Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF BLOOMFIELD
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Tuesday, December 13th, 2005
Bloomfield Township Hall

PRESENT: Board Members James Aldrich, Dan Devine, Robert Taylor, Lisa Seneker, Brian Kepes, Chairman Jane Reisinger

ABSENT: Corinne Khederian

STAFF PRESENT: Patricia McCullough, Planning and Building Director, Robin Carley, Development Coordinator, Brenda Schlutow, Ordinance Officer, and Kathy Davis, Building Department Secretary.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of November 8th, 2005

Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Devine to approve the Minutes of November 8th, 2005 as written.

Motion carried, 5 – 0.

III. APPEALS:

TABLED ITEMS

(1T) 2812 Telegraph Road – B. Thomas

Mr. Bill Thomas, homeowner, was present seeking approval for the installation of the following accessory structures for Lot 7, Hickory Knoll’s Subdivision, Section 9:

Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard, shall not exceed 14-feet in height, shall not be located closer than 16-feet to any side lot line, and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-09-153-006)

Mr. Thomas addressed the Board with the variance requests and indicated that the purpose was for aesthetic reasons for the outside of the home.

Mr. Kepes questioned if a landscape plan was available.

Mr. Thomas replied that a landscape plan was not available.

Chairman Reisinger questioned would the lighted bollards be located in the road right-of-way.

Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director replied that the proposed lighted bollards would be located on private property.

Mr. George Galayda, resident at 2866 Acorn, was present and spoke in objection of the variance request.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regard to the appeal at 2812 Telegraph Road for the accessory structures, a 16.3’ x 25’ x 16.3’ high detached brick canopy, Six 2’ x 2’ x 3.7’ high lighted masonry bollards, placed in a front yard along each side of the driveway, Two 3.7’ high curved screen walls with lighted bollards that the variances be denied as requested. Based upon the information presented, the applicant did not demonstrate that compliance would not be unduly burdensome; there are no unique circumstances with the property, and it is self-created.

Motion carried, 4 – 2

YEAS: Devine, Kepes, Seneker, Aldrich

NAYS: Taylor, Reisinger

NEW ITEMS

(1) 1631 Franklin Hills Drive – M. Schwartz

Ms. Sally Schwartz, homeowner, was present seeking approval for the replacement of an accessory structure, an air-conditioning unit screened with plantings, located in the northerly side yard immediately adjacent to the residential building. Also seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, a standby generator, located adjacent to the proposed air-conditioning unit for Unit 10, Franklin Hills of Bloomfield, Section 19. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted

mechanical or electrical equipment within a One-family Cluster district shall be permitted in any rear yard when placed immediately adjacent to the residential building. (19-19-226-041)

Ms. Schwartz addressed the Board with a variance request for the replacement of an air-conditioning unit to be placed in the northerly side yard on an existing slab. Ms. Schwartz also requested approval for an existing stand-by generator to be located adjacent to the air conditioning unit. Ms. Schwartz indicated that there is no other place to re-locate the air-conditioner given the existing unit is built into the home. Ms. Schwartz presented the subdivision association approval to the Board.

Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 1631 Franklin Hills for the location variance for the replacement of an air-conditioning unit and a stand-by generator, that the variances be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction for practical difficulty. Contingent upon additional screening to be installed around the generator, with the generator meeting the Township Noise Ordinance.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(2) 4328 Vernor Court – M. Carolan

Mr. Michael Carolan, homeowner, was present seeking approval for the installation of a 4-foot high chain link fence with a gate enclosing an area at the rear of the home, to be used as a dog run, located 35-feet from the rear lot line and more than 16-feet from the side lot lines for Lot 143, Vernor Estates No. 3, Section 16. Section 6 of General Ordinance No. 423 states that all outdoor enclosures and fenced dog run areas, are subject to the review and approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-16-451-002)

Mr. Carolan addressed the Board with the request for a dog run to be located within a 4-foot high chain link fence with a gate at the rear of the home.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of a letter received from Mr. & Mrs. George Falls, resident’s at 4188 Sunningdale Drive in objection of the variance.

Mr. Kepes questioned the petitioner if subdivision association approval has been granted.

Mr. Carolan replied that he had requested the approval however he has not received a response from the association.

Ms. Barbara Grashoff, resident at 4261 Sunningdale, was present and spoke in objection of the variance request.

Mr. Miroslav Vlcko, resident at 4243 Sunningdale, was present and spoke in detail in objection of the variance request.

Mr. Devine questioned Mr. Vlcko would additional screening of the proposed fence and permitted time for the dog to use the run be acceptable.

Mr. Vlcko replied possibly, but the enforcement is lacking for the barking dog.

Mr. Devine questioned the petitioner if he would consider a restricted time to be set for the use of the dog run.

Mr. Vlcko replied that a restricted time use would be acceptable.

Motion by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 4328 Vernor Court for the permission request to install an accessory structure, 4-foot high chain link fence with a gate enclosing an area at the rear of the home, to be used as a dog run that the request be approved as submitted based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards. With the fence to be similar in nature to the fence that currently exists at the rear lot line.

Motion failed due to lack of support.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regard to the appeal at 4328 Vernor Court for the permission request to install an accessory structure, a 4-foot high chain link fence with a gate enclosing an area at the rear of the home, to be used as a dog run that the request be approved as submitted based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards with the following conditions: 1. The fence to be screened with ivy and at the rear lot line other plantings to be installed. 2. The dog run hours are 9:30 AM – 9:00 PM. 3. The Planning Department will review the petition in one year based on condition with continuance on the Planning Department being satisfied that the dog has not created a nuisance for noise.

Motion carried, 5 - 1

YEAS: Devine, Kepes, Aldrich, Seneker, Reisinger

NAYS: Taylor

(3) 3781 Darlington Road South – Darlington Investments, LLC

Mr. Dave Kellett Sr. of Kellett Construction Company was present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, a stone retaining wall screened with evergreen plantings with an overall height of 4.1-feet, located along the easterly side lot line for Lot 8, Oaks of Bloomfield, Section 28. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard,

shall not be located closer than 16-feet to any side or rear lot line and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-28-276-022)

Mr. Kellett addressed the Board with the request for the existing accessory structure, a stone retaining wall screened with evergreen plantings with an overall height of 4.1 feet located along the easterly side lot line. Mr. Kellett indicated that they wanted to maintain the 30-foot driveway turn around area from the garage door to the property line, within doing so this resulted in a 4.1-foot high retaining wall being installed to help gain access to the garage. Mr. Kellett presented the Board with the subdivision association approval.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to the appeal at 3781 Darlington Road for an existing accessory structure, a stone retaining wall screened with evergreen plantings with an overall height of 4.1-feet that the request be approved as submitted, and the variance for the height be granted, based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(4) 4728 Littlegate – D. Fruman

Mr. Jacob Urbas of Urbas Construction was present seeking approval for an extension to the existing brick screen wall with an overall height of 5.5-feet for the purpose of screening the existing generator, located 16-feet from the southerly side lot line for Unit 118, The Hills of Lone Pine, Section 20. Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states fences/walls in a residential district shall not exceed 4-feet in height. (19-20-226-128)

Mr. Urbas addressed the Board for an extension of an existing brick screen wall for the purpose of screening the existing generator. Mr. Urbas indicated that the brick wall would be 5.5-feet in height with an 11.5-foot extension to accommodate the existing generator.

Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to the appeal at 4728 Littlegate for an extension to the existing brick screen wall with an overall height of 5.5-feet that the variance be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(5) 5128 Midmoor Road – D. Rosen

Mr. David Rosen, homeowner, was present seeking approval for an existing accessory use/structure, a 45.2’ x 27’ sports court with an adjustable basketball hoop and volley ball post, located 10.5-feet from the rear lot line and .4-feet from the northerly side lot line of Lot 39, Wood Lake Hills Subdivision, Section 20. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that an accessory use/structure shall not be located closer than 16-feet to any side or rear lot line and shall require the review and approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-20-427-012)

Mr. Rosen presented the Board with his immediate neighbors signatures along with the approval from the subdivision association for the sports court.

Mr. Devine questioned Mr. Rosen if he would be opposed to set restrictions and no outside lighting for the sports court.

Mr. Rosen replied that he would be in agreement to the restrictions for the sports court.

Ms. Mary Mills, resident at 1269 Lake Crescent, and President of Woodlake Hills Association, was present and spoke in support of the variance request.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 5128 Midmoor Road for the existing accessory use/structure, a 45.2’ x 27’ sports court, that the request be approved as submitted, and the variance for the setback of 10.5-feet from the rear lot line and .4-feet from the northerly side lot line be granted, based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty. With the following restrictions: the sports court use is from 9:30 AM to 9:00 PM with no exterior lighting to be used or installed for the sports court.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(6) 6040 Burnham Court – W. Picket, Jr.

Mr. Wiley Picket, Jr. was present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, an 8’ x 11.8’ x 8.5’ shed screened with plantings, located in a rear yard more than 16-feet from side and rear property lines for Lot 15, Glencoe Estates, Section 28. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that all accessory structures shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-28-153-016)

Mr. Picket asked the Board to be moved towards the end of the agenda to allow for his attorney to arrive.

Chairman Reisinger discussed with the Board members and determined to allow the item to be heard at 8:30 PM. Chairman Reisinger indicated that it was 8:00 PM given there are people here to hear the item it will be heard at 8:30 PM.

(7) 1292 Circle Court – M. Letica

Mr. Steve Templeton of Templeton Building Company was present seeking approval for the construction of accessory structures, 2’ x 2’ x 6’ high stone retaining walls including a light fixture, located on each side of the driveway 23.8-feet from the front lot line, Circle Court frontage, for Lot 31, Supervisor’s Plat No. 7, Section 8. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard, shall not be located closer than 16-feet to any side lot line and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-08-401-005)

Mr. Templeton addressed the Board for the construction of retaining walls with a light fixture to be located on each side of the driveway on private property.

Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to the appeal at 1292 Circle Court for the construction of the accessory structures, 2’ x 2’ x 6’ high stone retaining walls including a light fixture, that the request be approved as submitted, and the variance for the height be granted, based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(8) 4980 Stoneleigh Road – S. Foster

Ms. Christina Foster, homeowner, was present seeking approval for an existing 4-foot high fence, located along the southerly side of the driveway, Lone Pine Road frontage, within front yard setbacks for Lot 26, Judson Bradway’s Chelmsleigh Addition to Country Club Estates, Section 21. Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that fences in a residential district must be located in a required side or rear yard and a common street line with front yards on the same block shall be treated as front yards and shall not have a fence constructed within the minimum setback of 40 feet. (19-21-276-012)

Ms. Foster addressed the Board with a request for an existing 4-foot high fence, located along the driveway that was installed due to the 12-foot drop in grade. Ms. Foster indicated that the fence is utilized as a safety barrier along the driveway. Ms. Foster commented that she planned on installing ivy and morning glories along with painting the fence to help with screening the fence from view.

Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 4980 Stoneleigh Road for an existing 4-foot high fence, located along the southerly side of the driveway that the variance be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty. Contingent upon installing ivy to soften the view and painting the fence to match the trim of the home.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(9) 3883 Mystic Valley Road – A. Bahri

Mr. Phil Bahri, homeowner, was present seeking approval for existing accessory structures, two air-conditioning units and a stand-by generator, located immediately adjacent to the wall of the building in a front yard, more than 40-feet from the front lot line, West Pemberton Road frontage. Also seeking approval for the installation of an existing 6-foot high vinyl fence for the purpose of screening the proposed ground mounted mechanicals, located in a front yard 40-feet from the front lot line, West Pemberton Road frontage. Also seeking approval for existing boulder retaining walls with an overall height of 6-12-feet, located in front and side yards less than 16-feet to the side lot line, Telegraph Road frontage for Lot 8, Devon Gables, Section 16. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted mechanical or electrical equipment may be permitted in any side or rear yard and that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard, shall not be located closer than 16-feet to any side lot line, and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that a common street line with front yards on the same block shall be treated as front yards, that fences in a residential district shall not exceed 4-feet in height and must be located in a required side or rear yard. (19-16-153-004)

Mr. Bahri addressed the Board with a landscape plan indicating the existing boulder retaining walls, 6-foot vinyl fence, two air-conditioning units, and a stand-by generator.

Mr. Taylor questioned the proposed evergreen screening on the landscape plan does not allow for evergreens to be placed with a sidewalk installed next to the vinyl fence.

Mr. Bahri replied that the 6-foot high vinyl fence was installed to help screen the existing generator and two air-conditioning units.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of a letter received in objection from Mr. Arumugam, resident at 3861 Mystic Valley.

Mr. Taylor commented that the proposed landscape plans vs. the pictures presented to the Board are not accurate.

Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to the appeal at 3883 Mystic Valley Road for the existing 6-foot high vinyl fence and the boulder retaining walls be approved as submitted, and the variance for the location and height be granted, based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards and did demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty. Contingent upon adequate evergreen screening to be installed on the south side of the sidewalk and the west side of the 6-foot high vinyl fence to be approved by the Planning Department.

Motion failed due to lack of support.

Motion by Mr. Kepes, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to the appeal at 3883 Mystic Valley Road for the existing accessory structures, a 6-foot high vinyl fence and boulder retaining walls, be tabled to allow the petitioner to provide an accurate and detailed landscape plan indicating additional landscape to be added along Pemberton Road and around the vinyl fence. The petitioner is to return to the Board by March 2006.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of the time and that the Board would hear item (6) as previously discussed.

(6) 6040 Burnham Court – W. Picket, Jr.

Mr. Wiley Picket, Jr., homeowner, was present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, an 8’ x 11.8’ x 8.5’ shed screened with plantings, located in a rear yard more than 16-feet from side and rear property lines for Lot 15, Glencoe Estates, Section 28. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that all accessory structures shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-28-153-016)

Mr. Picket addressed the Board and indicated that his attorney would not be present.

Mr. Devine questioned the applicant if there was a change of circumstance.

Mr. Picket replied that there was a change in circumstance and indicated that the use has changed and the shed would be utilized to store his riding lawn mower. Mr. Picket addressed the Board with two new proposed locations for the shed with evergreen screening.

Mr. Kepes suggested to the petitioner that an addition be added on to the existing garage to eliminate the existing accessory structure.

Mr. Picket replied that he could not afford an addition.

Mr. Taylor made comment in regards to the proximity of the existing shed with relation to the residence. Mr. Taylor made mention that the existing shed could be a potential hazard with the storing of fuel.

Ms. Martha Forgach, resident at 5901 Blandford Road, was present and spoke in opposition of the variance request.

Mr. Alan Forgach, resident at 5901 Blandford Road, and Architectural Control Committee, was present and spoke in opposition of the variance request.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of a letter received in opposition from Mr. Joseph J. Gerber, resident at 6135 Thorncrest Drive.

Mr. Taylor made comment and indicated that he would like the homeowners association to address the existing nine other sheds prior to acting upon this request.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to the appeal at 6040 Burnham Court for an existing accessory structure, an 8’ x 11.8’ x 8.5’ shed screened with plantings, that the variance as submitted be denied with prejudice as to any location on the property, based on the information presented the applicant did not demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards.

Motion carried, 5 – 1.

YEAS: Devine, Aldrich, Kepes, Seneker, Reisinger

NAYS: Taylor

(10) 1225 Sandringham Way – R. Schwartz

Mr. Ben Heller of Morgan Heller Associates was present seeking approval for a 2-foot encroachment into the required 40-foot northerly front yard setback, for the construction of a single story addition, located 38-feet from the front lot line, Twin Maples Lane frontage. Also seeking approval for a 3-foot encroachment into the required 35-foot rear yard setback for the construction of a single story addition, located 32-feet from the rear lot line for Lot 1339, Judson Bradway’s Bloomfield Village, Section 27. The existing home is currently non-conforming. Article XV, Section 1502 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that non-conformities shall not be enlarged upon, expanded or extended. Article XIV, Section 1400 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 requires a minimum of 40-feet in the front yard and 35-feet in the rear yard setback. (19-27-201-028)

Mr. Heller presented the Board with the approval from the subdivision association. Mr. Heller indicated that the home sits on a corner lot, which makes this existing home non-conforming for the proposed 2-foot encroachment into the northerly front yard.

Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to the appeal at 1225 Sandringham Way for a 2-foot encroachment into the front yard setback and a 3-foot encroachment into the rear yard setback to the existing non-conforming building that the variance be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(11) 420 Glenhurst Drive North – J. Fischer

Mr. John Fischer, homeowner, was present seeking approval for a 4-foot encroachment into the required 16-foot side yard setback for the installation of an accessory structure, an air-conditioning unit, located 12-feet from the southerly side lot line for Lot 733, Judson Bradway’s Bloomfield Village, Section 26. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted mechanical or electrical equipment shall not be located in the required 16-feet side yard setback. (19-26-378-002)

Mr. Fischer addressed the Board with the request for an air-conditioning unit to be placed in the side yard setback. Mr. Fischer indicated that evergreen screening would be installed at the side and in the front of the air-conditioning unit.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of the approval letter received from the subdivision association.

Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to the appeal at 420 Glenhurst Drive North for a 4-foot encroachment into the side yard setback be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Contingent upon additional evergreen screening to be installed at the side and at the front of the air-conditioning unit.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(12) 2815 Courville Drive – G. Divecha

Mr. Kevin Flura of Flura Construction Company was present seeking approval for a 12-foot encroachment into the required 35-foot rear yard setback for the construction of a single story addition, located 23-feet from the easterly rear lot line for Lot 157, Bloomfield Hickory Grove Subdivision, Section 9. The existing home is currently non-conforming. Article XV, Section 1502 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that non-conformities shall not be enlarged upon, expanded or extended. Article XIV, Section 1400 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 requires a minimum of 35-feet in the rear yard setback. (19-09-180-001)

Mr. Flura addressed the Board for a 12-foot encroachment into the rear yard setback for a single story addition to accommodate the family. Mr. Flura provided subdivision association approval to the Board.

Chairman Reisinger referred to the site plan and questioned the placement of the existing air-conditioning unit.

Mr. Flura replied that the air-conditioning unit would be relocated to the rear yard screened with evergreens.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to the appeal at 2815 Courville Drive for a 12-foot encroachment into the rear yard setback for the existing non-conforming building, be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 –0.

(13) 2211 Devonshire Road – G. Fry

Mr. Gregory Fry, homeowner, was present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, a 6’ x 10’ x 16.5’ high tree fort, located in a rear yard 28-feet from the southerly side lot line and 37-feet from the rear property line for Part of Lots 90 and 91, South Bloomfield Highlands Subdivision, Section 3. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not exceed one (1) story or 14-feet in height, and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals.

(19-03-303-017)

Mr. Fry presented the Board with pictures of the existing tree fort and indicated that the accessory structure has been there for three years.

Mr. Devine commented based on the pictures provided, the accessory structure does not appear to be structurally safe.

Mr. Fry replied that the posts are attached to the metal supports which are cemented 2.5-feet into the ground. Mr. Fry submitted subdivision association approval to the Board.

Mr. Jeff Beachum, association member, was present and indicated that approval was granted by the association with no objections from the adjacent neighbors.

Chairman Reisinger questioned how does one gain access to the structure.

Mr. Fry replied that on a portion of the tree he drilled holes and inserted 4" pegs so the children could climb up the tree and enter the access door of the tree fort.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regard to the appeal at 2211 Devonshire Road for an existing tree fort with the 16.5-foot height be denied as submitted, based on the information presented, the applicant did not demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did not demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty. The accessory structure is self-created, and does create possible danger to the general public.

Motion failed due to lack of support.

Chairman Reisinger suggested to the petitioner to remove the exterior walls and cut down the walls 2-feet to meet the 14-foot height requirement.

Mr. Fry replied that there is also a roof on the structure. Mr. Fry explained the structure in detail.

The Board discussed the reconstruction of the structure in detail.

Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regard to the appeal at 2211 Devonshire Road for the existing tree fort be denied as submitted, based on the information presented, the applicant did not demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did not demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty. The existing tree fort is to be removed within 30 days.

Motion carried, 4 – 2.

YEAS: Devine, Kepes, Taylor, Reisinger

NAYS: Seneker, Aldrich

(14) 3858 Columbia Drive – S. Jaddou

Mr. Vince George, construction manager, was present seeking approval for the construction of accessory structures, four 3’ x 3’ x 6’ high brick piers, located on private property, in a front yard, on each side of the driveway entrances, Columbia Drive frontage. Also seeking approval for the construction of an additional accessory structure, an 8-foot high fountain located in a front yard, Long Lake Road frontage, for Lot 25, Wabeek Ridge, Section 18. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard, and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-18-251-009)

Mr. George addressed the Board with the variance requests for the brick piers and an 8-foot high fountain. Mr. George submitted subdivision approval to the Board for the fountain however; the brick piers have not been approved.

Chairman Reisinger made mention of two letters received from Mr. Harold Flnkel, President of Wabeek Ridge Homeowners’ Association, indicating that the association would not meet until February or March. The second letter from Mr. Edward Gudeman, resident at 3925 Columbia Drive, was indicating that they were in support of the brick piers but were in objection to the fountain.

Mr. Michael Shapiro, resident at 3971 Columbia Drive, was present and spoke in objection of the variance requests.

Dr. Lawrence Miller, resident at 3845 Columbia Drive, was present and spoke in objection of the variance requests.

Chairman Reisinger suggested to the Board that the variances be addressed individually.

Brick Piers: Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Devine in regard to the appeal at 3858 Columbia Drive for the location of four 3’ x 3’ x 6’ high brick piers located in the front yard on private property that the request be denied. Based on the information presented, the applicant did not demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty and the piers are not harmonious to the district.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

Fountain: Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regard to the appeal at 3858 Columbia Drive for an 8-foot high fountain to be located in the front yard of Long Lake frontage that the variance be approved with the following condition, install arborvitaes to screen along the entire property line of Long Lake Road by May 31st, 2006. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 –0.

(15) 5451 Brookdale Street – Vortex Enterprises Inc.

Mr. Avril Townsend, neighbor, was present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure, an air-conditioning unit screened with evergreen plantings, located in a front yard immediately adjacent to the westerly wall of the building for Lot 43, Bloomfield Estates Subdivision, Section 24. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted mechanical or electrical equipment may be permitted in any side or rear yard within the One-Family Residential Districts. (19-24-377-009)

Mr. Townsend addressed the Board with pictures of the existing air-conditioning unit and indicated that the unit is screened with evergreens. Mr. Townsend commented that this is the best location for the unit.

Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 5451 Brookdale for the installation of an existing air-conditioning unit within a front yard screened with evergreens, that the variance be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

(16) 860 Ardmoor Drive – D. Collon

Mr. Fred Capaldi of Capaldi Building was present seeking approval for a 3-foot encroachment into the required 16-foot side yard setback for the installation of an accessory structure, an air-conditioning unit screened with plantings, located 13-feet from the southerly side lot line for Lot 16, Rodeka Subdivision, Section 27. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted mechanical and electrical equipment shall not be located in the required 16-foot side yard setback. (19-27-127-016)

Mr. Capaldi addressed the Board with the request for a 3-foot encroachment into the front yard for the installation of an air-conditioning unit. Mr. Capaldi indicated that the proposed location is the best given that there is a deck with stairs that encompass the rear of the home. Mr. Capaldi indicated that the air-conditioner would be screened with evergreens.

Ms. Seneker made mention of a letter received in support from Mr. Drew Bacon, resident at 865 Ardmoor Drive.

Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to the appeal at 860 Ardmoor Drive for the 3-foot encroachment into the side yard setback for the installation of an air-conditioning unit that the variance be approved as requested. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty. With additional evergreen screening to be installed.

Motion carried, 6- 0.

(17) 3467 Greentree – K. Lorenzetti

Ms. Katherine Lorenzetti, homeowner, was present seeking approval for an extension on the use of the previously approved accessory structure, a 42’ x 20’ x 14’ high shed, which includes additional living facilities creating a second dwelling unit, located in a front yard, Greentree and Long Lake Road frontages, more than 40-feet from the front lot lines for Lots 70, 71, 48 and Part of Lot 49, Supervisor’s Plat of Eastover Farms, Section 12. Article IV, Section 400 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 allows for one single family

dwelling in the R-2, Single-Family Residential District. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall not be erected in any required yard, except a rear yard and shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-12-476-014; 016; 017)

Ms. Lorenzetti addressed the Board and asked the Board for an extension on the use of the previously approved shed that includes additional living facilities creating a second dwelling unit. Ms. Lorenzetti indicated that the home heating system is currently failing and is in need of repair. Ms. Lorenzetti asked for a one-year extension for the use of the accessory structure while her home is under construction.

The Board discussed the extension of the accessory structure in detail.

Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to the appeal at 3467 Greentree for the extended use of a previously approved accessory structure, located in a front yard that the variance be approved for one-year or an issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy, which ever one comes first. Based on the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards, and did demonstrate all of the standards for practical difficulty.

Motion carried, 6 – 0.

IV. GENERAL BUSINESS

Next Board Meeting – January 10th, 2006

V. ADJOURNMENT

Home  |  Government  |  Services  |  Community  |  Current Events  |  Resources
Contact Us  |  E-mail List  |  Forms

Still can't find what you're looking for?
Use our comprehensive Search or Site Map pages!

Charter Township of Bloomfield
4200 Telegraph Road
P.O. Box 489
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303-0489
248.433.7700

Click here to report website technical issues.

Need to contact the webmaster?  Click here.

This site is best viewed in Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher and Netscape 6.0 or higher.

Having trouble accessing our site forms? Your browser may not have the Acrobat Reader plug-in that is required.  Click here to download a free copy of this software.

Site Design/Development by

Proudly serving our community online since 1999.
Named #1 Township Website in Michigan by Cyber-state.org

Site Use Policy

All information © 2008 Bloomfield Township, Michigan