Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF BLOOMFIELD
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Tuesday, July 11th, 2006
Bloomfield Township Hall
I. ATTENDANCE:
PRESENT: Board Members Dan Devine, Lisa Seneker, Robert
Taylor, Brain Kepes, Jane Reisinger, James Aldrich, Chairman
Corinne Khederian
STAFF PRESENT: Patricia McCullough, Planning and Building
Director, Brenda Schlutow,
Code and Ordinance Director, Robin Carley, Development
Coordinator, Kathy Davis, Building Department Secretary,
George Kilpatrick, Building Plan Reviewer, and Chris Gruba,
Assistant Planner.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A. Approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of June
13th, 2006.
Motion was made by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich to
approve the Minutes of June 13th, 2006 as written.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
Chairman Khederian addressed the audience and indicated
that item (11) 328 Wadsworth Lane was withdrawn at the
petitioner’s request and placed on the August 15th, 2006
agenda.
III. APPEALS:
TABLED ITEMS
(1T) 6015 Snowshoe Circle – R. Weiss
Mr. & Mrs. Ron Weiss, homeowners, were present seeking
approval for an existing accessory structure, pool equipment,
located in a rear yard approximately 120-feet from the
residential building more than 16-feet from the side and rear
property lines for Lot 33, Gilbert Lake Estates, Section 28.
Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states
that ground mounted mechanical or electrical equipment shall
be permitted in any rear yard when placed immediately adjacent
to the residential building. (19-28-178-006)
Mr. Weiss addressed the Board with the request for the
existing pool equipment, located in the rear yard. Mr. Weiss
submitted photographs to the Board, which indicated the
screening of the pool equipment.
Mr. & Mrs. Craig Spangler, residents at 3953 Cotton Tail,
were present and spoke in objection of the noise that the pool
equipment creates but commented that the landscaping as
installed is sufficient.
Ms. Jodi Weiss, petitioner, replied screening and enclosing
the pool equipment was discussed at the last meeting. Ms.
Weiss indicated that the placement of the pool equipment is
the furthest location away from the Spangler’s residence. Ms.
Weiss referred to the site plan indicating the original
location of the pool equipment.
Chairman Khederian made mention of the approval letters
received from Mr. Roger Henkin, President of the Gilbert Lake
Association, Ms. Susan Bixler, resident at 5950 Snowshoe
Circle, Mr. Barry Drangin, resident at 6014 Snowshoe Circle
and Mr. Charles Federman, resident at 6031 Snowshoe Circle.
Mr. Aldrich questioned would the pool equipment be in
violation of the Township Noise Ordinance.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
replied that the pool equipment would require an inspection to
verify the decibel levels would meet the Township Noise
Ordinance.
Ms. Seneker questioned who made the decision for the
current location of the pool equipment.
Ms. Patti McCullough replied the homeowners made the
decision for the current location of the pool equipment. Ms.
McCullough indicated upon plan review there were outstanding
items relating to the fence and the pool equipment, which the
contractor was informed of these items. Ms. McCullough
indicated that revisions were submitted and reviewed for the
fence however the plan review was processed and a permit was
issued for the fence and the pool equipment. Ms. McCullough
indicated that upon an inspection by the Building Department
led to the findings of the pool equipment in the rear yard,
which has led to the homeowners seeking a variance from the
Zoning Board of Appeals.
Ms. Seneker mentioned the discussion of the last meeting,
which included landscaping with arborvitaes, relocation of the
pool equipment, or enclosing of the pool equipment.
Ms. Seneker complimented the landscaping of the pool
equipment and questioned the proposed enclosing of the pool
equipment.
Mr. Weiss replied that enclosing the pool equipment was an
option that was discussed. Mr. Weiss indicated that if the
pool equipment was enclosed, it would not perform effectively
and it would heat up being enclosed which would not be safe.
Mr. Weiss indicated it would also be very expensive to enclose
the pool equipment. Mr. Weiss commented that the landscaping
with the arborvitaes was aesthetically pleasing to the
property and the surrounding neighbors.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to
the appeal at 6015 Snowshoe Circle for the existing pool
equipment located approximately 120-feet from the residential
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. Approval is contingent upon the pool equipment
complying with the Township Noise Ordinance.
Motion carried, 7 0 .
NEW ITEMS
(1) 1252 Cottingham Row – D. Handleman
Mr. James Scott, Landscape Architect, was present seeking
approval for existing 4-foot high fencing, located on private
property within required front yards, Hidden Lake and Echo
Road frontages for Unit 133, The Hills of Lone Pine, Section
20. 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. (19-20-226-142)
Mr. Scott addressed the Board with the request for the
existing 4-foot high fencing located on private property
within the front yards of Hidden Lake and Echo Road frontages.
Mr. Scott presented photographs of the property and the
existing fence with a landscape plan to the Board and
explained in detail.
Mr. Doug Kaselitz, member of the Echo Road Subdivision
Association, was present and spoke with concerns relating to
the existing 4-foot fence in the winter having no landscaping
along a natural beauty road.
Mr. Henry Zanirdelli, President of The Hills of Lone Pine
Association, was present and indicated the Association did not
approve the fence and stated that the fence serves as a
purpose which is to help screen the dust from the road.
Mr. Kepes questioned could there be ivy installed that
would help screen the fence in the winter months.
Mr. Scott replied yes, there is trellis type ivy that could
be installed to help screen the fence during the winter
months.
Mr. Taylor disagreed that the ivy would take over the other
evergreens in the area.
Mr. Scott suggested that the arborvitaes would be the best
for the area. Mr. Scott referred to the landscape plan and
referenced the nine arborvitaes installed. Mr. Scott commented
that he would continue to install nine arborvitaes at a time
depending on their growth within the area.
Mr. Kepes questioned the time frame for the proposed
plantings.
Mr. Scott replied the time frame needed would be nine to
twelve months to allow for growth of the arborvitaes to take
root.
Motion by Mr. Kepes, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to
the appeal at 1252 Cottingham Row for the installation of an
existing 4-foot fence within front yards 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 the
arborvitaes being installed and the growth progress for 2
years are substantial.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(2) 1258 Cottingham Row – C. Letts
Mr. & Mrs. Charles Letts, homeowners, were present seeking
approval for an existing 6-foot high privacy fence, located on
private property within a required front yard, Echo Road
frontage, for Unit 135, The Hills of Lone Pine, Section 20.
Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states
fences in a residential district must be located in a required
side or rear yard and shall not exceed 4-feet in height.
(19-20-226-144)
Mr. Letts addressed the Board with the request for an
existing 6-foot high privacy fence, located on private
property within a front yard. Mr. Letts indicated that the
fence is in sections and it is not a continuous fence on the
property. Mr. Letts indicated that the fence has been in place
for eleven years and it is invisible from the road. Mr. Letts
commented that The Hills of Lone Pine granted approval eleven
years ago for the fence.
Mrs. Letts commented as to the screening of the fence and
indicated several attempts have been made with planting
different species of tress and they have had no success with
the growth. Mrs. Letts indicated that their property is lower
than 1252 Cottingham Row, which has more shade. Mrs. Letts
indicated that a 4-foot fence would not serve the purpose of
shielding the headlights from the vehicles on the street into
their residence.
Mr. Doug Kaselitz, member of Echo Road Subdivision
Association, was present and commented that this road is a
natural beauty road and in the wintertime the fences are
visible.
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Ms. Reisinger in regard
to the appeal at 1258 Cottingham Row for a 6-foot high fence,
located in a front yard 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, 7 - 0.
(3) The Hills of Lone Pine
Mr. Henry Zardelli, and Mr. Matt Grant, Property Managers
for The Hills of Lone Pine, were present seeking approval for
two sections of existing 6-foot high fencing, one extending
130-feet and the other 70-feet, located on private property,
separating Echo Road and West Wickford frontages within The
Hills of Lone Pine, Section 20. Article XV, Section 1510
states fences within a residential district must be located in
a required side or rear yard and shall not exceed 4-feet in
height. (Section 20)
Mr. Zardelli addressed the Board with the request for two
sections of existing 6-foot high fencing, one extending
130-feet and the other 70-feet, located on private property.
Mr. Zardelli indicated that the fence serves as a barrier for
the gated community at the rear of the property.
Mr. Matt Grant commented that there would be irrigation
installed along the fence line of Echo Road and West Wickford
Road frontages.
Mr. Taylor made comment to the Board given there is
irrigation and sunlight present arborvitaes would grow which
would then accommodate a 4-foot high fence instead of the
existing 6-foot high fence.
Mr. Grant replied that the existing 6-foot high fence is a
chain link fence. Mr. Grant referred to the photographs and
indicated not all areas are screened with vegetation due to
the shade of the overgrowth of existing trees.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich for the
existing 6-foot high fencing located along Echo Road and West
Wickford frontages, 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. Approved on a temporary basis for a period no more
than two years during which time The Hills of Lone Pine will
work diligently to provide greenery for screening instead of
the existing 6-foot high fence.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(4) 1164 E. Wickford – M. Chernoff
Mr. Matt Grant, Manager of The Hills of Lone Pine, was
present seeking approval for an existing accessory structure,
a stand-by generator, located in the easterly side yard
immediately adjacent to the residential building for Unit 35,
The Hills of Lone Pine, Section 20. Article XV, Section
1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that ground mounted
mechanical or electrical equipment shall be permitted in any
rear yard within the One-Family Cluster Districts.
(19-20-226-043)
Mr. Grant addressed the Board for an existing stand-by
generator, located in the side yard immediately adjacent to
the residential building. Mr. Grant indicated that the
generator is placed next to the existing air-conditioning
units.
Ms. Seneker made reference to the photographs and
questioned the board and the equipment on the residential
wall.
Mr. Grant replied that the board in question is an
electrical box that feeds the ground-mounted equipment.
Motion by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to
the appeal at 1164 E. Wickford to locate a stand-by generator
in the easterly side yard 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. The generator must comply with the Township Noise
Ordinance. Arborvitaes are to be installed to surround the
generator and to conceal the height of the electrical box.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(5) 4359 Oak Grove – H. Mehta
Mr. Matthew Strickfaden, builder, was present seeking
approval for the construction of accessory structures, 2.5’ x
2.5’ x 7.8’ high brick entry piers with mounted light
fixtures, located on private property within a required front
yard at each side of the driveway entrance, Oak Grove Drive
frontage, for Lot 7, Broughton’s Park Subdivision, Section 29.
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. (19-29-129-002)
Mr. Strickfaden addressed the Board with the request for
masonry brick entry piers located in a front yard. Mr.
Strickfaden indicated that the two piers would be placed
approximately twenty-feet from the edge of the Oak Grove Road.
Mr. Strickfaden referred to the landscape plan and indicated
the two piers would be made of brick matching the existing the
residence with limestone caps and a limestone address marker.
Mr. Strickfaden indicated that the two piers would have a gas
light fixture placed on the top of the brick entry piers.
Mr. Robert Schostak, resident at 4376 Oak Grove, was
present and spoke in support of the variance request asked if
a landscape plan would be required.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
commented that a landscape plan is not required for
residential new construction or a certificate of occupancy.
Ms. Seneker made mention of the approval letter received
from the Broughton’s Park Resident Property Owners
Association, Inc.
Mr. Kepes questioned what would the time frame be for the
landscaping.
Mr. Strickfaden replied the vast majority of the
landscaping would be completed by the end of the summer, the
trees would be completed by late fall.
Motion by Ms. Reisinger, Seconded by Mr. Kepes in regards
to the appeal at 4359 Oak Grove for the construction of two
brick entry piers be approved as submitted, and the variance
for the two entry piers located in a front yard 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.
Petitioner to submit a Hold Harmless Affidavit to the Township
and the landscaping is to be completed by November 1st, 2006.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(6) 7155 Parkhurst Drive – M. Schmidt
Mr. Martin Schmidt, homeowner, was present seeking approval
for the renewal of a variance for an existing accessory
structure, an 11-foot high tree house/storage area, located
6-feet from the westerly side property line and 6-feet from
the rear lot line for Lot 56, Berkshire Villas No. 2, Section
33. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265
states that accessory structures 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.
(19-33-426-005)
Mr. Schmidt addressed the Board with the request for a
renewal of a variance that was previously approved on July 21,
1992 for a two-year period, through July of 1994, contingent
upon the addition of three 6-foot high evergreens to screen
the structure from the view of the road. Mr. Schmidt indicated
that he purchased the property in December 1994 and occupied
the residence through September 2005 and was unaware of this
variance that was previously granted. Mr. Schmidt commented
that Mr. Nader, resident at 3775 Wedgewood Drive, made the
complaint to the Township Ordinance Department, which led to
an Ordinance violation being issued. Mr. Schmidt requested
from the Board that the existing 11-foot high tree
house/storage area remain on the property.
Ms. Reisinger questioned if the petitioner’s children use
the existing tree house/storage shed.
Mr. Schmidt replied yes his children did use this existing
tree house/storage shed. Mr. Schmidt commented that the tree
house/storage shed was utilized for storage due to the fact
the home has no basement. Mr. Schmidt stated the home is
currently for sale.
Mr. Frederick Nader, resident at 3775 Wedgewood Drive, was
present and spoke in object of the variance request. Mr. Nader
submitted a letter of objection in detail dated July 9th,
2006.
Mr. Taylor questioned Mr. Nader when did he purchase his
residence at 3775 Wedgewood Drive.
Mr. Nader replied the home was purchased in June 2005.
Mr. Tom Donnan, resident at 4082 Lincoln Drive, and
President of the Bloomfield-Berkshires Improvement
Association, was present and spoke in object of the variance
request. Mr. Donnan indicated the existing tree house/play
structure has an estimated height of 12-feet 6-inches and is
6-feet from the rear lot line.
Mr. Aldrich questioned Mr. Donnan if there was an
application received regarding the original variance request.
Mr. Donnan replied he has been the President for the past
four years and upon research of the meeting minutes he found
from the past President no comments were submitted.
Mr. Philip Good, resident at 7160 Parkhurst, was present
and spoke in support of the variance request.
Mr. Richard Chesbrough, resident at 7180 Parkhurst, was
present and spoke in support of the variance request.
Ms. Jill Robnett, resident at 3770 Wedgewood Drive, was
present and spoke in support of a grandfather clause for this
variance request.
Mr. Schmidt commented Mr. Nader recently removed the trees
at the rear property line, which now leaves the existing
structure in full view.
Ms. Jenette Phillips, resident at 720 Long Lake Road, was
present and commented to the Board now that the property is
for sale it is the best time to act to have the structure
removed.
Chairman Khederian made comment to Mr. Nader that he was
aware of the surrounding area during the purchase of the
property.
Mr. Nader replied that he was not aware of the existing
structure located in the adjacent property and the rear
property line was completely overgrown with trees and
greenery. Mr. Nader commented it was not until late October
when the leaves fell off the trees that the existing structure
became visible.
Mr. Taylor addressed concerns relating to the existing
structure. Mr. Taylor referred to the photographs and
questioned the hazardous materials left within the vacant
structure and recommended the rope be removed.
Mr. Schmidt replied the rope and the materials would be
removed from the existing structure.
Chairman Khederian made mention of the letter received from
James D. Landsberg, PLLC, attorney for the petitioner.
Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to
the appeal at 7155 Parkhurst Drive for the existing tree
house/storage area, that the request be denied as requested.
Based on the information presented, the applicant did not
demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards: Given the
location as is relates to the power lines is a concern to the
safety for general public, as well as the location to the
neighbors lot line and view from the neighbors property, given
the Association has not granted approval for the structure to
remain, the location of the accessory structure was
conditionally approved for a two-year period. The removal of
the structure would not be unduly burdensome to the applicant,
there is an injustice to the adjoining neighbor, as to the
continued location on the property, there is no unique
circumstances with the property, and it is self-created, given
it was placed there with knowledge from the prior homeowner
and the variance should have been acknowledged that it was a
conditional approval.
Motion failed, 3 – 4.
YEAS: Devine, Kepes, Seneker
NAYS: Taylor, Aldrich, Reisinger, Khederian
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to
the appeal at 7155 Parkhurst Drive for the existing tree
house/storage area, that the request be approved as submitted,
and the variance for the location less than 16-feet from the
side and rear property lines 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. The debris and
the rope are to be removed from the shed by July 31st, 2006
and the petitioner is to install 13-foot arborvitaes at the
rear property line to screen the existing tree house/storage
area from view of the neighbor’s property.
Mr. Kepes made comment to the Board that Township
Ordinances suggest that structures be within 16-feet from the
setback, given the residence is vacant, it is an opportunity
to remove the existing accessory structure which was granted
for only a period of time.
Motion carried, 5 – 2.
YEAS: Aldrich, Taylor, Devine, Reisinger, Khederian
NAYS: Kepes, Seneker
(7) 6495 Telegraph Road – Armada Real Estate, LLC
Mr. John Sword of Aver Sign Company, was present seeking
approval for a 1-foot encroachment into the required 25-foot
street side setback for the installation of a ground sign,
located 24-feet from the westerly front lot line on
AC270F-1-2, Section 28. Article XV, Section 1512 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 states that ground signs within the B-3,
General Business, zoned district shall be setback a minimum of
25-feet from any existing or proposed right-of-way line.
(19-28-352-003)
Mr. John Sword addressed the Board with a request for the
item to be withdrawn.
(8) 6510-6676 Telegraph Road – Bloomfield Plaza
Mr. Charles Kreminski of Schostak Brothers, was present
seeking approval to install additional signage, two identical
permanent ground signs to replace the existing pylon sign.
Each sign measures 21’ x 4.5’ with a total sign area of 94.5
square feet per sign, which is a total of 189 square feet for
both signs. Each sign is located 25-feet from the road
right-of-way, Maple Road and Telegraph Road frontage. Acreage
Parcel, Section 32. Article XV, Sections 1512 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 allows one ground sign for a business,
having an area of not more than 64-square feet of total area
within the B-2, Community Business, zoned district.
(19-32-277-041)
Mr. Kreminski addressed the Board with the request for
additional signage, two identical permanent ground signs to
replace the existing pylon sign. Mr. Kreminski indicated that
the proposed signage would incorporate 18" bronze letter,
21-feet long, on an aluminum channel framing system. Mr.
Kreminski proposed the sign would be 31.5-square feet. Mr.
Kreminski stated two signs would face Maple Road and one sign
would face Telegraph Road.
Mr. Michael Haviaras, of the Gallery Restaurant, was
present and questioned would any of the tenants be apart of
this sign request.
Mr. Kreminski replied that he is not apart of the leasing
agreements however, the proposed additional sign would not
allow for additional signage.
Mr. Devine made mention of the Design Review Board meeting
forwarding the sign onto the Zoning Board of Appeals with the
belief that the sign would enhance the value and the character
of the entire shopping center.
Motion by Mr. Kepes, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to
the appeal at 6510 - 6676 Telegraph for the installation of
two permanent ground signs with a total sign area of 94.5
square feet per sign, which is a total of 189 square feet for
both signs 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, 7 – 0.
(9) 7421 Wing Lake Road – A. Mohamed
Mr. Michael McGinnis of MJM and Associates, was present
seeking approval for the construction of an accessory
structure, a 9’ x 16.3’ x 9.5’ high pergola/trellis screened
with plantings, located in a rear yard 6-feet from the
westerly side lot line and 40-feet from the rear lot line.
Also seeking approval for the construction of a retaining wall
with an overall height of 3.5-feet, located in a rear yard
less than 16-feet to the westerly side and rear lot lines of
Acreage Parcel, Section 32. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures 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. (19-32-326-015)
Mr. McGinnis addressed the Board with the request for the
construction of a 9’ x 16.3’ x 9.5’ high pergola/trellis
screened with plantings. Mr. McGinnis referred to the
landscape plan describing a ground level patio and garden area
which indicated eighty-five percent of the rear property is
covered with the Nichols Drain and the sanitary sewer lead
easements. Mr. McGinnis indicated letters would be submitted
to the Oakland County Drain Commission and Bloomfield Township
Public Works offices seeking approval to extend the patio over
the easements. Mr. McGinnis made reference to the landscape
plan for a 3.5-foot high retaining wall around the proposed
perennial garden.
Ms. Seneker made mention of the fire pit being removed from
the variance request.
Mr. Taylor questioned what would the potential issues be
should Bloomfield Township need access to the easements.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
replied that a Hold Harmless Agreement is being drafted
specifically for this property by the Township Attorney that
would allow for full access onto the property and
indemnification of any damage to the Township.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to
the appeal at 7421 Wing Lake Road for the construction of a
pergola and a retaining wall be approved as submitted, and the
variance to locate a pergola and retaining wall less than
16-feet from the westerly side and rear lot lines 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.
Approval subject to Oakland County Road Commission granting
permit approval.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(10) 3400 Chickering Lane – K. Sahn
Mr. Kenneth Sahn, homeowner, was present seeking approval
for the installation of an accessory structure, a hot tub
screened with plantings, located on a proposed lower level
deck in a rear yard more than 16-feet from the side and rear
property lines for Lot 24, Kuschell’s Canterbury Hills,
Section 9. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No.
265 states that all accessory structures require the review
and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. (19-09-327-045)
Mr. Sahn addressed the Board with the request for the
installation of a hot tub, screened with plantings, which
would be located on a proposed lower level deck in the rear
yard. Mr. Sahn submitted subdivision association approval to
the Board.
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regards to
the appeal at 3400 Chickering Lane for the installation of a
hot tub, be approved as submitted based on the information
presented, the applicant did demonstrate compliance with
Section 1804 Standards.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(11) (Item withdrawn at the petitioner’s request, to be
heard on August 15th, 2006)
Seeking approval for existing wood and chain link fencing
to be used as a dog run area with an overall height of 6-feet
to enclose the entire rear yard of Lot 348, Westchester
Village No. 3, Section 34. Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 states fences in a residential district
shall not exceed 4-feet in height. 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 Board of Appeals and that dogs shall not be confined or
restrained in any manner except within the rear yard in an
area setback at least 25-feet from the rear lot line and
16-feet from the side lot lines. (Kevin & Valerie Kauth, 328
Wadsworth Lane, 19-34-128-016)
(12) 2811 Bradway Blvd. South – S. Patterson
Mr. Kerry Sutton of Kevin Hart and Associates, was present
seeking approval for an 11.2-foot encroachment into the
required 40-foot front yard setback for the construction of a
second floor addition and front façade changes for the
existing non-conforming building, located 28.8-feet from the
front lot line, Bradway Boulevard South, on Lot 533, Judson
Bradway’s Bloomfield Village No. 1, Section 27. 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 setback.
(19-27-430-001)
Mr. Sutton addressed the Board with the request for an
11.2-foot encroachment into the front yard setback for the
construction of a second floor addition and front façade
changes to the existing non-conforming residence. Mr. Sutton
indicated that the subdivision association approval was
pending.
Mr. Larry Nutson, Manager for Judson Bradways Bloomfield
Village Association, was present and commented the association
has reviewed the plans and indicated there are aesthetic
questions from the association. Mr. Nutson suggested to the
Board if approval is granted, base it contingent upon the
approval from Judson Bradways Bloomfield Village Association.
Motion made by Ms. Seneker, Seconded by Mr. Devine in
regard to the appeal at 2811 Bradway Blvd. South for an
11.2-foot encroachment into the required 40-foot front yard
setback, that the variance be approved as requested.
Contingent upon receiving approval from Judson Bradways
Bloomfield Village Association. Based on the information
presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s
satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(13) 1269 Indian Mound Road East – H. Carney
Ms. Cynthia Carney, homeowner, was present seeking approval
for the construction of accessory structures, two 5.3’ high
brick lampposts, located on private property one at each side
of the driveway entrances along the easterly front lot line
for Lot 1450, Judson Bradway’s Bloomfield Village No. 12,
Section 27. 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.
(19-27-228-010)
Ms. Carney addressed the Board with the request for two
5.3’ high brick lampposts, to be located on private property
one on each side of the driveway entrances along the easterly
front lot line.
Ms. Carney indicated the lampposts would be illuminated and
landscaped with a boxwood hedge and a bed of pacasandra in the
front for color.
Mr. Larry Nutson, Manager for Judson Bradways Bloomfield
Village Association, was present and spoke in support of the
variance request.
Motion by Ms. Reisinger, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard
to the appeal at 1269 Indian Mound Road East for the
construction of two brick lampposts, be approved as submitted,
and the variance to locate two brick lampposts in a required
front yard 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. Petitioner to submit a Hold Harmless
Affidavit to the Township.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(14) 3622 Darcy Drive – L. Brennan
Mr. Michael Haviaras of Sargent Construction, was present
seeking approval for the construction of an accessory
structure, an 8-foot high pergola, located in a rear yard more
than 16-feet from
the side and rear lot lines for Lot 4, Bloomfield Glens
Estates, Section 27. Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures shall
require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of
Appeals. (19-27-152-004)
Mr. Haviaras addressed the Board with the request for an
8-foot high pergola to be located in the rear yard more than
16-feet from the side and rear lot lines. Mr. Haviaras
indicated the pergola would cover the existing brick paved
patio area attached to the existing sunroom. Mr. Haviaras
referred to the site plan and indicated the proposed pergola
would have five columns surrounding the pathway.
Ms. Reisinger made mention of a letter received in
opposition from Mr. Walter Williams, resident at 3644 Darcy
Drive.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Ms. Reisinger in regard
to the appeal at 3622 Darcy Drive for the construction of a
pergola, that the request be approved as submitted based on
the information presented, the applicant did demonstrate
compliance with Section 1804 Standards.
Mr. Kepes made mention to the Board that he had received a
phone call questioning the subdivision association.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
replied by reading the letter received from Mr. Scott P.
McBride, President of Bloomfield Glen Estates, dated May 12th,
2006. "Dear Leo I have reviewed your plans for a covered
trellis. As I mentioned to you on the phone on Sunday, our
association does not have a design or planning committee. It
appears to me that all necessary reports and or documents have
been filed with Bloomfield Township and there are no open
items that would prevent you from moving forward. Should you
have any additional questions or concerns please feel free to
contact me. Best of luck with your project. Sincerely, Scott
P. McBride, President"
Mr. Kepes questioned when does the Township know internally
which subdivision associations are active or inactive.
Ms. McCullough replied the Clerk’s office annually contacts
the various subdivision associations asking for an update of
the status of the association along with the status of the
officers of the association. Ms. McCullough indicated this
information is provided from the association, which is
utilized at the Township.
Mr. Kepes questioned if the correspondence submitted were
crossed referenced with the association officers on file.
Ms. McCullough replied the applicant is responsible to
provide accurate information to the Board.
Motion carried, 6 – 1.
YEAS: Taylor, Reisinger, Kepes, Seneker, Aldrich, Khederian
NAYS: Devine
(15) 2755 Turtle Shores Drive – C. Shaya
Mr. John Babcok of Babcock Development, was present seeking
approval to allow for the follow items for Unit 81, Turtle
Lake, Section 6:
A 2-foot encroachment into the required 16-foot easterly
side yard setback for the construction of a brick screen wall
with an overall height of 5-feet for the purpose of screening
two air-conditioning units, located 14-feet from the side lot
line.
A 2-foot encroachment into the required 16-foot westerly
side yard setback for the construction of a brick screen wall
with an overall height of 6-feet for the purpose of screening
two air-conditioning units, located 14-feet from the lot line.
A 4-foot encroachment into the required 16-foot westerly
side yard setback for the construction of a brick screen wall
with an overall height of 7-feet for the purpose of screening
a stand-by generator, located 12-feet from the side lot line.
Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states
that screen walls, other than vegetative screen walls, shall
not be located in the required 16-foot side yard setback.
Article XV, Section 1510 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states
fences in a residential district shall not exceed 4-feet in
height. (19-06-480-053)
Mr. Babcock addressed the Board with the request for side
yard encroachments required for a screening wall. Mr. Babcock
referred to the site plan and indicated there are four
air-conditioning units and one generator on the side yard. Mr.
Babcock indicated the air-conditioning units meet the 16-foot
side yard setback requirement. Mr. Babcock commented the
developer for Turtle Lake, Victor International, is requiring
that the screen wall for the mechanicals be masonry. Mr.
Babcock referred to the site plan and indicated the screen
wall would be placed 4-foot into the side yard setback and for
the generator and 2-foot into the side yard setback for the
air-conditioning units.
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to
the 2755 Turtle Shores Drive to locate three screen walls less
than 16-feet from the side lot line and to construct screen
walls exceeding 4-feet in height, 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, 7 – 0.
(16) 2764 Turtle Lake Drive – C. Myers
Mr. Steve Schuster of Schuster Homes, was present seeking
approval for the construction of accessory structures, stone
retraining walls with an overall height of 5.8-feet, located
along the driveways edge and on the northerly side lot line in
the northwesterly front and side yards of
Unit 55, Turtle Lake, Section 7. 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. (19-07-202-017)
Mr. Schuster addressed the Board with the request for stone
retaining walls with an overall height of 5.8-feet, located
along the driveways edge and on the northerly side lot line in
the northwesterly front yard and side yards. Mr. Schuster
referred to the site plan and indicated the maximum height of
the proposed wall would be 70" and built out of Canadian Ledge
stone material. Mr. Schuster commented the wall is necessary
to retain the driveway and apron that would allow for
vehicular access to the garage of the referenced home. Mr.
Schuster indicated the proposed wall would sit on the property
line, which is with a sanitary sewer easement. Mr. Schuster
commented a Hold Harmless Agreement would be provided to
Bloomfield Township and Turtle Lake Development.
Mr. Michael Rupert was present on behalf of Mr. Archie
VanElslander, resident at 2774 Turtle Lake Drive. Mr. Rupert
referred to the letter submitted on July 6th, 2006, which made
comment to the negative and visual impact on his property. Mr.
Rupert suggested to the Board for the petitioner to complete a
natural stone or boulder retaining wall that would be less
obtrusive and to be approved by Mr. VanElslander’s landscape
architect. Mr. Rupert also requested the petitioner pay for a
landscape screen that will adequately conceal the wall and
garage as approved by Mr. VanElslander’s landscape architect.
Mr. Taylor questioned would the contractor be willing to
accommodate the materials and screening requirements as
requested by the adjacent resident at 2774 Turtle Lake Drive.
Mr. Schuster replied yes, the materials described on the
landscape drawings indicate the same walls and materials that
have been used on the surrounding properties to be
aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Schuster commented the vegetation
would need to be installed on the property of 2774 Turtle Lake
Drive, with the permission of Mr. VanElslander.
Motion by Mr. Devine, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to
the appeal at 2764 Turtle Lake Drive for the construction on
retaining walls, be approved as submitted, and the variance
for the retaining walls to be located within the required
16-foot northerly side yard setback in front and side yards 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.
Submit an approval and agreement from the petitioner and the
resident at 2774 Turtle Lake Drive for the screening of the
stone retaining walls. The petitioner is to submit a Hold
Harmless Agreement to the Township regarding the sanitary
sewer easement.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(17) 3707 W. Maple – Schwartz Devine Land Co.
Mr. Peter Schwartz of Schwartz Devine Land Company, was
present seeking approval for a 14-foot encroachment into the
required 15-foot easterly front yard setback, Lahser Road
frontage, and an 8-foot encroachment into the required 15-foot
northerly front yard setback, West Maple Road frontage, for
the construction of a ground sign for Part of Lot 8 and all of
Lot 12, W. C. Scott’s Maple-Lahser Subdivision, Section 33.
Article XV, Section 1512 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 requires
a setback on the street sides of 15-feet for ground signs
within the, O-1, Office Building District. (19-33-226-006)
Mr. Schwartz addressed the Board with the request for a
14-foot encroachment into the front yard setback of Lahser
Road frontage, and an 8-foot encroachment into the front yard
setback of W. Male Road, for the construction of a ground
sign.
Mr. Michael Haviaras of Sargent Construction, was present
and referred to the site plan indicating the proposed 6’x 3’
ground sign would be constructed of brick and limestone to be
placed on the corner of W. Maple and Lahser Road. Mr. Haviaras
indicated the sign material would match the existing building.
Mr. Devine disclosed the applicant, Gregory J. Swartz of
Schwartz Devine Land Company, does financial advising for
Bloomfield Township. Mr. Devine made comment that there is no
family to Mr. Michael Devine.
Mr. Devine made mention of the Design Review Board
comments, which were approved and forwarded on to the Zoning
Board of Appeals.
Motion by Ms. Reisinger, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard
to the appeal at 3707 W. Maple for a 14-foot encroachment
along Lahser and an 8-foot encroachment along W. Maple, 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, 7 – 0.
(18) 3530 Franklin Road – D. Ebert
Mr. Douglas Ebert, homeowner, was present seeking approval
for the construction of an accessory structure, a 5.5’ x 3’ x
4.6’ high stone cabinet to include a gas grill that will be
screened with plantings, located in a rear yard more than
16-feet from the side and rear property lines for Lot 1,
Forest Park Estates, Section 17. Article XV, Section 1503 of
Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures
shall require the review and approval of the Zoning Board of
Appeals. (19-17-276-001)
Mr. Ebert addressed the Board with the request for a 5.5’ x
3’ x 4.6’ high stone cabinet to be placed on an existing
patio, to include a gas grill, located in a rear yard,
screened with plantings.
Mr. Ebert submitted subdivision association approval, along
with the neighbor’s approval from the north and the south.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Aldrich in regard to
the appeal at 3530 Franklin Road for the construction of a
stone cabinet to include a natural gas grill, be approved as
submitted based on the information presented, the applicant
did demonstrate compliance with Section 1804 Standards.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(19) 3775 Shallow Brook Drive – H. Sullivan
Mr. Harold Sullivan, homeowner, was present seeking
approval for the following recently constructed accessory
structures on Lot 55, Brookside Hills Subdivision No. 1,
Section 16:
A 34.6’ x 23.3’ x 27.3’ high cabana to include kitchen and
bathroom facilities using the existing foundation of a
previously demolished storage building, located in a rear yard
more than 16-feet from the side lot lines and more than
25-feet from the water’s edge.
Pool equipment, located more than 20-feet from the
residential building and less than 16-feet from the southerly
side lot line.
Stone retaining walls, located in side and rear yards less
than 16-feet from the northerly side lot line with an overall
height of 10-feet.
Steps with an overall height of 13.5’, located in a rear
yard 25’ from the water’s edge.
A stone fire pit, located in a rear yard 6-feet from the
water’s edge.
Article XV, Section 1503 of Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states
that accessory structures shall not exceed one (1) story or
14-feet in height, shall not be located closer than 16-feet to
any side or rear lot line, shall require the review and
approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and that ground
mounted mechanical or electrical equipment shall be permitted
in any side or rear yard when placed immediately adjacent to
the residential building. Article XV, Section 1517 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 requires a 25-foot setback from the boundary
or edge of a wetland. (19-16-201-007)
Mr. Sullivan addressed the Board for the following recently
constructed accessory structures.
Mr. Sullivan referred to the photographs and indicated the
34.6’ x 23.3’ x 27.3’ high cabana on the existing foundation
would include kitchen and bathroom facilities. Mr. Sullivan
referred to the site plan indicating the pool equipment in the
southerly side yard, stone retaining walls located in the side
and rear yards, steps with an overall height of 13.5’ located
in the rear yard 25’ from the water’s edge and a stone fire
pit, located in the rear yard 6-feet from the water’s edge.
Mr. Sullivan indicated the fire pit is prefabricated steel
purchased from Home Depot.
Mr. Devine questioned does the fire pit violate the
Township Burning Ordinance.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
replied the Township Fire Marshall reviewed the proposal and
commented relative to the Fire Code, a 25-foot separation from
any structure or 15-foot separation from any lot line is
required.
Ms. Jenette Phillips, resident at 720 W. Long Lake Road,
and President of the Brookside Hills Association, was present
and addressed concerns of the approval granted from the
Association.
Mr. Raymond Marcil, resident at 3761 Shallowbrook, was
present and spoke in support of the variance request.
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Taylor in regard to
the appeal at 3775 Shallow Brook Drive for the cabana, stone
retaining walls, steps with an overall height of 13.5’ and a
stone fire pit that must comply to the Township Fire Marshall
requirements, be approved as submitted based on the
information presented, the applicant did demonstrate
compliance with Section 1804 Standards.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
Motion by Mr. Aldrich, Seconded by Mr. Devine in regard to
the appeal at 3775 Shallow Brook Drive for the cabana with an
overall height of 27.3-feet, pool equipment located more than
20-feet from the residential building and less than 16-feet
from the southerly lot line, retaining walls located with the
16-foot northerly side yard setback, steps with an overall
height of 13.5-feet, located within the required 25 ft.
natural feature setback 25’ from the water’s edge, and a stone
fire pit, located in the rear yard and within 25 ft. natural
feature setback 6-feet from the water’s edge, that the
variance be approve as requested. Based on the information
presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s
satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.
Petitioner to submit a Single Family Affidavit and a detailed
landscape plan to the Township, all necessary permits must be
obtained
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
(20) 3781 Darlington Road South – W. Davis
Mrs. Debbie Davis, homeowner, was present seeking approval
for the installation of an accessory structure, a hot tub
screened with plantings, located in a rear yard more than
16-feet from the side and rear lot lines. Also seeking
approval for stone retaining walls screened with plantings
with an overall height of 3.8-feet, located in the easterly
side and rear yard less than 16-feet to the lines for Lot 8,
Oaks of Bloomfield, Section 28. Article XV, Section 1503 of
Zoning Ordinance No. 265 states that accessory structures
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)
Mrs. Davis addressed the Board with the request for a hot
tub located in the rear yard, screened with plantings. Mrs.
Davis requested approval for stone retaining walls with an
overall height of 3.8-feet that would surround the proposed
hot tub, which would be screened with plantings.
Mrs. Davis submitted subdivision association approval to
the Board.
Motion by Mr. Taylor, Seconded by Mr. Devine in regard to
the appeal at 3781 Darlington Road South for the installation
of a hot tub and stone retaining walls, be approved as
submitted and the variance to locate the stone retaining walls
less than 16-feet to the easterly side and rear lot lines 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, 7 – 0.
(21) 43313 Woodward Avenue – Kingswood Plaza/Staples
Mr. Arie Leibovitz, owner of Kingswood Plaza, was present
seeking approval to install additional signage, a 4’ x 8’
permanent ground sign for Staples, having an overall square
footage of 32 square feet in addition to the existing wall
sign, located .5-feet from the road right-of-way line within
an existing landscaped area, at the north side of the south
entrance to Kingswood Plaza, Woodward Avenue frontage. Replat
of Lots 1 to 16, Lots 20 to 24 & Lots 1 & 2, Crest Hills
Subdivision, Section 4. Article XV, Sections 1512 of Zoning
Ordinance No. 265 allows one ground or wall sign for a
business, and states that no ground sign shall be located
nearer than 25-feet to any existing or proposed right-of-way
line within the B-2, Community Business, zoned district.
(19-04-476-051)
Mr. Leibovitz addressed the Board with the request to
install an additional ground sign for the Staples property.
Mr. Leibovitz referred to the site plan and indicated the
proposed sign would be 32 square feet in addition to the
existing wall sign, to be placed .5-feet from the road
right-of-way line within an existing landscaped area. Mr.
Leibovitz made comment as to the tenant lease of Staples and
indicated if the proposed signage fails for Staples, they
would consider closing the store. Mr. Leibovitz commented the
current sign is not very visible from Woodward Avenue.
Mr. Devine made mention of the from the Design Review Board
meeting on June 26th, 2006 which was forwarded to the Zoning
Board of Appeals. Mr. Devine commented that the Design Review
Board’s concerns were maintaining the mature trees on the
property.
Ms. Seneker complimented Mr. Leibovitz on the Kingswood
Plaza. Ms. Seneker agreed additional signage is needed for
this plaza and suggested could the proposed sign be a brick
pedestal type instead of the plastic stark look. Ms. Seneker
questioned if the variance was approved would this be granted
for the current tenant or would the approval follow the future
tenants. Mr. Leibovitz replied the request is for Staples the
current tenant however to obtain approval for future tenants
would be the intent. Mr. Leibovitz commented as to redesigning
the sign and suggested that a sign can be designed to match
the existing building.
Mr. Devine commented that if a new tenant moves in, they
would have to return to the Design Review Board for approval.
Ms. Patti McCullough, Planning and Building Director,
commented if a new sign is proposed, the Design Review Board
would look at the design, materials, placement and location of
the proposed sign. Ms. McCullough commented the review for the
sign would be expedited.
Motion by Mr. Kepes, Seconded by Ms. Seneker in regard to
the appeal at 43313 Woodward Avenue for the installation of a
ground sign in addition to the existing wall sign located
.5-feet from the road right-of-way line, be approved subject
to a brick pedestal for the sign. Based on the information
presented, the applicant did demonstrate to the Board’s
satisfaction all of the standards for practical difficulty.
Contingent upon receiving approval from the Design Review
Board for the brick pedestal.
Motion carried, 7 – 0.
IV. GENERAL BUSINESS
Next Board Meeting – August 15th, 2006
V. ADJOURNMENT
Respectfully submitted,
Patricia McCullough, Director
Planning and Building Department
kd
APPROVED MINUTES WILL BE AVAILABLE
AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AFTER THE NEXT SCHEDULED BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING
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
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
|
