MINUTES OF THE CATAWBA ISLAND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
NOVEMBER 9, 2022
Attendees
Nancy Kline Dan Kline
Mark Devine Jackie Devine
Joseph Boetsch Angelette Schmitt
Rebecca Faith Mike Owens
Larry Faith Tami Owens
John C. Schmitt Bryan Bishop
Lee Short Tami Bishop
Ken Spero Dale Castle
Eileen Castle Doug Young
Gayle Richter Judith Smithers
Kathleen Montgomery Doug Montgomery
Ron Wiseman Emily Messino
Wendy Worley Anita Selvey
Mark Worley Morgan Turjanica
Deanna Creswell Chris Scott
Robert Hammer Jim Brahier
Thad King Dennis Feltner
Betty Roberts Robert Frank
Marcy Frank Greg Rosenthal
Chairman Bryan Baugh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Board members in attendance included: Jack Zeigler, Sandra Erwin, Doug Blackburn and Alternate Rebecca Jessen. Todd Bickley, Zoning Inspector and Trustee Matt Montowski were also in attendance.
Chairman Baugh read through the meeting process. He asked if there were any questions concerning the procedure to be used. There were none.
Old Business
Case #157873 Paul & Patricia Zimmer
Jack Zeigler made a motion to remove Case #157873 from the table. The motion was seconded by Rebecca Jessen. Motion passed unanimously.
No Board member had a conflict.
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicants propose an accessory structure (non-navigational lighthouse) and are requesting an area variance to exceed the building height of fifteen feet (15’) to 32’ 4”. The property is located at 5256 E. Dane, also known as Lots 22 & 23 of Danevang Subdivision. The property is located in the “C-2” General Commercial District.
Chairman Baugh swore in Dennis Feltner, agent for the applicants. Mr. Feltner indicated that the lighthouse will be non-navigational. The lighthouse will have a fifteen (15) foot diameter at its base and a ten (10) foot diameter at the top railing. There will be a catwalk around with a light inside. A red light will be at the top of the roof and will come on for five (5) seconds at the top of each hour. Mr. Feltner commented that he talked with the Coast Guard and they indicated that they do not regulate a non-navigational lighthouse on private property. Mr. Feltner stated that the lighthouse will be used as a tornado shelter and that it will not be used for residential purposes. Mr. Feltner noted that the lighthouse meets setback requirements and would be permitted through the Ottawa County Building Department.
Doug Blackburn commented that a light at that location in the channel could be a distraction to boaters. Mr. Feltner commented that the light will go on for five (5) seconds at the top of the hour and then go off. Mr. Blackburn indicated that it is still a flash. Mr. Feltner disagreed with Mr. Blackburn and believed that the light will not be a distraction.
Rebecca Jessen noted that a lock is on the fence, if open to the neighbors, would the door to the lighthouse be left unlocked? She commented that this could be a distraction for kids. Mr. Feltner noted that keys could be provided to the neighbors.
Ms. Jessen also noted the orange spray paint identifying the footprint and she commented that could the lighthouse be relocated to the south and put in front of the garage to minimize the sight line issue. Mr. Feltner showed the Board an aerial photo illustrating the sight line and commented that the lighthouse will not create a sight line issue.
Robert Frank was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Frank commented that he was concerned that the lighthouse would become a tourist attraction and bring additional traffic down the street. The lighthouse would be seen from other areas. Mr. Feltner noted Dane Avenue is a private street and the lighthouse will not be advertised. Mr. Feltner also noted that there is room to turn around at the end of Dane Avenue.
Mary Frank was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Ms. Frank was worried about the boat basin, which is a private marina, that the lighthouse would be a tourist attraction and the that the view would be blocked.
Chairman Baugh closed discussion from the floor.
Chairman Baugh noted that several emails were received, all oppose to the application.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 1 and 4, agreed with the applicant by a 4 – 1 vote on Item 5, and disagreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 2, 3, 6, and 7.
Jack Zeigler made a motion to deny the application. The motion was seconded by Rebecca Jessen. The motion passed with all Board members voting affirmatively to deny the application. Chairman Baugh did not vote.
New Business
Case #157886 Joseph Boetsch & Jill Richardson
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicants propose to remove the existing home and construct a new single-family dwelling. The applicants are requesting an area variance to reduce the front yard setback from 20.4 feet to seventeen feet (17’), reduce the side yard setback from five feet (5’) to three feet (3’), reduce the rear yard setback twenty-five feet (25’) to one foot, and exceed the lot coverage requirement of thirty-six percent (36%) to sixty-five percent (65%). The property is located at 5318 E. Hull Drive, also known as Lot 11 of Johnsons Landing “A” Subdivision. The property is zoned “R-3” Residential District.
Secretary Erwin noted that a notarized letter from an adjacent property owner was emailed to the Board members.
No Board member had a conflict.
Lee Short and Joseph Boetsch were sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Short indicated that the existing cottage will be torn down and rebuilt. The new home will be 2½ stories and the existing roof area over the patio will remain. Mr. Short noted that the lot is 40’ x 70’ in size and Johnson’s Landing in general consists of cottages along a small drive. Mr. Short noted that Hull Drive is to the north and the channel side is to the south. Although the proposed setback on the south side is one (1) foot, it is actually twenty-one feet (21’) off the channel walkway. Mr. Short noted that if the front yard averaging could have been used, the proposed setback would have been okay. Mr. Short indicated that the patio will stay along with the concrete wall. The patio will not be enclosed. Mr. Short further commented that side yard is being reduced from five feet (5’) to three feet (3’) to meet the fire rating requirements.
Mr. Short showed the Board a drawing of the new house. Mr. Short noted that the new house will come out four feet (4’) and the columns will come out an additional four feet (4’) for a second floor deck. The first floor will remain open. Mr. Short indicated that the body of the new house will line up with the house next door. Mr. Short commented that the columns could be removed and the second floor deck could be cantilevered. Mr. Short noted that the columns may be in the neighbor’s sight line. Mr. Short provided a photo with the new house and second floor deck drawn in and how it may affect the neighbor’s sight line.
Mr. Short provided the Board with one (1) approval letter from a neighbor.
Chairman Baugh questioned if the shed will be removed. Mr. Short indicated that the shed will remain.
Chairman Baugh noted that the lot coverage was high and questioned if the lot sizes along Hull Drive were the same. Mr. Boetsch noted that the lots were of similar size. Chairman Baugh questioned what the lot coverage percentage was for the other lots along Hull Drive. Mr. Short was not sure. Mr. Boetsch commented that two (2) other cottages have not been touched (improved). Mr. Short commented that other improvements have been made in Johnson’s Landing.
Mr. Zeigler questioned if the second floor deck will be enclosed. Mr. Short indicated that the deck will not be enclosed. Mr. Zeigler questioned the posts size. Mr. Short stated that the posts would be 6” x 6” tube steel and painted dark. Mr. Short noted that instead of posts, the deck support system could be cantilevered.
Robert Hammer was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Hammer read the notarized letter. Mr. Hammer indicated that he does not want to squelch Mr. Boetsch’s plans, but Mr. Hammer does not want expansion to the south. Mr. Hammer is now aware that the existing wall will remain. Mr. Hammer noted that the new home could be moved to the north and not impact views. Mr. Hammer provided the Board with photo’s that he took the day of the meeting to show the sight line impacts. Mr. Hammer indicated that when he was going through his variance hearing, the Board required that his porch be scaled back from his original plans.
Chairman Baugh explained that the Board considers views, but cannot guarantee views.
Mr. Short noted that if the columns are limited, not all sight line views will be eliminated, such as when you get into the cottage.
Chairman Baugh questioned if the home could be moved to the north. Mr. Short indicated the home could be shifted to the north, but may lose the shed. Mr. Short noted that four feet (4’) may work.
Mr. Blackburn questioned the distance of the slab to the north. Mr. Short indicated about seven feet (7’). Mr. Blackburn commented the home could be moved back seven feet (7’). Mr. Short expressed concern with losing the shed. Mr. Blackburn suggested attaching the shed to the house.
The Board suggested that the house could be moved to the north by four feet (4’) and the second floor deck would be cantilevered with no columns. The rear yard setback would be at nine feet (9’), the front yard setback would be at one (1) foot, the house would have an attached garage and the porch would not be screened in.
Greg Rosenthal was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Rosenthal indicated that the area is becoming a nice neighborhood and this is a wonderful project.
Chairman Baugh closed the discussion from the floor.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7 as revised; disagreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Item 2 and disagreed by a 3 – 2 vote on Item 6.
Doug Blackburn made a motion modify and approve Case #15786 as the following: relocate the home four feet (4’) to the north so as to remain on the same footprint as the original cottage, no posts for the second floor deck, the north setback (front yard) to be reduced to one (1) foot, the side yard setback reduced to three feet, and the porch and second floor deck will not be screened in and/or enclosed. The motion was seconded by Sandra Erwin. The motion passed with all members voting in the affirmative. Chairman Baugh did not vote.
Case #157887 Mark & Jacqueline Devine
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicants propose to remove the existing home (garage will remain) and are requesting an area variance to reduce the front yard setback from twenty-five feet (25’) to eighteen feet (18’), reduce the side yard setback from ten feet (10’) to 2.5’, reduce the side yard setback (Port Drive side) from twenty-five feet (25’) to nineteen feet (19’), reduce the rear yard setback from fifty feet (50’) to ten feet (10’), and exceed the lot coverage requirement of thirty percent (30%) to 34.7%. The property is located at 5555 Eastview Lane, also known as Lots 17 & 18 of Eastview Subdivision. The property is located in the “A” Residential Low Density District.
Ms. Erwin noted that an email was received from an adjoining property owner, which was provided for Board review.
No Board member had a conflict.
Lee Short & Mark Devine were sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Short met with Mr. Devin who expressed an interest to redo the inside. Mr. Short indicated that the cottage is old and convinced Mr. Devine to tear the cottage down. The proposal is to build on the existing footprint, except for the second floor deck on the east side and a small porch on the rear. Mr. Short noted that a 8’ x 14’ connection will be made with the existing garage. Mr. Short provided the Board with a drawing of the proposal.
Chairman Baugh questioned why not move the house approximately three feet (3’) to connect with the garage. Mr. Short commented that he was concerned with quality of the garage.
Rebecca Jessen questioned the area with the crushed rock. Mr. Devine indicated that the area will remain open space.
Mr. Zeigler questioned the open porch. Mr. Short indicated that it is an open porch on the second floor.
Chairman Baugh swore in Mike Owens. Mr. Owens indicated that he lives across the street on the north side of the property. Mr. Owens noted that the additions made to the house were done before permits were required and he questioned the foundation integrity. Mr. Owens commented that the new home will be barely off the street and will be thirty-three feet (33’) in height and he noted that no other home on the street is that close to the street. Mr. Owens questioned that if the variance is approved, will other homeowners be allowed to do the same thing. Mr. Owens suggested that the house be moved back to the south. Mr. Owens also noted that the new house would only be six feet (6’) off the telephone pole and once again suggested that the house should be moved further to the south.
Mr. Short noted that the existing foundation is not being used, just the footprint. Mr. Short also noted that the side wall is a nine (9) foot high wall. Mr. Owens commented that he would like the house moved further to the south. Mr. Short indicated that he had a survey completed and the house will be ten feet (10’) off the property line. Mr. Devine noted that if the house is moved to the south, the kitchen windows would be blocked and a tree may be lost. In addition, the southern side will be used as a garden. Mr. Owen indicated that the tree would not be impeded if the house were relocated to the south.
Chairman Baugh swore in Jim Brahier. Mr. Brahier indicated that he was two (2) lots up on the north side of the applicant’s property. Mr. Brahier noted that all the existing structures were setback evenly along the road. Mr. Brahier believed that the proposed home is too close to the street and if approved, may result in other homeowners moving out. The setback from the road should be larger.
Larry Faith was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Faith indicated that he lives next to Mike Owens, right across from the applicant’s driveway. Mr. Faith commented that he felt the house was too close to the road.
Ted King was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. King indicated that he lived to the south of the applicant’s property. Mr. King commented that he had no problem if the house was moved further to the south, coming out to the garage.
Kathleen Montgomery, Doug Montgomery, Angelette Schmitt, John Schmitt and Tiffany Bishop were sworn in by Chairman Baugh.
Ms. Montgomery expressed concern with side yard setback of 2.5 feet and would not want that to apply to the entire side yard. She also expressed concern with damage to her driveway. Mr. Bickley commented that the 2.5 foot setback was for the existing garage, which now will be connected to the home. If the garage were to be expanded, then an additional variance would be required for that expansion.
Mr. Montgomery noted that the applicant’s property is unique and that an approval would set a precedence for possible future developments.
Ms. Schmitt, President of the Homeowner’s Association, questioned the rear yard setback – was it reduced to ten feet from thirty-five feet (35’) or fifty feet(50’)? Mr. Bickley explained that he errored when preparing the notice to be mailed to the adjacent property owners. Since it was a through lot, the setback on both streets was fifty feet (50’). The information provided to the Board reflected the correct setback.
Ms. Schmitt commented that the Association agreed that the house should be moved back.
Mr. Schmitt commented that the house should be moved to the south.
Ms. Bishop commented that she welcomed the change and the newness to the neighborhood.
Chairman Baugh closed discussion from the floor.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 3, 4, and 5; agreed with the applicant by a 3 – 2 vote on Item 7; disagreed with the applicant by a 3 – 2 vote on Items 1 and 2; and disagreed by a 4 – 1 vote on Item 6.
Sandra Erwin made a motion to approve Case #157887 as submitted. The motion was seconded by Doug Blackburn. Rebecca Jessen and Jack Zeigler voted against the motion and Sandra Erwin and Doug Blackburn voted in favor of the motion. Chairman Baugh voted against the motion. The motion failed by a 3 – 2 vote.
Jack Zeigler made a motion to deny Case #157887. The motion was seconded by Rebecca Jessen. Sandra Erwin and Doug Blackburn voted against the motion. Jack Zeigler and Rebecca Jessen voted to approve the motion. Chairman Baugh voted to approve the motion. Motion passed and Case #157887 was denied.
Case #157892 Dale & Eileen Castle
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicants propose to raise an existing deck and install a roof extension over of a portion of the deck, and they are requesting an area variance to reduce the canal setback from twenty-five feet (25’) to 20’ 9” and exceed the lot coverage requirement of forty-two percent (42%) to forty-nine percent (49%). The property is located at 1418 N. Little Drive, also known as Lot 29 of Harbor Park Marinas Inc. 2 Subdivision. The property is zoned “R-4” Residential District.
No Board member had a conflict.
Mr. Bickley informed the Board that the association compliance officer indicated that the proposal was approved by the association.
Dale Castle was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Castle indicated that the existing patio
(20’ x 20’) will be raised and a roof extension will cover a portion of the patio. Chairman Baugh suggested that the roof extension be for the entire deck. Mr. Castle agreed.
Ms. Jessen questioned if the deck will be enclosed. Mr. Castle commented that the deck will not be enclosed.
Chairman Baugh closed discussion from the floor.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7; and agreed with the applicant by a 4 – 1 vote on Item 6.
Mr. Blackburn questioned steps. Mr. Castle indicated that steps would be towards the canal.
Rebecca Jessen made a motion to approve Case #157892 with the modification of the canal setback from 20’ 9” to 17’ 9”. The motion was seconded by Doug Blackburn. Motion passed with all Board members voting in the affirmative. Chairman Baugh did not vote.
Case #157893 Quintin Smith
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicant has submitted an application for a conditional use for property located at 478 NE Catawba Road, consisting of Lots 1, 2 and 11 of L.C. Heights Allotment and a 0.35 acre parcel of land in Section 25 of Catawba Island Township. The property is zoned “C-1” Neighborhood Commercial District. The applicant proposes a boutique hotel.
No Board member had a conflict.
Emily Messino was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Ms. Messino, Director of Events, indicated that Quintin Smith was unable to attend the meeting. Ms. Messino commented that a boutique hotel is proposed; however, there are no architectural drawings at this time. The inspiration for the hotel is the 1872 winery.
Chairman Baugh questioned the location, Ms. Erwin questioned the setbacks and Mr. Zeigler questioned whether a drawing was available. Ms. Messino noted that Wine Cellar Road would be the main entrance to the hotel and the NE Catawba driveway would not be used as the primary entrance.
Mr. Blackburn questioned the barn. Ms. Messino indicated that the barn is part of the winery process.
Dan Kline was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Kline questioned setbacks. Mr. Bickley indicated that the “C-1” setbacks were the following: front yard – 60 feet; side yard – 20 feet; and rear yard – 20 feet. If both the front and rear yards have frontage on a street, the front yard would apply to both yards.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 1, 2, 3, and 4; could not vote on Items 5, 6, 7, and 10 because no plans were submitted with the application; and disagreed with the applicant by a 3 – 2 vote on Items 8 and 9; and agreed with the applicant by a vote of 4 – 1 on Item 11.
Doug Blackburn made a motion to table the application until the applicant provides the necessary drawings for Board review and a site plan is submitted to verify zoning compliance. Motion passed with all members voting in the affirmative. Chairman Baugh did not vote.
Case #157894 Richard Siess
Secretary Sandra Erwin read the case facts. The applicant is proposing an addition and is requesting an area variance to reduce the rear yard setback from thirty-five feet (35’) to twenty-six feet (26’). The property is located at 4484 E. Cliff Road, also known as Lots 86, 87 and Part of Lot 88 of Catawba Cliffs Subdivision. The property is located in the “R-1” Residential District.
No Board member had a conflict.
Ken Spero was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Spero noted that prior to Mr. Siess purchasing the property, a rear yard variance was issued for the garage addition. Mr. Siess has purchased the adjacent lot and had the home demolished. Mr. Siess’ home is a two (2) bedroom home and he would like to construct an addition, thus the need for a rear yard variance of twenty-six feet (26’). Mr. Spero noted that the application should be modified to include the stairs.
Ms. Jessen questioned if the addition was two (2) stories. Mr. Spero indicated that the addition was 1½ story.
Doug Young was sworn in by Chairman Baugh. Mr. Young, representing the Cliffs Building Review Committee approved the addition with the condition that the lots would be adjoined and no further lots would be created. Mr. Young noted that the Cliffs Association do not want additional narrow lots. Mr. Bickley commented that the lots have been converted to one (1) lot for zoning purposes by the filing of an Affidavit with the Ottawa County Recorder’s Office. As a result, if the property owner would like to split off the vacant lot, then the zoning requirements would need to be met or a variance obtained.
Chairman Baugh closed discussion from the floor.
The Board reviewed the Finding of Fact. The Board agreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 and disagreed with the applicant by a 5 – 0 vote on Item 6.
Sandra Erwin made a motion to approve Case #157894 with the modification that the setback be changed from twenty-six feet (26’) to twenty-three feet (23’) and the condition that the balance of the remaining lot will not be split off. The motion was seconded by Rebecca Jessen. Motion passed with all Board members voting in the affirmative. Chairman Baugh did not vote.
Approval of Minutes – October 12, 2022
The meeting minutes from the October 12, 2022 meeting was mailed to each member. Doug Blackburn moved to approve the October 12, 2022 meeting minutes. The motion was seconded by Sandra Erwin. Motion passed.
Other Business
No other business to conduct
Adjournment
Sandra Erwin moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Doug Blackburn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________ _________________________________
Bryan Baugh, Chairman Sandra Erwin, Secretary