 4 foot from the house. We are moving the shed 2 feet. Where her flowers are, that is where the shed is going. Just sliding the shed down 2 feet, it will be even with the house. The shed will not be past the house. Tammy asked if you are taking it toward the driveway or the property line. Dee states that they are taking the shed toward the driveway to match the line of the house. The shed will move 2 feet toward the property line. There are certain rules about how close a shed can be to a house. Tammy then stated that there will not be 5 feet from the shed to the property line. Dee states that there will be 5 feet from the end of their property line to the shed. Tammy states that the mother-in-law has a problem with them building the addition on, she will feel all closed in. There is not much room in-between those properties. Dee the normal setbacks is 5 feet and this is a non-conforming lot. The deed states 5 feet setbacks. The last time we came to zoning some reason the surveyor picked up 10 feet. Your house is 5 foot from the property line. Tammy still states that it will still feel closed in. Dee states that the porch was included with the original plans. They added nothing more. They never added to that porch, they only enclosed what was planned.
Dale has a question for Mr. Hurley regarding the boat. How will this move impact your ability to get your boat in and out of there? Mr. Hurley states it is going to awfully close for his ability to move his boat to the side of the driveway. Also when his daughter comes up, there will be problems with the parking back there.
Jack Zeigler just confused on the front and side setbacks of this. Dee has listed here as road coverage as 132 feet. Which I thought is the front and then the back is where you are putting the addition on. Dee states that when they first went to zoning, there were 2 front yards and a rear yard and just one side yard. Walter had to help with this naming of the setback. The front yard is the roadway. The rear yard is the driveway and the front yard is where the dock is at. They only have one side yard. Dee has the original zoning application for review. Bryan asked how many bedrooms are in the house now. Dee has stated that there are 3 bedrooms now and the addition will be 4. Dee shows the original drawings for when the house was put up in 2004. The previous zoning 2 fronts and a rear was listed and 1 side yard. Actually the original shed was 10 feet deep and they replaced it with a shed 8 foot deep, actually smaller. The Roberts have an easement to drive to their home. The driveway is actually 10 feet.
Dale coverage states 35.4% original zoning. Dee states that she was wrong on the coverage due to the size of the lot. Dale states that the original was wrong. Dee states that she did make that mistake. Why are the lot numbers so different? When Dee called the surveyor he actually went out to measure the lines. Dee states that all she did was take the information from the deed. When Rudy did the evaluation surveyor he even cut off the plot lines. Here is the location of the shed and here is your house. This is what I am talking about the driveway coming back here and then tapering this way to our house. If you move the shed to where you are planning this is where I will have trouble with my boat going in and coming out. If these gentlemen would allow the shed to remain within 2 feet of the house you would not have a problem. But I think they will have a problem with that. The other shed that they had was 10 feet deep. This shed is only 8 feet so it is smaller. We worked around the shed when they built the house. I still think it will cause a problem here. The shed will cover her flowers. But the roof overhang is going to cause a problem also.
Dale is asking about numbers that don’t match up. Dale has a problem with numbers not working on the applications. Dee states that the coverage is not an issue with this variance.
Dale is asking is the number correct or is it not. Dee does not respond.
Tom is asking about coverage did you include the deck on the water. Dee states that the deck was included but not the dock level because it is less than 1 foot (ground level). Dee states that it is not elevated and it follows the land.
Bryan is stating that he is hearing a lot of discrepancies in the paperwork. Dee states that she has made a few mistakes that she should have caught.
Closed to the public:
Tom feels that he can vote on this. The numbers are all over the place, he is not comfortable with the numbers, and He does not feel that they will affect the number of coverage. He can still vote on this project. Dee asks can this be tabled for a month so she can straighten the numbers out. Jack DeVore can vote tonight. He feels the numbers will not change the vote. Too close for house and burden on the neighbors. Jack Zeigler it is very tight in there. With fire and utilities.
Find of Facts:
#1 yes to part a / no part B
#2 no – variance is substantial
#3 no – neighbors are affected; Dale feels that is will be more.
#4 no – possible of fire space between to the south
#5 zone R-4 yes
#6 no – Dale agrees that they will need a variance.
Motion to approve #543654 by Jack Zeigler; Tom Anslow seconded the motion.
Jack DeVore-no; Jack Zeigler-no; Tom Anslow-no; Dale VanLerberghe-no
Mr. Roberts your variance has been denied.
Meeting adjourned:
Approved Minutes: ______________________________________