Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA MEETING 2015-09-29 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY OF LIVONIA MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 29, 2015 A Special Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the Auditorium of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, September 29, 2015. MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman Sam Caramagno, Secretary Craig Pastor Gregory Coppola Jim Baringhaus Leo Neville MEMBERS ABSENT: Ben Schepis OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Fisher, City Attorney Craig Hanosh, City Inspector Patricia C. Burklow, CER-8225 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi explained the Rules of Procedure to those interested parties. Each petitioner must give their name and address and declare hardship for appeal. Appeals of the Zoning Board's decisions are made to the Wayne County Circuit Court. The Chairman advised the audience that appeals can be filed within 21 days of the date tonight’s minutes are approved. The decision of the Zoning Board shall become final within five (5) calendar days following the hearing and the applicant shall be mailed a copy of the decision. There are four decisions the Board can make: to deny, to grant, to grant as modified by the Board, or to table for further information. Each petitioner may ask to be heard by a full seven (7) member Board. Six (6) members were present this evening. The Secretary then read the Agenda and Legal Notice to each appeal, and each petitioner indicated their presence. Appeals came up for hearing after due legal notice was given to all interested parties within 300 feet, petitioners and City Departments. There were 22 people present in the audience. (7:05) City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 63 September 29, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-08-40: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Septimiu and Maria Puscas, 20121 Merriman, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect a detached garage while maintaining an attached garage, resulting in excess number of garages, garage area and garage height. Number of Garages: Garage Area: Detached Garage Height: Allowed: One Allowed: 720 sq. ft. Allowed: 16 ft. 0 in. Proposed: Two Proposed: 1571 sq. ft. Proposed: 23.ft. 6 in. Excess: One Existing: 851 sq. ft. Excess: 7 ft. 6 in Excess: 851 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Merriman (20121), between Norfolk and Fairfax, Lot. No. 009-99-0017-000, RUF-A Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 2.10(5), “Definition of Miscellaneous Terms; Garage Private”, and Section 18.24, “Residential Accessory Building.” Henzi: Mr. Hanosh, anything to add to this case? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, will the petitioner please come to the podium? Good evening. Puscas: Hello gentlemen, hello everyone. Henzi: Can you tell us your names and address? Puscas: Yes, I’m Septiumiu Puscas, living at 20121 Merriman Road in Livonia. And I also brought with me the sales engineer from Tuff Shed, the people who are actually going to manufacture the garage for us. Henzi: Okay, go ahead and tell us about the new request. Puscas: Yes, as you know this is the second time for us being here. First time we got the approval from you and we thank you very much for that. When we applied--we wanted to apply for the permit to actually build the garage we realized that there was a misunderstanding or that’s the way I took it between the drawing we filed for the variance and actually the drawing we wanted to use to build the garage. In the first place we filed a generic drawing which Ron Topovich was saying it was designed for 16 by 18 feet base. And I was asked to actually go ahead and make the drawing per the dimensions I wanted to build the garage which the base on it was going to be 24 feet by 30 feet. I submitted a drawing in the first place but I did not realize that it was--I understood later actually it was supposed to be my request to remove the old drawing and replace it with the new drawing. I did not know to do that so on the end of it I found out that because we did not get approved for the height of the new drawing, we have to actually go through the entire process to actually apply for a new variance so we can ask you to look at the correct height of the garage. So we got approved in the first place for the height of the generic drawing of 18 feet and 7 inches but actually we have the drawing submitted at the first City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 63 September 29, 2015 request where the base was 24 feet by 30 feet and then the height according to this th surface--this area was going to be up to 23 feet and 5 inches and 1/8. So on the end of it because we want to follow the rules, the correct way of coming in front of you and discussing this issue we went on and we reapplied for the second variance. And this time I have included actually drawings with the correct--I mean enlarged so now everyone can read all the dimensions. I know it was pretty tough on the old drawings to read the dimensions. So practically this is already our only request now so we can go on and build this garage. Now I understand the height of it appears to be pretty high, but I like I mentioned this was actually designed not per our request it was designed for the standards of Tuff Shed based on the dimensions we gave them for the base of the garage. Henzi: Okay, a couple of questions for you. The structure height is the only change we are talking about tonight, right? Puscas: Correct--correct. Henzi: And are you saying that the plans were either misnumbered or miscalculated and that when you got to the point that you wanted to pull the permit you thought the 23 feet had been approved when in fact it was really only 18’ 7”? Puscas: That’s correct. Henzi: Okay, any questions? Neville: Yes, I’ve got a question. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is it possible to build the garage at a lower height because yours as proposed already is going to be about six--almost six feet taller than your neighbor’s structure? Puscas: I looked at the options of reducing the height on it--like I said I did not ask for this height in the first place. It end up being a normal design for Michigan considering the winters here. So it was designed in a way to actually handle all the rain and the snow and the ice, everything we get in Michigan. We looked at options to reduce the height but if we reduce the height on it then the pitch on the roof is going to be reduced also. So we are going to be ending up with snow and ice sitting on the garage for a longer time and in a long time it’s just going to destroy the shingles. Also, we’re all--the entire family is over six foot tall. I’m probably one of the smaller ones. So I would like to maintain the second room like I mentioned in the first place if I do build it I like to build it the right way. I don’t want to feel like I’m going into a small box when I go to the second floor. So yes, I’ll--we would love very much to actually keep it at 23 feet. Neville: But that was already addressed the last time that you were here, correct? Puscas: Yes, considering that--we were considering 23 feet back then. I did not realize that actually we were using the old drawing. Neville: The last one was 18 feet, 7 inches, correct? Puscas: That’s based on the old drawing yeah. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 63 September 29, 2015 Neville: Okay. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I know we talked about the height of this garage the last time extensively and you were happy with that. Now you’re telling me it’s not tall enough. I don’t have the old plan here so I don’t remember exactly what the height of the old plan was. Now your interior height is over 9 feet to the ceiling. Even though you are over six foot, why do you need 9 foot? And please don’t tell me it is the pitch of the roof because I know I can build that roof pitch any way I want. Puscas: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Yes, sir. Puscas: I submitted the generic drawing and then I was asked to bring the correct drawing which I did. The letter should have been written the correct to actually show the 23 feet in the first place, it was not. I assumed it was 23 feet. And when we talked about it I did not look at 18 feet or 20 feet I assumed it was the correct drawing. So that is how we talked about it and I remember we talked about reducing the height back then, and I said no I want to keep it. But I in my mind was 23 feet. When I-- Pastor: When we talked about the 18 or the 18 and a half feet whatever it was--so you-- we were talking those numbers. Puscas: Yeah, but that was the old drawing. Pastor: But we were still talking the numbers. Puscas: We’re still talking about numbers correct, but how many times--how many garages do I build in my life, one or two. Is not--is not something what always pay attention to the height. If I submitted a drawing and the drawing was correct, I assumed that I’m going to be judged by the drawing. Then when I apply for the permit I said no-- no--no, you are not approved for 23, I said why not because the old--the new drawing was in the file. Well no you were supposed to actually remove the old drawing. Was I supposed to remove it? I thought it was going to be removed when I supplied the new drawing. So then I realized hold on a second I did not get approved for what I wanted to get approved. So that’s why we went through the whole process I lost two months just because I wanted to bring and show you that the new drawing was in the file and I did not get approved for it. So I’m trying again to see if you guys can see that I had the drawing there, I understand it is a very tall building. I also understand this building is going to be built in my backyard is like 350 feet from the street and it’s going to be surrounded by trees. So it’s not going to make anybody upset or obstruct any kind of vision or any kind of--create any kind of issues for anybody. And on top of it right by me my next door neighbor has a garage with industrial doors facing the street. Those are about sixteen feet only the doors I believe. Pastor: And how tall is that building? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 63 September 29, 2015 Puscas: That’s about 20 feet in my guesstimation (sic). Pastor: Your guesstimation (sic), you don’t know then? Puscas: I don’t know but you know go in the backyard and try to measure. I cannot go and ask the guy to go and measure his garage. It’s also a barn on Norfolk. It’s a nice red barn it just got remodeled in the last month or so. It looks nice now. That’s about 20--21 feet also. Now the reason I want to keep the 23 feet is if I do build a barn, if I do have the second room there, I’d like to use as like a vacation house. I mean our lot is big enough to in the summer time I can use this room for something not just to build it to be there. You know to be able to use it. Pastor: Okay, but last time you said you were going to put your lawn equipment in there and stuff. And you were thinking about putting bees upstairs and stuff and now it is a vacation home. Puscas: That’s--no--no-- Pastor: You can’t have two homes on one property. Puscas: No--no, downstairs correct. I’m going to use it to put all the lawnmower and the snow removal equipment and all that. Yeah I wanted to do the bee hive and all this business there on top, correct. I wanted to close it in. I was informed I was not able to do that. But I don’t think anything would stop me to not use it as a vacation house instead of going up north. Do you know what I am saying? Pastor: Mr. Fisher, don’t we have an ordinance against having two homes on one property? Fisher: Generally speaking you don’t get two houses-- Puscas: It’s not--it’s not-- Fisher: --on one property. Pastor: Thank you. Fisher: I’m not sure that is allowed. Puscas: It’s not a home it’s a room. I’m talking about like a vacation room if I can call it so. Rustic way of--you know--sleeping one or two nights in the summer time where it is nice and clear and you hear the birds. In my opinion I don’t think there is anything wrong to have something like that on your property if you do build it. Why not do it right? Pastor: So what are you going to put a kitchen in here? Puscas: No--no. Pastor: A bathroom in here? Puscas: No--no, not at all. Pastor: Well you say it’s a vacation home. My vacation home has a bathroom in it and a kitchen in it. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 63 September 29, 2015 Puscas: No--no--no, the only thing I’m going to do like we talked before is I’m going to bring power so I can have power in the garage, that’s all. Pastor: In my mind this changes the whole design. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Thank you. Did you consider any other Tuff Shed models that could meet your requirements but have a lower height? Puscas: I looked at all the models, actually this was ordered through Home Depot. Home Depot works with Tuff Sheds. Tuff Shed is actually a manufacturer right here in Livonia. I looked at all the models, but all the models in order to have the second floor at the decent square footage they all close in so you end up with probably using half of the area. So this was the only one that gives me more area on the second floor. Baringhaus: Thank you. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Did you tell us last time this was a custom built building? Puscas: It is custom yeah, but it’s based on a design. It is still called shed but it is more like a barn. It is. Pastor: So you can build it any size you want because it is a custom built building? Puscas: Yeah, this particular design, yeah. But they have different designs out there and that’s the--the question was if I can use a different--this was the only design that actually offers me the large area on the second floor. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Did you order and receive materials for this structure? Puscas: The whole--the whole--and Bill is right here can tell you, the whole building was ordered just like it is right here. It’s already paid for. Henzi: Well-- Puscas: I paid it two months ago. Henzi: --I’ve got a real problem because your builder specifically talked about an 18 foot 7 inch structure height. We talked about it and I for one went back and forth and thought because it’s behind this big beautiful home, two feet seven inches isn’t going to cause me to deny the variance. Now you’re talking about something that is six feet higher than that and probably the biggest garage anyone has even asked to put up. It is six feet taller than your neighbors which is seventeen foot six. No one knows what the barn is. I asked you about that at the last meeting and you didn’t know what the barn is and I can’t estimate the height of the barn. This is a deal changer. So I think--here’s my question. Tell us City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 63 September 29, 2015 why you need the excess height. The screw up respectfully was yours, not ours, it was yours. Puscas: I take full responsibility-- Henzi: So tell us why you need the-- Puscas: --for it. Henzi: --extra height? Puscas: I take responsibility. I should have checked the height back then and I should have catch it, I did not catch it and I was trying to explain that’s because I don’t build garages all the time. I did not pay attention. I just assumed it was the correct height based on the drawing. Henzi: It was more than that. You told us this was a custom design. And your builder used those dimensions. You told us about the fact that Tuff Shed is a great quality business that builds special buildings. It was going to be a barn structure. Puscas: Yes. Henzi: And that--and when we asked you how tall is it going to be, eighteen seven. This is not prefab. This is custom. This is better than the typical pole barns you might see out in Salem Township. That is the conversation we had. And that was an error, your error. And now you want it taller so before we waste a lot of time on this, tell us why we should grant the variance for something that is six--seven feet greater than what is allowed? Puscas: It is true, it is custom. It’s going to be custom. It’s going to be built that way. It is true that I said yes and again I said yes assuming the new drawing, I did not pay attention and that is my fault. Henzi: We’re beyond that. Puscas: Yeah, now-- Henzi: You’re asking us for 23 feet and because of that we’re now confronted with a guy who says I put money, I’ve bought this thing, it’s sitting in the warehouse ready to be delivered but I can’t until you give me this permission, now I’ll ask for the permission. So let’s cut through what happened last time, why do you need 23 feet and then we’re going to vote yes or no. Puscas: The moment I realized we don’t have the right approval I paid for it but it is not built. It’s going to be built custom like we said based on your approval. Twenty-three feet I realize is very high, it’s higher than everything else out there. Eighteen is too low. So I’m here to ask if you can give me somewhere like in the middle we still can adjust the drawings. If I go to 18 that means it’s going to reduce the pitch very much and I have to double--and Bill can talk about it how we can actually have to do the roof to actually last long enough and it is going to reduce the second floor also. Now if I can get the approval from you guys for 19 or 20 feet that will help me to still maintain--even if I change the pitch on the roof, I still can maintain the second room the way how it is right now. Henzi: Well then why don’t you just build a smaller structure? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 63 September 29, 2015 Puscas: Smaller structure? Henzi: Yeah, you’re telling us that based on my design it’s got to be this height based on its size, so build a smaller structure and you don’t need it as high. We never got there last time because we didn’t know you were asking for 23 feet. So that is why I am asking it today. Why can’t you have a 1200 square foot barn? Puscas: Well the cement, the foundation, it’s all done. That is done. Because I knew I got at least 18 feet approval and I said if I’ll come and explain to you it was a misunderstanding and it was the wrong drawing used at least I can talk to you and at least you guys can consider that I’m doing--that I’m building a nice building in Livonia, I’m not building anything cheap. And I’m building something for my family to be able to use. Now if you think 23 is too high, I’m asking to give me 20 or give me 19. Or something, 18 is just too low for this particular garage based on a 24 by 30 foot area. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Did you pull a permit? Puscas: No, I cannot pull a permit. Pastor: How did you pour--how did you pour your floor then? How did you put your footings down? Puscas: Because-- Pastor: Because you need a permit for that. Puscas: Well I pulled a permit. The cement guy pulled a permit on that, not me, yeah. And we pulled a permit based on the approval-- Pastor: The concrete man couldn’t pull the permit because you have to pull a building permit first for your trades to pull their permits. Craig, am I correct on that? Hanosh: There is potentially--he could do the slab only with a foundation. I don’t have anything on that. Puscas: That’s all we have yeah. Pastor: That’s it for right now. Henzi: Any other questions? Fisher: Mr. Chair, if I may. Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: Just to clarify how he got here. If you go back and look on the drawings Mr. Puscas refers to from last time, you will see in print so small you will need a magnifying glass to read it, that it’s at a 23 foot height. So that’s why--because the Inspection Department had a print that very clearly shows 18 feet 7 inches tall, that’s why they put that in the public notice. And nobody knew until one of the Tuff Shed employees came to the Inspection Department and told the Inspection guys just white out that 18 foot 7 City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 63 September 29, 2015 inches and put in 23 instead. Now apparently that was done without Mr. Puscas’ knowledge. Puscas: I have no idea. Apel: What? Puscas. I have no idea of any of that, no idea. Pastor: Mr. Chair, I don’t have the old plan does anybody here have the old plan. Apel: Excuse me, you’re accusing Tuff Shed of doing something-- Puscas: He was the only one from Tuff Shed with me. Fisher: I don’t know who did it, but I know that is what the Inspection guys told me happened. Am I right about that? Hanosh: It might have been with Randy. Fisher: Okay. Recorder: Can I have you name please? Apel: Yes. My name is William, last name is Apel, A-p-e-l. Henzi: Go ahead Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I’ll hold my comments for a few minutes. I’ll let Mr. Tuff Shed--I’m sorry, I didn’t hear your first name? Apel: William Apel, Bill. Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Before--I maybe didn’t hear Mr. Fisher right. You’re saying the plans show the 23 feet but the public notice said 18’ 7”? Fisher: Yes, because there were two sets of drawings as we heard. One that said 18’ 7” very clearly and one that had 23 on it in microscopic print. Caramagno: Okay. Pastor: Does anybody have that old plan? Henzi: I don’t. Pastor: Does anybody’s packet? Baringhaus: No. Puscas: That’s the reason I enlarged this drawing so there are clearly seeable now. The ones you have not in the files. Henzi: Mr. Fisher, can you confirm so the packet that we have now it is identical to what was originally produced except for the differences you just mentioned? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 63 September 29, 2015 Fisher: It--and I honestly don’t know if it is identical but it looks like the same thing. You can see even still the 23 foot is in very small print. But the previous version of this was much smaller and harder to read. Henzi: I remember a very professional drawings like this. I mean it wasn’t just-- Puscas: I do have a copy-- Henzi: --marked up. Puscas: I mean I can show how it looked before, it is hard to see it and I went and enlarged all of them so we can see them easier. But it is exactly the same drawing. Henzi: Okay. Pastor: I have a-- Henzi: Any other questions? Hanosh: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Hanosh. Hanosh: From the inspection standpoint, the Petitioner is saying that he is going to be having overnight stays in this, this is a garage. It is an inhabitable space. Now we are going to be actually creating a habitable space if he is going to want to do overnight stays in there. And there is going to be certain criteria that needs to be met by the code such as egress, smoke detectors, separation from the garage area with gas products and the habitable space above would be a concern from the inspection standpoint if it is going to be built to code and properly. It puts a whole new perspective on it. Puscas: If it gets so complicated then forget it. I didn’t know. I just considering--how can I say it--it is for my own use for my family usage. It’s not like I am inviting anybody to sleep over. So if I want to stay there and sleep overnight, I cannot do that? Hanosh: I didn’t say that there is certain-- Puscas: I’m just asking because I don’t know. Hanosh: --criteria per code for safety and my job is to maintain the public safety whether your family or someone else’s. And there is certain criteria such as fire separation, that we build all new houses to or anything like that when it comes to habitable and uninhabitable garage space compared to residential space where you have to follow-- Puscas: Okay. Hanosh: --the State code. Pastor: Craig, isn’t there also insulation factors and-- Hanosh: If he is going to possibly heat this structure or anything then there is whole other issues. Puscas: No there is not heating, it is just about summer time, it’s--that’s all it is nothing else. It is not like we are going to live there. The house is big enough we don’t need to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 63 September 29, 2015 live in a garage. It’s just for fun I can say that for the kids. I mean if they want to sleep one night over there, but if it is not okay we are not going to do it. Henzi: Any other questions? Caramagno: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: The plan originally said 23 feet and something, is that right? Puscas: Yes, sir. Caramagno: And that plan comes from who? Puscas: From Tuff Shed. Caramagno: Tuff Shed? Puscas: Yes, they design it for me based on the-- Caramagno: Who designs it? Tuff Shed? Does Mr. Apel design that? Apel: No, I don’t personally no, we have engineers and CAD people out in Denver, Colorado that do it at our national headquarters. Caramagno: Okay, but--when I look at the old minutes here, you specifically talked about 18 feet and 7 inches in the minutes out of your mouth. Apel: Out of my particular mouth? Caramagno: You said something about height there, not only did you plan say 23 perhaps, your petition was for 18, the public notice was for 18, you talked about 18 and now here we are at 23. Somebody is trying to deceive or there was a real-- Puscas: Can I show you this two drawings? Caramagno: And Mr. Puscas-- Puscas: Yes. Caramagno: Right away what I put down in my note here is you are a very particular type of person, very detailed. So for you to miss this height on this garage, look at the public notice and miss that. Your petitioner--your builder talked about it that is unlike you from what I’ve seen you here three times now. Puscas: That’s correct, I’m surprised myself why I didn’t catch it during the meeting. But I did not pay attention to that I just assumed it was the new drawing we are talking about. That is the only thing that escaped me and I am sorry it--I know-- Caramagno: It is very clear. Puscas: --I have some responsibility for it. Caramagno: Eighteen feet, seven inches, very clear out your builder’s mouth. Puscas: Can I show you the drawings? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 63 September 29, 2015 Caramagno: I understand what you’ve said. I just saying, here it was--we were told this. Puscas: I agree--I agree--I agree, I know exactly what you are saying. I did not look at the new drawing, I just assumed that was the height of the new drawing. Otherwise I wouldn’t be here believe me. I wouldn’t lose two more months and I wouldn’t be under all kinds of time pressures. Henzi: Any other questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: So, on this garage shed whatever you want to call it, second home, what kind of power do you plan on putting in that? Puscas: I was thinking sixty amps or a hundred amps max. Pastor: Because the last time you said you only needed, you only need enough to do a charging or chargers or something like that. Puscas: Correct, but-- Pastor: Now you are telling me you want a hundred amp panel which could be converted into a shop-- Puscas: Oh, no--no--no. Pastor: --a home on the upstairs, it can be--you can do anything with that power. Puscas: No, but I tell from the expense I have it in the house right now if I have too many things on one circuit you know it pops the fuse all the time so I like to have a few extra fuses. Nothing to do with a shop. We already have a shop in Livonia. Pastor: That is not what you said last time. So now you’re changing-- Puscas: Sixty amps. Pastor: --even that you are changing. Puscas: No--no, sir, you asked me if I want to put electricity there. And in the first place I did not want to, and you said maybe it is safe for you to do it so we said sixty amps will do it if I need power to charge up the batteries and all that sixty amps will do it. Pastor: “Not much-- Puscas: You suggested it to me. Pastor: --I do not need more than just to charge a battery on the equipment, the snow equipment, the lawn mowers.” Puscas: That is correct. Pastor: That is one circuit. That is not sixty amps worth of circuits. Puscas: Well-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 63 September 29, 2015 Pastor: You do understand I’m in the construction industry. I know what the differences are. Puscas: I know but you suggested sixty amps would be enough. I’m not an electrician. If sixty amps will be enough so I don’t have to rerun another wire later, I just went on with the sixty amps. Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Coppola: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: How tall is your house? Puscas: I don’t know. Coppola: Is it going to be--will this structure be taller than the house? Puscas: No--no--no, it’s a two story house and it was built-- Coppola: This is a two story structure so I’m just trying to understand-- Puscas: No--no. Coppola: --how it will compare if someone were looking line of sight whether they would see from the front of the house if they would see the-- Puscas: No, the house is in the front and the garage is all the way in the back of the house in between the trees. Coppola: Yeah, but if it is taller than the house it could be seen and I’m just trying to understand. Puscas: No--no, it’s not, if I’m not wrong I think the house is 32 feet tall. It is based on maximum height we are allowed to actually build. Coppola: Okay. Mr. Apel. Apel: Yes. Coppola: If you are to have to modify the height of the structure let’s say from the second floor down, four to six inches, is that a difficult process, an expensive process? Apel: Bring it down four to six inches or-- Coppola: Well back in--so you’re talking you wanted almost five inches. So let’s say to back down to the 18 feet? Apel: It-- Pastor: It is feet not inches. Coppola: I mean five feet, sorry, five feet, excuse me. Apel: Okay. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 63 September 29, 2015 Coppola: I’m not a builder. As you can tell, you don’t want me building anything. Apel: It won’t be costly but as Mr. Pastor knows the lower you go in pitch the more the load increases as far as snow is concerned on top of it. Coppola: But you can drop the height by dropping the-- Apel: We can drop the height-- Coppola: --height of the wall instead of the pitch, correct? Apel: No, we still--we have to come down on the pitch. Pastor: Excuse me, you mean you are telling us you have to have nine feet inside? You telling me that we can’t go down to seven feet? Apel: No, I’m not saying that. Pastor: That’s exactly what you just said. Apel: Okay. Coppola: That’s why I was asking, I apologize, you misunderstood my question. Apel: I apologize. Coppola: You misunderstood my question that is what I was asking. Could you drop the wall down in height? Apel: We could drop the wall down but then with the way it has been engineered as far as bracing and so forth. And excuse me, I’m not a builder either. I’m a salesman but I do--I don’t have a builder’s license. But as far as the bracing is concerned with that going down, yes, the walls would have to go down a bit too, sure. Coppola: Okay, thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Neville: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: If the variance wasn’t granted, would Mr. Puscas be able to get any kind of a refund on the materials that he has already laid out money for? Apel: And--well there would be--there would be a charge. There wouldn’t be a charge for the whole building no, but there would be a handling charge. There would be a charge for the trusses that we’ve already built and so forth. Neville: So if the--if the structure were I guess redesigned so that it wasn’t 23 feet six inches in height but brought down to something in the neighborhood of 20 or 18 feet, what would be the cost--I mean the financial aspect of doing something so that nature? Apel: You know I really couldn’t put it--I really couldn’t answer you that--on that. There would be--there would be but I can’t really answer. Mr. Pastor probably could tell us that. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 63 September 29, 2015 Pastor: Well all you are doing is building the walls shorter, so what would the cost of cutting a couple of two by fours be? Apel: Well-- Pastor: Because your structure--your truss structure is on top of the walls, it’s not on the side of the walls. Apel: Right. Pastor: So, the only thing I can see him losing is some extra wood. Unless your designs are different than what I am accustomed to. Apel: I can’t answer that properly, I’m sorry. Neville: And if a variance is granted and you were to begin construction, how long would it take to erect the building? Apel: Three weeks--three weeks to a month. We could be ready--it would take us probably three days once we get on his property to build. We would prebuild--we would start prebuilding some walls and of course roof trusses and so forth in the factory, although the trusses have been built. And then we bring those out and basically rebuild it on site. Neville: So at this point weather is not an impediment? Apel: No. Neville: Okay. Apel: As Mr. Pastor once again knows, carpenters are funny guys, they will work throughout the whole year. Neville: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Mr. Puscas-- Puscas: Yes. Baringhaus: --it appears your lot is very large according to this drawing the proposed structure would sit back from Merriman Road, 382 feet? Puscas: Yes, about that. Baringhaus: Okay. Puscas: I think I had it on the site plan. Baringhaus: Yes. Puscas: Marked. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 63 September 29, 2015 Baringhaus: And then even with your neighbor on the sides it looks like there is about 72 feet of space? Puscas: That is correct. Baringhaus: Okay. So it is not like the shed is immediately behind your house, it is set back quite a distance? Puscas: No--no--no, from my house-- Baringhaus: Or more from the side of it I believe. Puscas: --there is probably--let’s see that is 80--it is probably a 150 feet from my house- -from the back of my house, probably a 150 feet the garage is going to be built. Baringhaus: Okay, thank you. Puscas: Sure, thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up to the podium. I see no one coming forward. Can you read the letters? Caramagno: Letter of approval from Douglas Maykovich, 20100 Osmus (letter read) and letters of objection from Philip Arpino, 20135 Merriman (letter read) and Nancy Opatich, 20169 Merriman (letter read). Henzi: Mr. Puscas anything you want to say in closing? Puscas: Yes, as I mentioned I came here for a second time. This time with the correct drawing. I understand my mistake. The drawing is asking for 23 feet, I’m asking you for something in the middle be whatever you guys can approve us to do I’ll take it as good and we’ll adjust the drawing based on that. I will prefer to keep the walls--the interior walls at the height they are. We will adjust whatever needs to be adjusted based on your approval. In regards to my neighbors, if I can say that and I know very well my next door neighbor and the neighbor after that who are the ones rejecting they had a lot of rejections when we built the house. And a lot of stuff was based on just being somehow jealous. Like I say my neighbor has a garage with 16 foot doors you can see from the street and if you look at his garage you think he has a shop there. I’m not doing anything close to a shop. I do have a shop it is 12,000 square feet shop in Livonia on Industrial Road. I do pay taxes over there, I pay taxes on my house. And I’m just asking you to let me build something what my family can enjoy. Henzi: Thank you. Puscas: The next door neighbor north of Mr. Arpino, last time when he was here he claimed to be builder, he is not a builder. He is a clown, he is a real clown. He is talking about industrial garage, he had no clue about industrial garage. So just so you know I know who are my neighbors, I appreciate the neighbor who did not see an issue building a nice barn in Livonia. And the rest of the neighbors and you can see I do have a lot of neighbors they not say a word. So I’m just asking you kindly to approve whatever you City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 63 September 29, 2015 think makes sense to you. And I’ll adjust the drawing in that way. Thank you very much for your attention and for your support. Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Thank you. When we last met I think we took a lot of things into consideration, the size of the property, the set back of the structure, both from Merriman Road and both on each side of the neighbors. Even at two feet we thought that was probably more than sufficient for that size building. And at that time a couple of things were pointed out. One, Mr. Puscas does have a four car garage for storage. And the other point that we made was the fact that we thought at that time with the two feet that it was a large shed. Now with another five feet on top of that it is turning into a very large shed. So with that being said I’m not inclined to support it. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: I tend to agree with Mr. Baringhaus. I think the petitioner with a four car garage has more than sufficient garage and storage space. When we approved the prior application it was somewhat of a stretch but at the 18 feet I thought that we found it to be acceptable simply because the upstairs was we were told was to be primarily used for storage and bees. Now you are turning it into kind of a highly useful space and now you- -that’s a lot of excess space even if it is a large lot. I’m not inclined to approve this deviation from our prior approval. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: This issue having to come back here is totally self-created and there were some misses on the drawings. Misses on the public notice, either deliberately or purely by accident. I had no trouble with the square footage, I had no trouble with the additional garage, this is a very large lot. Eighteen feet seven was approved at our last meeting, would I go 20 another foot and a half, the property elevation goes down in back, you will never see this from Merriman Road, so a foot and a half I could give you at 20 feet with my opinion with some very strict restrictions on this thing regarding electricity, regarding no outdoor living in this building. That would be my comments. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Well, originally when I looked at this case the first time I said no way, then I looked at the property and I said okay. We talked about this shed as much or more than we talked about it this evening. Now we go from a shed with some possible storage upstairs to a shed with some living space upstairs, more power downstairs, and then what really put me over the edge a little bit here, is that Mr. Puscas just said give me what I can get and I’ll adjust my trusses. Because he wants that nine foot ceiling height for some reason. And I’m not inclined to give it to him. I’ll be either--I can table this or deny, it wouldn’t matter either way to me. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: I know this has been discussed quite extensively and honestly I would have difficulty approving a variance at 23 feet 6 inches. I think I could support Mr. Caramagno’s City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 63 September 29, 2015 proposal with a maximum height of 20 feet because I do believe that the--that your lot is large enough to support a structure of that size. But even at 20 feet you are going to have the tallest garage in the neighborhood. I would be willing to go up to 20 but I clearly would not be able to support your request at 23 feet, 6 inches. Henzi: I certainly won’t approve the request at 23 feet 6 inches. We got to this point because of an error whether it was accidental or not. But I asked specifically the last time we were here whether there was wiggle room with 18 feet 7 inches because I thought that was high. And the answer was no because it has been engineered and it is 18’ 7” that’s the way it is going to be built. And in reality a more accurate answer would have been yes, there is wiggle room because we are not asking for 18’ 7” we are asking for 23. This would have been a completely different discussion and now we sort of have our hands tied behind our backs because we granted something. If the original request had been accurate we never would have granted 23. We might have granted 19, maybe even 20 I don’t know. I think that Mr. Caramagno makes a really good point that the grade dips and you are not going to see it from the back yard. I--I mean for that reason, I could go to 19’ 7” you know if consensus is 20 perhaps I would go along with that. But Mr. Pastor makes an awfully good point too that this can be designed however Mr. Puscas wants it. And it would--it would be the biggest garage I’ve ever seen in Livonia. It is one of the biggest lots, and it is one of the biggest homes, so maybe this is the one house but I could go on and on but that’s what I am looking at something like 19’ 7”. The floor is open for a motion. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Upon Motion by Pastor supported by Coppola, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-08-40: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Septimiu and Maria Puscas, 20121 Merriman, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect a detached garage while maintaining an attached garage, resulting in excess number of garages, garage area and garage height. Number of Garages: Garage Area: Detached Garage Height: Allowed: One Allowed: 720 sq. ft. Allowed: 16 ft. 0 in. Proposed: Two Proposed: 1571 sq. ft. Proposed: 23.ft. 6 in. Excess: One Existing: 851 sq. ft. Excess: 7 ft. 6 in Excess: 851 sq. ft. The property is located on the west side of Merriman (20121), between Norfolk and Fairfax, Lot. No. 009-99-0017-000, RUF-A Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 2.10(5), “Definition of Miscellaneous be tabled Terms; Garage Private”, and Section 18.24, “Residential Accessory Building,” to allow the petitioner an opportunity to consider the Board’s comments. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 63 September 29, 2015 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Pastor, Coppola, Baringhaus, Neville, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Schepis Henzi: This is tabled, that was a courtesy to you quite frankly because there is a deadlock. When something is tabled that means you don’t have to pay to be rescheduled. You are th to come back at your leisure but the next available meeting is October 27 and if you nd want that meeting you have to call the ZBA office by October 2. So October 27th, contact nd Marilyn by October 2. Thanks. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 63 September 29, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-08-44 (Tabled on August 25, 2015): An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Bernetta Murphy-Ellul, 14133 Westmore, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to maintain a six (6) foot tall chain link fence surrounding the rear yard, resulting in excess height. Chain Link Fence: Allowed: 4 ft. Proposed: 6 ft. Excess: 2 ft. The property is located on the west side of Westmore (14133), between Summers and Grennada, Lot. No. 087-04-0336-000, R-1A Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under City of Livonia Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090A,(1), “Residential District Regulations.” Henzi: Is there a motion to remove? Pastor: Mr. Chair, I make a motion to remove. Caramagno: Support. Henzi: Motion to remove from the table by Pastor, support by Caramagno. All in favor say aye. Board members: Aye. Henzi: This is removed. Thank you. Mr. Hanosh, anything to add to this case? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, good evening. Ellul: How you doing? Henzi: Can you tell us your name and address? Ellul: My name is Robert Ellul, 14133 Westmore Street, Livonia, Michigan. Henzi: Mr. Ellul, I--we all remember you were here once before it was tabled so we could go drive through the neighborhood. Can you tell us anything new about the proposal? Ellul: You don’t want me to start from the beginning again or? Henzi: That’s up to you. Pastor: Well, for those of us who were not at the meeting? Henzi: Oh, that’s true. We do have a new member, so yeah, go ahead take it from scratch. Ellul: Okay. Early April, 2014 me and my wife discussed putting in a pool. At that time I contacted a few pool builders got some prices making sure I wasn’t talking about a check I couldn’t cash. He also stated to me about having proper access to the backyard. So at that time I went to my neighbor. And when I moved in one of my neighbors had made City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 63 September 29, 2015 comments about how their bushes were very imparticular (sic) to them. Well at that time I decided to go to the other neighbor and asked him if he minded if I removed the fence, took down the bushes and went through the easement to the left of my home. So I did-- he said yes and everything was good. I had an architect come draw up the print, signed the contract with the pool company. Well, as soon as I signed the contract with the pool company I started preparing the property moving bushes, taking down fences and what not and getting it ready for this guy with the excavator to come in and dig this hole, sink this pool. Cut a long story short at that point he gave me a day notice that he was going to dig the pool which he was supposed to give me a couple days’ notice. So I went next door to discuss it with the neighbor next door who had agreed for me to use this easement. Well at that time he came up with some--if I didn’t have my vehicle parked in front of my house, if I didn’t put a garbage can in front of my house, a lot more issues came up between me and the neighbor to where he didn’t--he basically denied me the easement. So I says okay and I left and I went to the other next door neighbor and paid for their trees $500.00, for their--to replace their bushes and remove the fence next door. Because if the pool company couldn’t get in the day they come to dig I’m in breach of contract because I have to provide access to the backyard. So we removed all the bushes and all the shrubs on the other side of my home. And started to dig and put the pool in th and everything was going along smooth. Well, around September 16, 2014 anonymous letter popped up over at City Hall. When I say “anonymous,” nobody put their name on it. This is some guy who lives in South Lyon who decides to write letters about me and Livonia. Or could be a previous owner because there was a dispute between the brothers and sisters who sold the house because the sister wanted to keep the home. I have no idea who wrote this letter. To cut a long story short it’s regarding my house and how we’ve disarrayed and didn’t follow violation (sic) and comments about the fence and what not. That is it was under 48 inches in height. So the Building Department got this and I got this and all my neighbors around got this letter which a lot of it is untrue. It says three feet the fence was 42 inches. It wasn’t three feet it was six inches shy of 48. I’ve been in the building trades for 30 years building homes. Rennolds Ravine, the Villas, Caliburn Manor, On the Pond behind Kroger over here. I’ve been in the building trades a long time but I’ve never done a pool; this is the first swimming pool I’ve ever had to be around. To cut a long story short the building--the engineer--the inspector shows up, Patrick O’Donnell is his name. He says Bob, we’ve got a violation on your fence. He says it’s 42 inches or 44 inches and it’s supposed to be 48. I said what’s my options Pat? He says well you know what I think you can go 48 or six feet chain link, his exact words, 48 or six feet chain link. “But let me check on that.” I said okay, he said keep working on the pool. So we regarded and kept working on the pool. About seven--eight days later, Mr. O’Donnell shows back up to my house and says Mr. Ellul, I said yeah, he came in and sat down with me and my wife, I said what’s my options with this Pat. He said you can go 48 or six foot it doesn’t matter. He says six foot of course is safer. Of course instantly with this letter--did you guys get this letter and read this first letter that was addressed to this? Henzi: Yeah. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: Okay, because yeah if you read it it goes through a lot of how I’m going to kill animals and dogs and different things in the neighborhood because the fence is so low. To cut a long story short he says I have the option to go with the six foot fence or the four foot, six foot of course is better. I says okay and me and the wife looked at each other we really didn’t have the money kicking around, we’re in the project came upon us to put a new fence in. We just went we’re going to go with a 48 inch existing. Well at that time we finished up the pool and Pat had told me, I says I don’t need to pull a permit, he says no, you’re sleeving existing posts, you’re not changing your boundary lines, you don’t need a permit, you don’t need acceptance, you don’t have to get approval from none of your neighbors if you go a four or six foot fence. I says okay, Pat. So we goes on with the project and puts up a six foot fence. Gets all done, pulls all my permits which with the swimming pool there’s quite a few permits to it. And I just sided the house, and put new windows in and did quite a bit of work to this home. To cut a long story short gets all done, Pat shows up two--three months after I’m done. Mr. Ellul, I made a huge mistake. I was in Clarkston for 16 years over here who has nowhere near the ordinances Livonia does. I built homes in Clarkston, same thing as Milford, South Lyon, you have more ordinance than any City that I really--I’m amazed at how many ordinances in the City. He says I made a huge mistake, ’95 there was an ordinance passed. Someone wrote the Mayor another anonymous letter--anonymous here this word again. I made a mistake, can’t have this fence. Since ’95 they passed an ordinance you can’t have a chain link fence erected unless you go through a variance board and they approve it before. I says well what am I supposed to do with this? I got all this custom gates made. Six foot high fence. I paid an extra $600.00 in installation and fourteen to fifteen hundred dollars between the gates and the chain link fence. I got $2,000.00--$2,200.00 wrapped up in this fence. At that time he said go ahead and pull a variance. Don’t need approval from nobody--don’t need approval from nobody. My neighbors informed me they got letters is how I found out that all these letters went out to all these neighbors. Well I goes down to City Hall and Mr. Craig Hanosh over here, great fellow, tells me about his first story of him making a mistake on a fence with a vinyl fence and right along exterior of a home that is on a corner and you have to have 20 foot variance with a fence off a corner for sight. Well he made the mistake of allowing this homeowner to put this same fence in. To cut a long story short the homeowner ended up having to rip down that vinyl fence. The inspector totally mislead me with this project. I know he was new to this City. My suggestion is when you all hire new inspectors that their seniors and their superiors go over all of their stuff for a good six months to a year instead of letting the taxpayer listen to such as the policeman on the street is the inspector in building my home. That is who you listen to is the inspector. While I was here I was asked the question of oh just take a saw and cut it down. That’s--this is real thick. The gauge of this metal is really thick to sleeve a post. And then I was asked how come I didn’t--did you observe any chain link fences in your neighborhood and I said yes. And Mr. Caramagno over there said nope, absolutely not there is no such thing. And I said yes there is. Well here--if you would like to pass these down, I’d like these back. These are all the houses that I just noticed within 20 minutes of driving through the neighborhood with the addresses on them. The first one on top of that is unbelievable. Its fourteen foot high two by fours with chicken mesh on it. Fourteen foot high and I’m looking at these fences and this is right--four houses from the Mayor. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 63 September 29, 2015 Guess--guess give or take because one of my neighbors pointed out he lives right there somewhere. But each address in on the back if you don’t believe. But when I’m called a liar, this is the first ones that I noticed in the neighborhood. Set aside the other fifty or sixty homes that have vinyl fencing over chain link fencing and all sorts of fences on top of fences. As far as the ordinances go I’m not one to point fingers and I don’t want none of these folks with these addresses to get in any issues with the City on my ocognance (sic). But that is what I seen in my neighborhood. The City dropped the ball on this whole ordeal because had this not happened--had Patrick told me four foot, we would have went with four foot. I did this for safety reasons. The neighbors have huge dogs. Like I said, I’ve been--the last house I’ve been involved in was the biggest house I ever built in Michigan, 49,000 feet cost 47 million dollars. Bill Ford, Junior was the house that I built before that through Al Lewan and Tom Lewan. I have never seen more of a debacle in my life. The stress from this is just unbecoming. Having--you know--some guy in South Lyon doesn’t like me and he can write anonymous letters and we follow up on this. If you’re not going to put your name and phone number and address on it, then don’t say your two cents. And that’s how I feel about it. Henzi: Okay. I think we got it. I want to start asking you some questions. Ellul: Anything you need to know. Henzi: How much did you have to spend to correct the fence from 42 inches to six feet? Ellul: If I would have went with four foot I would have spent four to five hundred bucks tops and that’s with labor. I spent $2,200.00 on six foot because this Inspector said safety--safety, and if you read this letter--this anonymous letter about me killing people, kids, dogs, handicap kids are dying, if you read the letter and this Inspector saying safety, I thinking he knows something more about Livonia than I know. Henzi: That’s okay, I-- Ellul: I--I like I said, I’m not--Mr. O’Donnell is a great inspector. He made a big mistake here though and this cost me $2,200.00 if not more. Henzi: Why would it have only cost $500.00 to go from 42 to 48? Ellul: All I had to do was replace 48 inch fence by digging it out of the ground because the same guy that denied my access in there put four inches of dirt on his side of the fence while I was doing the pool. Henzi: So you’re saying there was 42 inches high but you had-- Ellul: He put--he added elevation. Henzi: --it was buried? Ellul: He added elevation to the left of me which he is the lowest elevation with two main sewer culverts in his backyard. Henzi: So you’re saying you wouldn’t have really needed to buy too many new parts? Ellul: Yeah, just 48 inch fence because the trees had fallen on it. When I bought it you couldn’t even see Farmington Road. My elevation in my house when I look out--I’m sure City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 63 September 29, 2015 you’ve got the other pictures with the busses, that’s to prove how low of an elevation, I’m looking up at the tires on Farmington Road with the busses going through my backyard. Henzi: Next you’re probably going to get asked some questions about the photographs and I have a couple. Ellul: Okay. Henzi: Number one-- Ellul: Now I don’t know if those were in ’95 those ordinances. These houses could be totally be before the ’95 ordinance was put in. Some of these is impossible because the fencing looks newer than my new fence. Henzi: That’s a fair point. My question is first of all are all of these in Kimberly Oaks? Ellul: Yes. Henzi: All right, now-- Ellul: That’s the addresses on the back there. Henzi: Got it. And there’s one that shows two different houses on Barkley? Ellul: Yeah. Henzi: Are you saying--are those both--each house-- Ellul: Oh, yeah--yeah-- Henzi: --has a six foot gate? Ellul: And they put the plastic in the fence which is another ordinance, you can’t have the plastic rungs. There are so many things there and like I said this is three--four houses down from the Mayor. And I noticed it and that is why I never paid no attention when he said six foot I thought I did see six foot fence. Not knowing ’95 ordinances, I’m not a guy to hang around the ordinance department I listen to my inspector, just like I listen to a policeman. Henzi: We asked you to bring those pictures and I appreciate it because I-- Ellul: I don’t want to get those folks-- Henzi: --drove through there-- Ellul: --in trouble though, please. Henzi: --extensively, I didn’t see a single one. But it’s impossible probably to just drive by perhaps and see a six foot fence. So thank you for providing the photos to let us know-- Ellul: When I was accused of being lying I--I’m not a liar. Henzi: I don’t think anyone was accusing you of lying. I’m telling you I drove by today and I didn’t notice any. Ellul: Yeah. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: That doesn’t mean they don’t exist I’m just saying when you drive by it’s not like they jump out at you. Ellul: Yeah, there’s some ugly ones. And like I said that wooden one if you really want to see the worst fence in the neighborhood, he’s holding it up right there, I was in awe. I was in awe. And a few of those some old man came out and asked me why I was taking picture of his house. I understand this guy saying he didn’t want to measure the barn because there I was and I’m thinking I going to get this guy in some trouble when really if I lived next door to him, I’d let that go. Because really it doesn’t--if you want to talk about ugly, that is ugly. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: I noticed a lot of the addresses on your photos were of Barkley Street. Ellul: Yes, sir. Baringhaus: Where is Barkley Street in proximity-- Ellul: It’s the last street-- Baringhaus: --to your home? Ellul: --behind the police department. You go down Westmore, dead ends to that street at the end of Westmore-- Baringhaus: Okay. Ellul: --and I think it goes--there is like a park there behind it. And then it stops the park a block up. But some of those aren’t--they’re the second block in. And there’s way more fences fellows. I seen so many ordinances wrongs with these fences I seen three fences built over each other. I stopped counting the ordinance issues with the fences. Stopped counting. Baringhaus: Did the City of Livonia provide you with any documentation that stated you had to install a six foot fence? Ellul: No, they just--he said four or six foot, six foot is safer. People are dying. When you say that to me, safety, you know--and I didn’t want no chain link fence, I really wanted a vinyl but couldn’t afford $10,000.00 right now. So I said you know what the couple grand, give me four or five years--six years me and the wife will probably put a vinyl fence in. Because you know we really wanted to--she’s a pathologist at DMC, I’m a retired builder. I wanted to move to Manistee but my wife because of DMC chose to live here. I have a 3,000 foot home on Lake Michigan and a 30 foot boat in my driveway. I would much rather be there then here. But she chose to be here. And like I said this--we had a pool for 35 years in our last house, that’s why we put a pool in this house. We never had no problems. But I started thinking reading these letters and what this inspector told me I better go six foot if some kid dies or some dog or something happened and I didn’t do what he said was safer-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 63 September 29, 2015 Baringhaus: So you-- Ellul: --I lay that guilt upon myself. Baringhaus: So just to clarify so that I understand it. Your decision was based on a conversation with an inspector and not a documented request to change that fence? Ellul: Oh yes--yes, sitting at my table, me and my wife. And I don’t--I’m not upset with Patrick O’Donnell but I wish he would have known these ordinances because had he stated these ordinances I would have said you know what I’m just going to go with chain link four feet until we can afford the fence we want that is six feet high and then get the variances or whatever is needed. But he simply did not know your ordinances. And like I said and I was questioned like I said I didn’t see no other fences, this and that, that’s not my job as a guy who lives here. I’m not supposed to--I’m not supposed to--when the inspector tells me something and I’m building something, guess what I’m listening. And that’s where we are at with this fellows. And I’m not being arrogant. The building department is a great building department. This young man over here Mr. Hanosh he has saved me--I would have done torn the fence down and been angry at you all forever blaming this. But that’s where we are at. Baringhaus: Some of your property has 48 inch chain link fence on it? Ellul: Right now it has six feet, that’s exactly what I did is what he said. It passed final inspections. All my permits were passed, everything was glorified, three or four weeks th later--or four months later--here, on November 11 is when the Mayor was with an anonymous letter from someone. Which there again do we really acknowledge the guy from South Lyon who used to own the house? The anonymous part of this is just unbecoming to me. I don’t know if that matters to you, you guys see more of this I’ve never this much of a soap opera setup with this type of thing. But to me I wouldn’t acknowledge an anonymous--especially when I send all these letters out and it said I never received a letter from the building department about this ugly fence. So then he does send all these things and no one comes back to say absolutely not, don’t have this fence. Baringhaus: Okay, very good. Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: So you’re an ex-builder? Ellul: Yes, sir. Pastor: Pulled permits for the pool? Ellul: Oh, yeah every one. Pastor: Pulled permits for the electrical? Ellul: I--Prestige Pools pulled all the permits. Electrical I pulled the permits. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 63 September 29, 2015 Pastor: And you didn’t pull a permit for the fence? Ellul: I was told I didn’t have to. I have a final inspection on that fence. Pastor: On the fence? Ellul: On the fence. Pastor: How do you get an inspection without a permit? Ellul: You tell me. Pastor: I don’t know. Ellul: You tell me. Pastor: I don’t know, I’m asking you because you did it I didn’t. Ellul: You want the date of it, I’ve got a picture of it in my phone. Would you like to see it? Pastor: Well I’d like to know how you got a final inspection on something you didn’t even have a permit for? Ellul: Well I would believe that the building department would have something to say about that because they have the records of the date when they finalized it and they have a copy of that permit. Pastor: Did they finalize your pool? Ellul: And fence because of this issue. Got this letter, there was something wrong with my fence. We weren’t going to pull no permits because the existing fence was going to remain the same. When we realized there was a violation with it he told me-- Pastor: As a builder you know you have to pull permits for everything. Ellul: To sleeve a post on a fence? Pastor: As a builder-- Ellul: And refurbish an existing fence is exactly why he said I did not. So you are wrong sir, because that question -- Pastor: Well you were changing--you were changing the height of the fence. You know you have to pull a permit. Ellul: Well there--see there is another area here. The previous owner there was a six foot section so I thought because of this existing six foot section with Mr. Hanosh over here told me, I could be grandfathered in if it was six foot before. Did we have any pictures? I came up with an old picture that my wife had took because you could not even see the side of my house from all the weeds and trees. You had to--you could crawl on your hands and knees to get back between the easement to get in my sunroom. That’s how bad the growth was when I bought the home. So when I took all that down there was--and I think it was for a flower or something that somebody had growing in fence there was a small section of six foot. So he says or you can grandfather it in because it was existing. Then we find out there was no six foot permit ever pulled on the house so City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 63 September 29, 2015 I don’t--so that’s where I think it got mislead. And yes, I know, I pulled more--I’ve done more permits and this and that and should I say as a subcontractor. You know Pulte, Biltmore, Ivanhoe Huntley, Silverman, S.R.J. Jacobson, NBC Bosco Trinity, Calibat (sic), you name them. The Lewan family with Ford Field. I didn’t pull every permit there but yes I did their drywall and plaster in his home. So I--and I’m very familiar with this but when he said no you don’t have to you ask him because when I went to the building department do you know what I was told? He doesn’t know what he is doing. That’s exactly what was said to me so for you to say that to me is just unbecoming. That’s-- because you’re wrong. I was amazed myself and I said it twice. Pastor: So your argument is if you decide to add on to your two by fours to bring your roof up higher you don’t have to pull a permit? Because that’s what you are telling me about a fence. Ellul: No, a fence to me is totally different. Pastor: It’s the same thing, you know that. Ellul: A chain link fence? No I don’t know that, I’m not a fence installer and never was a fence contractor. Pastor: You’re a contractor, you know when you change the structure-- Ellul: I didn’t change the structure that’s-- Pastor: Yes, you did you put longer poles on it. Ellul: I sleeved an existing post. He said that didn’t have to be a permit-- Pastor: That’s not--that’s not-- Ellul: --because I didn’t dig the hole. I’m repeating what the building--the inspector said to me. And I’m amazed that you’re not understanding. Why would I--how did I come up with this story? Pastor: What I’m amazed at is you’re a--you say you’re a retired contractor and you didn’t pull a permit, that’s what I am amazed at. Ellul: I was told not to what am I going to do go down--you’re making no sense. You’re making no sense. If an inspector says I don’t have-- Pastor: This doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Ellul: --to pull a permit to change the existing fence to a different height or whatever, I says okay I’m going with the same fence, I don’t know your ordinances. I’ve never--I’ve never contracted a fence in my life. Do you understand what I am saying? I was rough carpentry, I was drywall, I was never a fence guy. That’s like saying plumbing issues to me about inspections. I couldn’t tell you what the heating and cooling has to do. I built a million house but I couldn’t tell you what his inspections qualify for. That’s his department. Electrician same thing. How could I tell the electrician, I’m not an electrician? Pastor: You pulled an electrical permit. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: Sure did, I’ve got a good friend who is a pool electrical contractor. Did it for me for a six pack of beer. As a matter of fact he was a retired inspector too. Henzi: Any other questions? I had one. Mr. Ellul-- Ellul: Yes, sir. Henzi: --your neighbor to the south sent in an approval that would be--I think that is 14125-- Ellul: Okay. Henzi: --but we didn’t get a letter from the neighbor to the north? Ellul: Okay. Henzi: I’m just wondering are you surprised about that? Ellul: You know, they--no, they asked me and you know what I told them for me coming up here at seven o’clock and waiting ‘til ten o’clock to leave that’s embarrassing to me. I wouldn’t ask my neighbor to do that. Henzi: No, I’m just--is there a dispute? Do you have-- Ellul: No, not at all. No, he wanted to and I told him don’t waste your time. The City’s going to do what they want to do with this. This is basically in your all’s lap, the mistake was made over here at the building department. And Mr. Hanosh I’m sure if you addressed him with this would probably remember me quite religiously on all these stories. Because when I dug my gas lines out to have the gas line installed, this guy would his water downspout over into my gas line where the rut was going to--and fill it up with water. Same kind who denied me access to the backyard after I removed all my bushes, built up the elevation to meet his elevation and took the fence down on the other side. So now I’ve tore up all my whole house and this is what I’m saying. This coboggle (sic) has just gotten so crazy here with this that I’m ready to leave Livonia and that is no exaggeration. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Baringhaus: Yes. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus: Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Do you have any City of Livonia documentation related to the installation of this fence that you can provide to us? Ellul: No, nothing. I just--I can--what is on my phone the finalization that says fence. I have a picture of that permit if you would like to see it and it says fence and final on pool, elevation, and all that. Baringhaus: I’m looking for documents related to your interaction with the City in terms of specifications on the fence, the layout of the fence-- Ellul: No, just the-- Baringhaus: --any discussions-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: It was existing-- Baringhaus: --any comments on the fence-- Ellul: --the actual dimensions-- Baringhaus: --things like that? Ellul: Nothing, because like I said it was refurbishing the existing fence. And I--I don’t know fences fellow, and I’m not going to lie. I feel foolish that like he said maybe I should have said to him and went to his boss and said hey, but when I went to them the other guys at the building department they all said he’s new. And I forget the other Jerome-- Baringhaus: So at this point you have no documentation? Ellul: Not on that fence sir, no. Baringhaus: Okay, thank you. Ellul: Except for what my--I have a material bill where I spent a bunch of money for the new chain link and then the extra thick posts that go over the existing posts and for my new gates. I had custom gates made. Baringhaus: Thank you. Henzi: I just want to go over the timeline. You bought this house in 2013 is that right? Ellul: Yes, we were there one year before we decided to put the pool in. Henzi: You pulled a permit for a pool in 2014 right? Ellul: Yes, sir. Henzi: In 2013, when you moved in how tall was the fence in the backyard? Ellul: It was four foot and six foot and one 25 foot area that had so much growth you couldn’t even see Farmington Road. Now it’s like I sort of wish I wouldn’t have cut all those weeds down because I can really see Farmington Road. But it had one--I think-- like I said someone had grown a grape vine or something and they put one little piece of six foot fence up and I think that is where Patrick O’ Donnell got mislead, is that he thought that the whole fence--because we had to take it down to bring the loader into the house. Henzi: Right, you had to remove the fence-- Ellul: Took posts out, we kept the same fence up. Henzi: --to put the pool in-- Ellul: We just put temporary stakes in--you know--while the pool was being built. Henzi: Okay. Ellul: Yes. Henzi: Got it, okay. I just wanted to make sure I had that right. Ellul: Yes, sir. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: Thank you. Any other questions? Hearing none, does anyone in the audience want to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Chambers: Hi, my name is Michelle Chambers. I live at 23442 Scone Street. I am not a direct neighbor of Bob but my mother lives two houses north of the property in question. My first point is that since all the permits were pulled and approved and signed off on by a trained employee of the City of Livonia, I’m not sure why an anonymous letter regarding this issue was even given merit. Maybe it’s not what you know but who you know since the rumor is that this anonymous person is an acquaintance of Mayor Kirksey. Sorry, my second point is I feel the Zoning Board should grant a variance with regard to this fence. Anonymous has not shown up to object on the record either at the first meeting or the second. The fence that is in place is there to prevent children and animals from being hurt from entering the backyard where a pool is located. This fence looks much less institutional than if every home placed a six foot wooden stockade fence along their property which is in compliance with the City ordinances. That’s all I got. Henzi: Thank you. Bydlowski: My name is Joan Bydlowski and I live at 14149 Westmore two houses north of Bob. I can go out into my backyard and look over in his yard and I see nothing offensive about this fence. He has gone out and bought 40 shrubs and planted each one of them himself around this pool. So he has done a lot--I don’t know if you are aware of when he bought this house it was a rental house for a couple of years. And you know--I don’t have to tell you what a rental house might look like when the people move out. His wife and himself bought this house, they’ve put a $10,000.00 kitchen in, they’ve put new windows on the whole house. They have put this pool in. They have put this fence in. They have bought these 40 shrubs and planted them. He has sodded the front lawn on his own hands and feet in the hot weather. I don’t know what else they’ve done inside the house. They have done work on this little building on the outside of the house which was falling apart when it was being rented. Like I said I think all cities would love to have a homeowner like this. To put all of this money into this house and all this sweat into this house and have somebody send an anonymous letter who is afraid to sign their name. Who is afraid to come up here and speak their mind which they are entitled to do? So I have no objections to it and thank you for listening. Henzi: Thank you. Oh, Mrs. Bydlowski, can I ask you a question? Bydlowski: Mm-hmm. Henzi: Does that sound right to you that there was a 25 foot section of six foot fence at some point in the past on that lot? Bydlowski: I have lived there a little over 20 years. When my husband and I bought that house the people that were living in that house were an elderly couple so I really didn’t have any really rapport with them. I just--you know--talked to them. I never noticed their backyard. I did notice though that it was not well taken care of in the backyard. And then when the man passed away the woman lived there for a couple of years and then they rented it and of course then it got in even more disrepair. But I see nothing wrong with this fence. I mean you could not ask for a better homeowner believe me. I think any City City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 63 September 29, 2015 would love to have this homeowner who put all this money into this house to keep that neighborhood looking good, to keep those values up. What more can you ask? And now somebody wants to come along with an anonymous letter and say this fence is not up to City code, well you know what maybe we could find something, some variance to make the City happy and to make the homeowner happy because he’s put a lot of money into this place. And he wants to stay. Why would he put an in ground pool in if he didn’t want to stay? Henzi: Thank you. Bydlowski: Thank you. Henzi: Anybody else want to speak for or against the project? Okay, can you read the letters? Caramagno: Letters of approval from Ralph Koehler, 14117 Westmore (letter read), Steven Chambers, 14154 Farmington Road (letter read), Vicki and David Gallinat, 33075 Middleboro (letter read), David Hunt, 14155 Westmore (letter read), William and Sandra Rellias, 33118 Middleboro (letter read), Eugenia Singer, 22107 Perth (letter read), and Kenneth and Lisbeth Rudberg, 14125 Westmore (letter read). Henzi: And I just wanted to state that there was some letter writers who also spoke. We don’t read your letters out loud but we read them to ourselves. Okay. So Mr. Ellul, anything you want to say in closing? Ellul: No, I just like I said I’d really like to resolve this issue. And my suggestion is is when the building department has a new inspector come in that their superior goes with them or goes over their paperwork and not to allow because as Mr. Hanosh would testify his story on a vinyl fence to me the same thing of his first mistake as a building inspector in Livonia. I’m amazed that their superiors don’t go with them. You have more ordinances--or don’t go over their paperwork, they come in and say oh he’s going to pull a--he’s going to do this, the person who knows these ordinances should observe this before he’s let loose in my pocket book. Because my pocket book can’t afford that type of overseeing on a project. That’s all fellows, and I’m not being wise with it. I just--you know--I feel that was totally--and like Mr. Pastor said and I amazed that I didn’t catch this. I should have went to the building department and said no permit because these other fellows as soon as I said his name they all--oh, he’s not familiar. I started acknowledging where I’m at with the fellow which I didn’t know. He’s an older gentleman in my opinion when he pulled up I thought he’d been in Livonia 25 years. And that’s a fact because he’s an older gentleman. I mean I didn’t know we turned over inspectors or how fast we do. But I dealt with Alex when I did Caliburn Manor over here and we had one insulation failure and he made me rip some drywall down so he could see the insulation. Other than that I’ve never had a problem with inspectors. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: When you did your kitchen remodel and your window remodel, did you pull permits for those? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: That was--the kitchen--all we did was replace existing facings. We didn’t replace the actual--we faced the cabinets, faced the countertop, that’s it. Pastor: Well did you pull a permit for your windows? Ellul: Yes, Performance Windows. I don’t know if they ever did come back. There was an issue with the seals and they tried to fix them. I put $10,000.00 worth of windows in and I could literally see out the sashes. So I don’t know if they’ve come back to do their final inspection. They finally have come out and put bigger seals and they reworked my front room window four times before it was correct and I couldn’t see outside the house through the sashes. So I’m not really happy with the fiberglass windows that I put in, but there was a permit pulled for everything that I’ve done that needed a permit that I knew of except for the fence. Pastor: Thank you. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Perhaps this is a question for the Inspection Department. But just for my clarification was there any discussion with this inspector to see if there was any miscommunication on fencing requirements with Mr. Ellul? Hanosh: I don’t believe at that time he understood the difference between a separation fence on the property line that is chain link with the maximum being at 48 inches compared to a privacy fence which we allow at going up to six feet. It is in our books and our ordinances that way. I do know that there was a suggestion--actually there was talk that there was an existing six foot fence. We couldn’t actually document that which we tried to help him that way also as best as we could do in the Inspection Department but we weren’t able to actually find any pictures trying to see if something wasn’t pre-existing trying to use that and try to help him in any means that we could. But when it comes to if he approved it at six foot and that it was the pool I believe he was approving as a final, not as a fence. There was no fence permit pulled. Henzi: Okay, thank you. Ellul: Because of this issue this saying he wrote on my file fence and pool finalization and that was my--and I do have that on my phone if someone would like to see it. And I was amazed because like I said I--but I didn’t know when you’re sleeving a post I thought and going with the same chain link fence is a chain link fence, and because I wasn’t taking away structural visual, you know what I mean? Because with a picket fence you can’t see through now with a chain link--that’s why I thought that I could do--that I thought Pat knew what he was saying. So I went with it and did it. Henzi: Mr. Ellul-- Henzi: Yes, sir. Henzi: --what about your next door neighbors, the Rudbergs’ suggestion or a request that you turn this into a privacy fence within two years? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: Yeah, I told them any time they want to I’ll split whatever fence they want with them. Any time they want to. That was said from the beginning. Henzi: But they-- Ellul: I’m not stipulating to no time schedule and he was told that. Henzi: Let me ask-- Ellul: I said I’m not saying in two years and three days I’m going to do--when at my leisure in the future I plan on having a vinyl fence. I’m not going to give you a date on when or where. Henzi: All right, so-- Ellul: Do you know what I’m saying because I just-- Henzi: --you--you--you would be upset if we made a condition that within two years you put a privacy fence on the south side? Is that right? Ellul: That I put a privacy fence? Henzi: Yeah. Ellul: No, I’ll put a chain link 48 inch fence up if you request me to change it. A 48 inch chain link existing the same as it was. That’s what I’ll do, but I’ll not be pressured into a privacy fence at any time or criteria with anybody. Henzi: I’m just asking you. Ellul: I know. I’m just-- Henzi: You’ve got a next door neighbor-- Ellul: This is the same neighbor-- Henzi: --who writes-- Ellul: --who didn’t allow me an easement after I tore up my home. Henzi: Let me ask the question please. Ellul: Okay. Henzi: Or we are going to be here until eleven. Ellul: Okay, I’ve got time. Henzi: Your neighbors who live next door to you-- Ellul: Mm-hmm. Henzi: --write essentially they are okay with this because you assured them it is a temporary fence which will be in place for two years. And then he, meaning you, plans to replace it with a privacy fence. Ellul: It was stated a few years. Henzi: Okay. So you-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 34 of 63 September 29, 2015 Ellul: Not two years, I said a few years. Henzi: All right-- Ellul: And that’s why when that was said in the previous if you look back in my words I said immediately hey I’m not going to be pressured into this I told them a few years at my--you know--when I--when do you have $10,000.00 for a vinyl fence. That’s was my-- that’s the fence we want. We really didn’t want wood because I had one before, maintenance--maintenance--maintenance-- Henzi: Well wait a minute. Your conversation with the neighbors we will never know but because we weren’t there. Ellul: Yep. Henzi: But it is safe to say they want you to put one up within two years-- Ellul: They can want-- Henzi: --and you don’t want to? Ellul: Chain link fence or nothing. Henzi: Got it. Thank you. Anything else? Ellul: Nope. Henzi: Okay. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Well my memory is not always best. I recall that we basically had and it is obviously in the minutes, but two requirements for you when you came back. And one of them was provide us some proof that there are other six foot chain link fences in the neighborhood-- Ellul: They’re bigger than six foot, yeah. Coppola: --as you stated. And the other was to go to your neighbors and get them to approve what existed. You’ve provided some pictures of some other six foot fences in the neighborhood. And there’s been a relatively positive response with the neighbors-- most of the neighbors. The ones to the south apparently had a misunderstanding as to what to you were willing to commit to. But you seem--from my perspective you seem to have fulfilled what we have asked you to do. Based on the circumstances how this all ended up where it is, I’m going to take you on your word on that, the story is almost too hard to make up. And the fact that the one person who appears to have objected to this fence has had two opportunities to voice their opinion to this Board and has not felt it necessary to do so. I would be in support of this variance. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: I clearly was not in support of the six foot tall fence last time and as it was presented here tonight I didn’t see many--or any six foot tall fences in the neighborhood. From your pictures I see that there are. There might be four or five what you’ve shown City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 35 of 63 September 29, 2015 us including the one on Barkley which I think is absolutely ridiculous. And I want to see that-- Ellul: Please do. Caramagno: --I want to look at that one. Ellul: I was amazed. Caramagno: These fences had they come before us or me here tonight and asked for a six foot fence, I would have told them as I have in the past, no. I don’t think a six foot chain link fence belongs in a residential neighborhood. I haven’t supported them in the past, I’m not going to support this one here tonight. I think you have an opportunity to make this right like we talked about last time. Cutting it down, modifying it to make it a four footer. I think that can be done so I still stand in the same position I was last time. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I wasn’t here the first meeting so that is why I asked to hear the whole story. Ellul: Yes, sir. Pastor: I am having a hard time with this fence because I don’t think I’ve ever approved a chain link fence six foot in a subdivision. I have on commercial property. So when you bring up the turkey farm that is neither here nor there for me. I am having a hard time with this because I understand your position, but I also understand you were in the industry. When someone tells you something you don’t really believe usually you check it out. Ellul: And there again, Mr. Pastor, like I said I did drywall, plaster and rough carpentry. Henzi: Mr. Ellul, we got it. Ellul: Okay. Pastor: At this point, unless someone says something else, I don’t think I can I support this. But I will leave my mind open. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: Generally financial consideration does not give grounds for granting you a variance. However, I think the facts in your situation are unique from the standpoint you relied on the representation made by the building inspector of what you needed. And I think--I personally think your reliance on that was justified. I’ve driven by your home and I thought your fence six foot or otherwise looked really nice. And I detected the other fences in your neighborhood. You’ve got overwhelming support from your neighbors and I would be in support of granting you the variance. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: On the surface having a six foot fence in a residential area is something I really don’t think is appropriate but again there is a lot of circumstances within your petition that I have think have merit. You did ask what we requested of you, you did bring in photographic evidence that showed other homes in the neighborhood did have six foot City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 36 of 63 September 29, 2015 fences. Looking at the letters from your neighbors they are in support of it. Their main concern being safety for the children in the neighborhood. Based on that I am inclined to support it. Ellul: Thank you. Henzi: I think that I too will support it. I don’t like, I prefer four feet chain link fences. I think you’ve demonstrated a hardship in that you were reasonably lead to believe that this was okay. You did what we asked you to do tonight which was provide proof that other six foot fences exist in Kimberly Oaks. The most critical thing for me though is the allegation that you did have a six foot section in the backyard. I had hoped that your neighbor would corroborate that but she didn’t remember, however there is no evidence suggesting that it didn’t exist. And so when I look at all of that I’ll go ahead and approve the variance. Ellul: Well, thank you, sir. Henzi: So the floor is open for a motion. Coppola: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Upon Motion by Coppola and supported by Baringhaus, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-08-44 (Tabled on August 25, 2015): An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Bernetta Murphy-Ellul, 14133 Westmore, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to maintain a six (6) foot tall chain link fence surrounding the rear yard, resulting in excess height. Chain Link Fence: Allowed: 4 ft. Proposed: 6 ft. Excess: 2 ft. The property is located on the west side of Westmore (14133), between Summers and Grennada, Lot. No. 087-04-0336-000, R-1A Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under City of Livonia Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090A,(1), “Residential be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact: District Regulations,” 1. The uniqueness requirement is met due to the circumstances and misunderstandings and other difficulties which resulted in construction of the six foot fence in violation of the ordinance. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the hardship in regards to time, effort and money to replace a perfectly good and useful fence. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 37 of 63 September 29, 2015 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the surrounding neighbors are in support of the variance. 4. The Board received 8 letters of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as “low density residential” in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted without any conditions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Coppola, Baringhaus, Neville, Henzi NAYS: Pastor, Caramagno ABSENT: Schepis Henzi: The variance is granted, no conditions. Ellul: Thank you, sir. Henzi: Just one last thing I wanted to add, it is routine for people to send anonymous letters blowing the whistle on their neighbors. I wouldn’t read anything in to that. I don’t think anything untoward, people do it, we see it all the time. Ellul: No kidding, see I’ve never been to a meeting like this. This is--the first time was the first time was the first time I was ever at a meeting like this. Henzi: Thanks, good luck. Ellul: Thank you, sir. Have a good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 38 of 63 September 29, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-09-48: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by James and Angelina Bourdage, 33409 Norfolk, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect an addition to a dwelling on a corner lot, resulting in deficient corner side yard setback. Corner Side Yard Setback: Required: 25 ft. Proposed: 13 ft. Deficient: 12 ft. The property is located on the south side of Norfolk (33409), between Irving and Farmington, Lot. No. 013-01-0496-000, R-3 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 4.06, “Minimum Side Yard Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts.” Henzi: Mr. Hanosh, anything to add to this case? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, good evening. Tiseo: Good evening. Henzi: Go ahead and introduce yourselves, please. Tiseo: Ben Tiseo, Tiseo Architects, 19815 Farmington Road. Bourdage: Angelina Bourdage, 33409 Norfolk. Bongero: Dave Bongero, Bongero Construction, 3346 Glendale, Livonia. Henzi: Okay. Go ahead, take it away. Tiseo: Thank you. Thank you for hearing us tonight. You got the package and I just wanted to point out again that Mr. Bourdage was in an accident in 2014. He’s been in a nursing home under medical care. He’s been able to come home on the weekends and in order to bring him home permanently which the doctors and everybody is recommending--highly recommending they do that, we have to modify the home to accommodate his conditions. He’s in a hospital bed, he requires total care, and his actual bedroom suite needs to have not only the hospital bed, exercise area, it will require a storage closet for a lot of equipment that he needs, a toilet room, and shower. We examined the whole house and given the fact that he is confined to a special wheelchair the only way to accommodate is to put an addition on the east side of the house. That’s the only area that allows it. Obviously we can’t go in the front. The west side we have an eight foot setback that is existing. On the back there are some large trees plus a deck, there’s just no other place to put the addition other than again like I said on the east side. A couple of things to point out is the fact that the addition is facing the Farmington Road side. I took care on trying to proportion the house so that the existing--excuse me the addition to the existing house frames the addition, it’s a two foot setback on the front and City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 39 of 63 September 29, 2015 the rear, matches the same slope, same materials so it doesn’t look out of character. The fence will also be the same wood fence that is there now. So the only objection might be the people driving by at 45 miles an hour down Farmington Road. I further would like to point out if you were to take this lot and literally move it in one lot we would not need a variance because we would have the minimum eight foot setback if it was an interior lot. Our hardship is the fact that Mr. Bourdage needs to be home with his family. They need him home and this is the only way we can accommodate it. And because this is a corner lot we cannot add out with what is needed in order to have the--maintain the 25 foot setback. There’s 30 foot now, 5 foot--we would only be able to build for 5 feet which would obviously would not accommodate what we would need. Henzi: To that point, that is very important to me. Is that because the lot is smaller or is that because there is less room to work with because of an easement with that fence? Tiseo: Well, I guess I don’t understand the question. We have 30 feet-- Henzi: Well you’re saying if you moved it-- Tiseo: --from the property line to the existing west--east building. Henzi: Why is it if you were one lot inward you wouldn’t have this problem? Tiseo: Because this is a--the 25 foot restriction is on a corner lot, this is a corner lot. Henzi: Okay. Tiseo: If it were an interior lot again, we would not be here. Henzi: I apologize if you answered this in your packet, but I just want to confirm. Without this, Mr. Bourdage cannot use the home, is that fair? Tiseo: He comes home I think on the weekends but they just can’t accommodate his needs to be there permanently. Henzi: Okay. Tiseo: Miss Angelina--I mean Angelina can speak to that too as well. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Mr. Tiseo, why can’t you use the existing living room or the existing dining room? Tiseo: Then you would destroy the whole family atmosphere and house, it would not be the dining area, it would not be the living area, the whole idea is to accommodate the family setting there. And then if they ever go to sell the house and what would you do with the space? Would you have to rip it all out to make it into a living room and a dining room again? Pastor: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Neville: Mr. Chairman. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 40 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: Mrs. Bourdage, I happen to be familiar with your situation. Is it your goal or your hope to bring your husband home full time? Bourdage: Yes, we’ve--since the accident it’s--I’ve been gone most of the time so with him home he does better. He is not conscious yet, he is what they call minimally conscious so he has his eye open but we don’t know what he can hear or understand. So in the facility I spend as much time as I can there with him so he is not by himself but we also have three small children. And it’s--when he is home he is more alert, we feel like he can hear us, he seems responsive to the kids, he’s just got more life in him when he is home. When he is in the facility he just sits there, he doesn’t open his eye, he doesn’t turn his head, he doesn’t do anything. So for him, it started out as let’s see if he does any better kind like a therapy on the weekends, and he did better. His oxygen has gotten better, he’s gotten stronger, he started to put his thumb up sometimes in response. So the facility that we are at, the therapists recommended that we continue to do that. So now that we’ve seen that he does do better at home, we want to make the move so that he can be with us at all times. The other thing is obviously it’s been a very long time and we don’t know what he can or can’t enjoy and it is not a whole lot of quality of life sitting there in that room by himself. And my kids are happier because I am home on the weekends with him so if we could all just be together again as a family, it may not be the perfect picture but at least we are all in the same space. And we looked in the beginning at just maybe bringing him home as is, trying to expand the downstairs bathroom but structurally--I don’t know anything about this, but I know it can’t happen. They sent two OT assessors out and according the MCAA rules you have to have like this, and you have to have this storm shelter, and you have to have exits, and you have to have all these things or he can’t come home. And they hand those assessments to the builders and the architects and they figure out this is the only way to get him home. And we don’t want to move because the house itself in a TBI you have to try and stimulate sort of any activity, memories, familiar music, familiar sounds, familiar faces, familiar voices, anything familiar and it is his home so I don’t know what would be familiar. Neville: Thank you. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against this project? If so, come on to the podium. Bongero: Guys, can I say something? Henzi: Yes, Mr. Bongero go ahead. Bongero: Hi guys. I’ve been before this Board several times for variances. If ever there was one this is one that really needs--she needs it. This addition is designed solely for need. To me it needs to be bigger because everything is compressed into this area. And we had to do a tornado shelter. If you look at the blue prints there’s a concrete room because he will never be able to get down to the basement. It’s--it’s just--it’s a good thing and it is designed for need, only need. There is nothing excessive about it and I think just the idea of bringing him home, I’ve done a lot of handicap renovations and it’s shown that in this situation he will definitely do better at home then in a facility. Any of us would. So City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 41 of 63 September 29, 2015 really I just think it is a job for need, it really is. And that’s it, because if it wasn’t for this she wouldn’t be here, she doesn’t want to do this, but she needs to get home. That is really what it is all about. Thank you. Henzi: Where did you put the shelter? Bongero: It’s in the back. Tiseo: That’s--those are early drawings when we went through the course of the design with the OT consultants they both recommended these FEMA shelters. So what I had to do is--this is before we finalized the design and got into the interiors, is I combined the bathroom and the shower room into one room and they said they wanted to be able to have it large enough for the family. So I went on the FEMA website and I got their designs and we actually now have a--I want to say it is about a nine foot by seven foot square reinforced poured concrete--reinforce block with grout filled with a concrete slab that will withstand 150 to 250 a mile an hour wind period. That’s what they said you have to have if he is going to stay home. So we had to design it into the structure. You will never notice it on the outside, it is everything interior. And again that came up after those drawings were submitted otherwise we would have shown it. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Who is requiring this? Tiseo: Pardon? Pastor: Who is requiring this? Tiseo: The MCA--they are the State organization that approves these projects. Bourdage: Michigan Catastrophic-- Neville: Catastrophic Claims Fund? Bourdage: Yes. Tiseo: Yes. Pastor: Thank you. Tiseo: And both consultants said you have to have it so we have no choice. Plus it makes sense if you think about it. We haven’t had many tornados but that is all we need is to have one, where is this poor man going to go? He can’t. Henzi: Okay. Go ahead. Caramagno: Letters of approval from Diane and Larry Kwiatkowski, 33410 Norfolk, (letter read), Lynn and Tom Giovannini, 33561 Norfolk (letter read), Richard Arsineau, 20126 Farmington Road (letter read) and Joyce Holmes, 33523 Norfolk (letter read). Henzi: Mr. Tiseo, anything you want to say in closing? Tiseo: No, again, the only other thing I want to say is that should we get the approval we would like to ask to waive the five day rule. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 42 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: Okay. Tiseo: So that we can get started as soon as possible. We are approaching winter. Henzi: Okay. Tiseo: Thank you. Henzi: I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Yes, this is an absolutely absolute need. There is no neighbor impact. I’m in full support with the project and the five day waiting period being waived. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Pastor: I’ll agree. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: I would agree and I agree with Mr. Bongero if there was ever a situation that required a--justified a variance I think this is the situation and I would approve. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: I’m in agreement with the project. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: I’m in full support. Henzi: I too will support. There are definitely two hardships here. First of all I don’t feel the Bourdages should be penalized by the fact that they live on a corner lot when if they lived interior they could have this without the need for a variance. Second of all we talked about the medical condition. But thirdly I’ll add, this is one of the first ones that I can think of, this is more like we have to help this family as opposed does it meet the technical requirements for a variance. And I think you put it in the best spot and it is going to look very nice. Tiseo: Thank you. Bongero: Or for sure, thanks guys. Henzi: The floor is open for a motion. Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Upon Motion by Baringhaus and supported by Pastor, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-09-48: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by James and Angelina Bourdage, 33409 Norfolk, Livonia, MI 48152, seeking to erect an addition to a dwelling on a corner lot, resulting in deficient corner side yard setback. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 43 of 63 September 29, 2015 Corner Side Yard Setback: Required: 25 ft. Proposed: 13 ft. Deficient: 12 ft. The property is located on the south side of Norfolk (33409), between Irving and Farmington, Lot. No. 013-01-0496-000, R-3 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 4.06, “Minimum Side Yard be granted for the following reasons and Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts,” findings of fact: 1. The uniqueness requirement is met because this is a corner lot and a variance would not be required if this was an interior lot and due to the need for additional handicap accessible living space required to bring a family member back into the home to recover his quality of life. 2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner because of the impact on the family by not having the family member there full- time. 3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because the surrounding neighbors are in support of the variance. 4. The Board received 4 letter of approval and no objection letters from neighboring property owners. 5. The property is classified as “low density residential” in the Master Plan and the proposed variance is not inconsistent with that classification. FURTHER, This variance is granted with the following conditions: 1. That the addition is constructed as presented. 2. That the five day waiting period for a permit is waived. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Baringhaus, Pastor, Neville, Coppola, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 44 of 63 September 29, 2015 ABSENT: Schepis Henzi: The variance is granted. You have to build it as presented and then you can get a permit tomorrow. Tiseo: Thank you. Bourdage: Thank you. Bongero: Guys, thank you very much. Henzi: You bet. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 45 of 63 September 29, 2015 APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-09-49: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Jerone and Rosalie Stenrose, 30410 Puritan, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to erect a single family dwelling with attached garage, resulting in deficient lot area and front yard setback. Lot Area: Front Yard Setback Required: 0.500 acre (21,780 sq. ft.) Required: 50.0 ft. Existing: 0.378 acre (16,466 sq. ft.) Proposed: 39.2 ft. Deficient: 0.122 acre (05,314 sq. ft.) Deficient: 10.8 ft. The property is located on the west side of Henry Ruff (16135), between Puritan and Greenland, Lot. No. 054-99-0022-003, RUF Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section, 5.04, “Minimum Lot Size” and Section 5.05, “Front Yard.” Henzi: Mr. Hanosh, anything to add to this case? Hanosh: Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Henzi: Any questions for the Inspection Department? Hearing none, good evening. Endersbe: Good evening. My name is Matthew Endersbe. I reside at 3077 Lafayette in Lincoln Park. I am here to see if I can get these variances approved. Henzi: Go ahead and tell us why you want to construct the house. Endersbe: So I’ve lived in Livonia since 2006, 2013 went my own way with my ex, moved into one of my rental units and would love to move back. I like the area, I have some friends right there in the area and I have a purchase agreement pending this variance approval. I see that this was all handled it looks like in 2005 as well. I tried to go through the notes as best I can from the previous case. It seems to be pretty clear to me. That might be a poor assumption. But that basically there was 19 feet there that was given back to the City for the easements. And so with the 19 feet and the 32 feet we are close to what we would need. It looks like you guys agreed with that last time. I can go through if you would like and kind of point out--unless you--I don’t want to-- Henzi: Well maybe one question while we are on that topic. Endersbe: Sure. Henzi: Do you know why--this was approved in 2005 do you know why a house was not built during the year? Endersbe: The gentleman passed away. I have--so he got this all taken care of--I know that the builder, Breckenridge he’s in here as well, I’ve got three different cases in front of me. But I’m not sure what happened to him. The gentleman passed away. I am dealing with his wife now so that’s why they didn’t do it. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 46 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: Mrs. Stenrose? Endersbe: Correct. Henzi: Okay. Endersbe: I’m not sure if he passed first or the builder disappeared, I’m not exactly sure. I did see that it was a one year variance but as far as all that goes I really am not sure. Henzi: And then is it a new builder then? Endersbe: Yeah, I have a builder who is actually building another house right in the area as well. Henzi: So then we’ve got some drawings. Can you tell us about the building materials for the house that is proposed? Endersbe: So it will be a brick--here I actually have it. It will be the exact same thing that you guys proposed--that was proposed to you before. The exact same blue prints. The blue prints that you have are the same blue prints that were submitted originally. I actually have it right here. So as stated previously it will be a brick built all the way around, rough sawn cedar and siding. A combination of all these three just give the same dimensions- -same dimensions. So brick built all the way around, rough sawn cedar and siding. Henzi: Okay, any questions? Baringhaus: Mr. Chairman. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: Yes, is there an existing structure on the property that would have to be removed before this house could be built? Endersbe: No. Baringhaus: Okay. Henzi: Anything else? Coppola: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Have you considered maybe a different home with a different footprint that would avoid at least a setback variance? Endersbe: You know, this exact conversation was held the last time. Basically, I would like a modern home. I’d like something that is a little bit deeper. I don’t really want to spread it wide. I’d like something that is contemporary. You know there’s discussion in here also about the easements not being required--or on Puritan, this 19 feet wasn’t--so people have a different setback. When he gave the setback back that--it kind of--it put him in a spot where he could no longer build on it. So that’s what I’m reading through the City notes the City had originally approved this. This is the first time I’ve been in front of you guys--one of these things so I’m kind of a little bit discombobulated on what I am supposed to present. But it looks like-- City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 47 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: Your argument is if he didn’t deed the 19 feet he would have the 50 and you wouldn’t need a variance. Endersbe: Correct. Henzi: But because arguably he did the neighborly thing, the civic minded thing and deeded it to the City now you can’t ever meet the setback unless you have a variance? Endersbe: Correct. Henzi: Okay. And then the house I guess it would be to the north, do you happen to know what the setback to the home is? Endersbe: You know it is funny because that exact question is in here as well. And everybody kind of said it is closer but no one knew exactly how close. So I don’t know either. Henzi: Yeah, it’s hard to tell. Endersbe: Yeah. Henzi: I just put it out there in case-- Endersbe: The house-- Henzi: --you measured. Endersbe: --to the south however, if you look at the plot plan it’s a--you can see that right at the corner it is farther forward. Henzi: Was that the Stenrose’s property also? Endersbe: Yes--yes, correct. Henzi: And does Mrs. Stenrose live there? Endersbe: She still does correct. Henzi: Okay. Endersbe: When they gave that easement apparently that immediately violated even the existing home. I have another--and that variance was also granted for the existing home on Puritan but it’s on the corner of Puritan and Henry Ruff. So I have that here as well somewhere. Henzi: So you’re saying the Stenroses would have come once for their residence and-- Endersbe: They did. Henzi: --once for the lot split? Endersbe: Yeah, it was just a couple of weeks prior in 2000--I actually think it was 2004. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Neville: Just one. As far as you are aware, the only deficiency is the setback from the front, correct? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 48 of 63 September 29, 2015 Endersbe: No, it’s not. I’m actually here for two variances. Neville: Okay. Endersbe: And it is unclear to me if this has been already addressed but so I figured I would address it. And today--so I’m here for the setback and also the deficiency in lot size. So lot is about 3.8 just under 3.9 acres, but again a substantial portion of that was given to the City--deeded to the City. It’s still doesn’t fulfill the whole entire five acres or I’m sorry point five acres, but it is very close. I also have some notes here that talk about how many houses in the area. There’s fifteen houses or so that are close--in the last-- with the City when they were going through all of this that there’s a substantial amount of houses in the same area that are also under the point five acres. It also talked about in the last meeting that you guys said that that side of the road looked like R-3 property versus the rural, the entire side of the road. It was also in there as far as moving it back farther--the structure farther in the property wouldn’t be fair to the people behind the property. I have kind of--if you want me to guide you through I have some-- Henzi: Maybe if you have the--are you talking about the Stenrose--the residence variance? If you want to pass that around. Endersbe: yeah, let me see if I have-- Henzi: Because we’ve got the minutes from the one regarding this lot. Coppola: Which one is that, the one with the subdivision? Henzi: Yeah, their house faces south. I think what he is saying is we gave a variance to 161--30410 and then we gave a second variance 16135. Coppola: What did they need a variance for? Henzi: Well I think he is saying because of the lot split then it made 30410 non- conforming. Mr. Endersbe, is that what you are saying? Endersbe: Yes, that is correct. Coppola: So they got a variance after the split? Henzi: Yes. Do you have that one with you? Endersbe: I do somewhere. Coppola: That was one of my questions, how do you split to a non-conforming lot. Endersbe: There was something--he used a land act or something like that. I actually went through his office and it is quite--it is like a time capsule. But he seemed to be a pretty savvy guy at least that is what it looked like to me. Henzi: Well, Mr. Endersbe, you might know or maybe Mr. Fisher but if he split the lot before he deeded the easement that would have made sense right? Fisher: Yeah, what we really need if we wanted to answer the question about where the lot split deficiency came from we would need to look at the map that went with this case ten years ago. And that would--that would tell us why it wasn’t shown on that notice the last time. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 49 of 63 September 29, 2015 Coppola: It’s deficient almost 5000--over 5000 square feet, 19 foot times 120-- Fisher: Yeah, that is what I am saying-- Coppola: It doesn’t-- Fisher: --that would have shown up very easily ten years ago. It must have been provided a different map at that time. Henzi: Yeah, I think Mr. Coppola made a good point. And if you can’t address it then we can take it up perhaps at another time. But his suggestion is that the 19 feet deeded back to the City does not equal the deficient lot area. So there is some kind of disconnect between the calculations tonight and what was decided ten years ago. Endersbe: So here’s what I--this is something that I have here. “Council does hereby waive the minimal lot area requirement set forth in the Zoning Ordinance number 543, as amended, with respect to the property division provided. However that--until a variance is granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals as to every non-conforming lot resulting from such split none said lots may be sold, leased or transferred. Further, the Department of Law is requested to place in property form a quit claim deed for the respect for the donation of the parts--donation of parcel C from Jerone Stenrose to the City of Livonia for the right-of-way purpose along Puritan Avenue. And the City Clerk is hereby requesting to cause a certified copy of this resolution if after said quit claim deed to record in the office of the Wayne County Register of Deeds.” So I guess I have really at this point no skin in the game, but if you guys the way this--I’m not a lawyer, but if I--if I interpret this the way I think I do, basically it is saying that they will never be able to sell this property or deed it? Henzi: Mr. Fisher. Fisher: It’s a separate piece of property that is exactly the point. Because this is non- conforming so the--I’m bewildered as to what the deal was ten years ago, but what we are doing right now is correct. And that is we’re going--assuming we approve this we’re going to give you the area variance that you need in order to have that as separate lot. Coppola: That’s what it says, any sale will be conditioned on a transfer of whatever, conditioned upon a variance. Fisher: Yes. Coppola: Is the way I heard what you said. Endersbe: Right, if the variance isn’t--in my--you’re the lawyer--the way that I interpret it is if you guys don’t give it then she can’t do anything ever with the property. Fisher: That’s correct. And the idea there is to prevent somebody from getting swindled basically. Endersbe: So-- Fisher: Picking up a piece of property they can’t build on. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 50 of 63 September 29, 2015 Endersbe: And they gave their easement away. I mean I just pointed it out, I mean this is kind one of those places where you say what is right is right. Henzi: Okay. Any other questions? Coppola: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: I just want to understand. So Mrs. Stenrose still lives in 30410 Puritan, correct? Endersbe: That’s correct. Coppola: And she has to the best of your knowledge has no plans to leave there in the near future, redevelop it, do anything with it? Endersbe: I don’t know if this helps my case or not, but her plans are to leave. In fact she was asking us what we would think about her cleaning the place up, getting all the stuff out of the basement, replacing the floors. She’s alone and has a big piece of property. So I can definitely assure you she’s on--she’s planning on leaving. And I don’t- -I didn’t figure this out, this little thing about never being able to sell her property until today. So I don’t know--like I said at this point I don’t have any skin in the game. I love the property but she’s going to be the person that I guess pays the price ultimately. Coppola: Because it appears based on setbacks and such she couldn’t deed you the extra--there’s not enough setback in her rear yard to deed you enough land to conform. Endersbe: I would love more land. Coppola: I mean there’s enough land there, her house just doesn’t appear to sit properly on it to be able to--that’s why I was curious because actually-- Endersbe: But you know-- Coppola: --the back of that property needs to be redeveloped. It’s--I don’t know if I would spend another penny on the house. Endersbe: Well, I was wondering if she wanted to sell it. Coppola: The ideal situation would be to redevelop both of those parcels, re-divide them so that they conform and take care of some of the issues you have in regards to deficiencies. Henzi: Any other questions? Hearing none, is there anyone in the audience who wants to speak for or against the project? If so, come on up. Endersbe: Oh, I have a bunch of signatures. Do you guys want them? Henzi: Sure. Endersbe: There’s this one which someone handwritten letter. And that’s a copy of the original. Henzi: Good evening. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 51 of 63 September 29, 2015 Hancotte: Good evening. I’m Angela Hancotte, 30431 Puritan. I live right across the street from Rose’s house--Miss Stenrose’s house facing Puritan. So she owns the corner lot between Henry Ruff and Puritan. She lives there, got the lot split and the one in question today is the split lot, 16135 Henry Ruff. So geez, there’s confusion it sounds like over what actually transpired ten years ago. So from what I’ve read and basically I got my information from the minutes of your 2005 meeting. That’s where I got--so even in kind of reviewing that and looking at your considerations and where you granted them, that is where I kind of picked up some of my information. I’ve got--I object to the variance request. So basically, I’m going to just read so I don’t get nervous if you don’t mind, to my letter. Try to follow along with me. You have questions you can stop me. Henzi: Okay. Hancotte: I’m Angela Hancotte, 30431 Puritan and respectfully object to the deficient back up and lot size variance request. In an effort to retain the openness, views and wild life of our large lots, and that our current neighborhood is rural urban zone afford us. I don’t want to see unwarranted backup or of--I have to put my glasses on sorry. I don’t want to see unwarranted backup or lot size variances granted as the may also set a precedence for others to try to subdivide their lots into smaller ones that are normally allowed for financial gain. We have a new neighbor last house on the south side of Greenland north of Henry Ruff that just bought a .99 acre lot that adjoins the back of this lot at 16135 Henry Ruff. The new owners just bought the house that was listed at about $249,000.00 thinking that Henry Ruff lot was vacated and unbuildable. So they just paid a lot of money thinking they had that. They have a beautiful private wooded backyard and it wouldn’t be fair to them to put up a house against their fence and intrude against their peaceful view of their waterfall and roaming deer. But not only for them but for the whole neighborhood. Please adhere to the RUF zoning guidelines. We need to retain our zoned, backup and lot size requirements. I understand that Mrs. Stenrose originally inherited or took ownership of the property at 30415 Puritan as a nice corner lot on Puritan and Henry Ruff with a large backyard. That’s how she inherited it as one piece of property, I think you’ll agree. In 2005, Mrs. Stenrose sectioned off the 16135 Henry Ruff piece know that--at that time know that it was too small to build on. Further they got a variance to build on the 2005--on it in 2005 but the variance that they got for a shorter backup and a smaller lot to make it buildable expired one year later in 2006 as noted in your minutes from that 2005 on the last thing. It’s expired, dead, and gone, okay. It appears one of the reasons on your documents that that variance was granted was only that--we only had on it one of the considerations of the Board at that time, there was only one neighborhood response and that response objected. Well obviously the Board could only say that the rest of the neighborhood was okay with it. And you know--so that makes sense to me. I also understand that Mrs. Stenrose wants to sell both her Puritan and Henry Ruff property so she could move closer to her daughter in Fowlerville. Although it would be more profitable and this is the thing, I think this is just for financial gain not for a real need. Although it would be more profitable to sell the Henry Ruff piece to the builder- -and I apologize I thought that this Matt was--who approached me last night at my house was the builder, but it sounds like a potential home owner to me. And on your paperwork that you have I thought he was the builder. But anyways I have a purchase agreement City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 52 of 63 September 29, 2015 that I’ve attached. He’s buying it for--pending agreement--I think I sent that to you in your paperwork, for $39,000.00. And on it I questioned that purchase agreement because it says it’s a buildable lot. I’m not quite sure, it’s like putting the cart before the horse there. It’s not buildable yet until you approve right? Anyways, so further they got a variance to build on it, they split it knowing that that section, the small section we are talking about today is not buildable. And then they got a variance on it from those--the Zoning Board at that time because of the reasons listed on your minutes--your 2005 minutes. It appears that one of the reasons it was granted is because of the no responses and--reading-- reading--reading--let’s see understand that she wants to sell both Puritan and Henry Ruff properties so she can move closer to her daughter. And that she--it would be more profitable for her to sell it at $40,000.00 if the variance is approved. But if it’s not, she can still combine them into one sale like she originally took ownership of it. That is advertise and sell them as one nice corner lot on Puritan and Henry Ruff with a large backyard. The total between the two is like .94 acres and that size is more consistent with the majority of the surrounding lots right around the house except for those two houses on her side north of the said property--vacant lot. So most of those are half acres to five acres right there. Our land in our neighborhood has become a more--less--pardon me-- a lot more populated and more sacred to us in the last ten years since this transpired. It was initiated in 2005 and expired in 2006. So today in 2015 if RUF, our zoning, says that it is a half-acre minimum lot please don’t approve one because it says it .48 or .43. Also please don’t allow two small lots north of this to be considered again like it was in 2005 with no neighborhood feedback for approving this request today. Let’s not let it set precedence for what--how the neighborhood is set up and feels today. Also, please don’t allow the two--let’s see--I’m sure there was a good and fair reason back then for originally granting those two variances for those two small lots that are like .4 acres that are north of this property but that was back prior to 1994. Because on your zoning map documents that was actually issued in 1994 and it shows that both of those two small lots that were already parceled you know at that time. And--but I’m sure there was a fair and good reason at that time but we just don’t know what those reasons are. One of the things that I thought of was maybe it was to allow right there after the second north one there’s a City cross walk that the whole neighborhood really enjoys. So good decision for the Board at that time for approving if that was the reason because we all enjoy walking--cutting through Greenland over to--you know--over to Henry Ruff and utilize that path that the City allows us. Please note that I’ve not been contacted by Mrs. Stenrose regarding this request, but last evening was approached who I thought was the builder Matt and he introduced himself as Matt after being at--talking at Rose across the street and said he was thinking about buying the property that was going in front of Zoning Board today. He wanted to know how I felt about it since I honestly thought that he was the builder and I’m--you’re not the builder it sounds like, or are you the builder? Endersbe: I’m both. Hancotte: You’re both and you plan on living there? Endersbe: I do. Hancotte: Okay, not just buying it and selling it? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 53 of 63 September 29, 2015 Endersbe: (inaudible) Hancotte: Honestly from what I’ve just been through recently with another zoning request next to me the way that he was conveyed is I thought he was trying--being misled. So he wanted to know how I felt about it since he introduced himself as a potential homeowner not identifying himself as the builder who has a potential purchase agreement in place pending the variance approval, I just told him when he asked that I objected to it. He asked if I could tell him why and I said no that we would discuss it at today’s meeting. And then he politely, respectfully left. But I felt like I was being misled so I didn’t talk to him more. And basically he is one and the same and again, I just don’t want it--the overall purchase to me sounds to me like its--Mrs. Stenrose bought it as one property, had it split knowing that this is not a buildable lot, but eventually got that approved. But that approval expired in 2006. Times have changed from a neighborhoods perspective and we’re--land is scarce. We enjoy our openness we just don’t want to see more unnecessary approvals especially nothing for financial gain. She can combine them and sell them as one. So it’s not--it shouldn’t be hardship it’s a financial gain situation in my opinion. From a neighborhood perspective so I object to it. We’ve recently had--if I can just show you this and you can tell me if you can consider it or not because I’m not sure if it’s appropriate. But here’s the--if you can see the circle of the target audience 300 feet from this request is up here, this other one is-- Henzi: You have to be by the mike, I’m sorry. Hancotte: I’m sorry. I don’t know if I gave you this or not but I’ll just pass it around so you can look at it. If you can’t legally look at it or whatever I’m just showing you that there’s 12 additional responses from homeowners in the area that object--would object to this but they are outside of the 300 foot target that was targeted from this request because this is across the street. We just got done doing one on 30451 Puritan which is right next door to me and you can see the one circle shows the distribution list of the notification you folks sent out and they overlap. So some of the same people were notified but the other people that weren’t notified I’m passing around theirs, if you can look at them, consider them, there’s 12 more people that object to that backup variance request that would definitely had they been notified say the same thing. We want to preserve our views, neighborhoods, we don’t want houses closer to the street or between each other. That’s all I have. We love our country in the City, please help us in the neighborhood preserve it and decline this request. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. McPherson: I’m Bill McPherson. I live within that 300 feet. Henzi: What’s your address? McPherson: My address is 30266 Puritan. The house I guess they are proposing to build would face my backyard which would take my views when I go in my yard of the wooded area and the open space I see. So for that reason I’m pretty much opposed to it. I know it’s going to be on a smaller lot. The guy north of me he’s got a lot about similar size and when I talked to him he could build--split his property it would be a smaller lot but he would consider building a house on his lot, you know sell his and maybe put a house there. So City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 54 of 63 September 29, 2015 I don’t know what we are opening these doors to smaller lots and less wooded areas. I mean over in that area where they are going to build my water runs over there so I don’t know how it would it affect my drainage. But there’s deer and there’s a lot of wildlife and my grandkids and we enjoy it. So I would hate to see a house built there and I would just like to keep that minimum half acre lot size continue on. That’s it. Henzi: Thank you. McPherson: Thank you. LaPointe: Kevin LaPointe, I live at 30145 Greenland. I would be across Henry Ruff from it and one house back. My concern is if you split that the neighbor who backs up to my backyard would split his and then I would have another house in my backyard. So for that I’m against it making the lot smaller because that would just lead to another one being smaller too farther up. Thank you. Henzi: Thanks. Hoffman: My name is Jenna Hoffman and I live at 30220 Puritan. I am objecting to the property being split and built on. If the lot is not of size to build it’s not of size to build. I run by that area every single morning. I do use the easement from Greenland to Greenland to do my morning runs and I’ve looked at that lot a million times. There is not enough property to build a house on there. I understand Matt, I moved out of Livonia fourteen years ago and it took me 14 years to move back in the neighborhood that I’ve wanted to live in. I specifically bought in this neighborhood because of the lot sizes and it would kill me to see this neighborhood start to turn into another cookie cutter neighborhood. There’s plenty of other places, new homes that are going up, there really is not a need to build on that land. Sorry. Henzi: Thank you. Anybody else? MacDonald: My name is Bruce MacDonald. I live at 30127 Greenland. I bought the house in ’89. I’ve watched many lots be split and houses put on generally half acre lots. We have all lived by the half acre lot rule for many years. I moved to Livonia in ’64 and I watched it go from country to subdivisions. And one of the other concerns I have is there are few homes right adjacent to my home that would have or could have smaller square footage if this variance is approved. I don’t want to set a precedent with that. Another consideration is I would like to make a request that the Engineering Department look at the plot map and the drainage system in the area. As this gentleman mentioned there is a free flowing drain that runs through there, I’m not sure you would want to build a house there. This gentleman might not even realize that at this time of the year. In the springtime there’s a lot of water that runs through there to the ditch. So it would be running west to east and then down to the creek. But I’m opposed and thank you for your time. Henzi: Thank you. Vertin: Good evening, my name is Gordon Vertin. I live at 30512 Greenland. I’ve lived there for 40 years. Gentlemen, I’ve been going over the minutes of the meeting of 2005 and it’s the same issues then as it is now. The lot is just not buildable. The issues are that it is going to impact the neighborhood. And let’s have a variance and a shoehorn to City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 55 of 63 September 29, 2015 get a home in there it won’t be buildable--it won’t be able to build. And as I think it’s up to you to maintain the standards of the neighborhood, things we bought and paid for and that is the ambience of lot size, RUF standards and to sacrifice those because of a lot that has been parceled off knowing full well that it is not buildable and counting on a variance to claim either hardship or an issue that without the variance someone would not be able to have a home. The issue is first and foremost that we look after the people that have already built or have bought property there knowing full well that RUF was the standard. And to violate that trust I think it impacts the neighborhood and it is just plain unjust. I thank you for your time and I hope you consider what I’ve said. Henzi: Thank you. Caimotto: My name is Tom Caimotto. I live at 30465 Greenland. I am machine repairman by trade. I do know how to read a scale, I don’t know how he came up with only being 10 feet short of a half-acre lot. He’s got to be counting the easement in that and that’s like a natural drainage down through there. It drains the lots that are at the end of that lot. For him to build a decent size house on that lot there are going to have to put drain tile in for the backlots. He can’t build a decent size house on that lot. I just can’t see it. There is not enough property there. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Belchert: Good evening. Henzi: Good evening. Belchert: Marshall Belchert. I live at 15725 Harrison Street. I am not immediately involved as a surrounding neighborhood, you know the neighbor, and that really doesn’t matter. I live in an RUF area. I have approximately an acre of property where I live. I’ve been going over the profiles of this situation and I don’t know how this thing got passed back in 2005. Because what it states here this gentleman would like to buy this property it’s deficient in lot size, RUF is a half-acre minimum. It’s deficient there and this property being split off the original parent piece that lot is also less than a half-acre now. Henzi: Do you have that in front of you? Belchert: I didn’t print that one. I took it off the City service-- Henzi: Do you have some documents that talk about the fact that deficient lot size was discussed back then? That’s an important-- Belchert: No, I don’t have that. Henzi: Let me finish. Belchert: Okay. Henzi: It’s an important issue because the minutes that we have which is all we have-- Belchert: Okay. Henzi: --do not talk about deficient lot size. The minutes that we have discuss that there was one variance granted for front yard setback of ten feet. So my question is you just City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 56 of 63 September 29, 2015 made a statement that we considered deficient lot size and if you have something to support that I would love to see it because that would be critical for me. Belchert: Well this letter that was sent around to the surrounding neighbors says you need a half-acre minimum to build. Henzi: That’s right. But I’m asking--you said that in 2005 I don’t know how this got granted because the lot was deficient and I’m telling you the minutes make no mention about deficient lot. So if you’ve got something from 2005 that says we granted that variance, let me see it. Otherwise-- Belchert: No, I don’t. Henzi: --then just--we’ve got to figure it out because no one remembers. Belchert: Well, okay, I agree with you. You’ve got to figure out what happened, how did that get passed back in 2005? Henzi: Okay. Belchert: And then the existing where this piece of parcel came from off the parent lot. They call it the parent lot. That lot is now only .43 and that’s in City records on the taxes and everything else. I only printed off of the--concerning this one piece of property you know on Henry Ruff. Henzi: I didn’t mean to be argumentative, I just--it sounded like you were being authoritative about it-- Belchert: No--no, I’m sorry-- Henzi: --I was just asking you for your help. Belchert: --I didn’t--I don’t mean to mislead you or anything. Henzi: Okay. Belchert: The existing corner lot now is even less than a half-acre in size. So if that house was torn down to be rebuildable--I don’t know, just according to this it seems deficient. I’ve walked up those streets on Greenland, I’ve driven up and down Puritan. My daughter lives on Puritan. All of the homes in the area are on nice big parcels of property and I don’t think it’s appropriate to start building on small pieces like this that don’t conform to what is already in the neighborhood. You know once you start doing that everybody is going to be want to be splitting up property and it--you know--there’s plenty of subdivisions in the City with lot sizes that are appropriate and even vacant lots that can built on for those. But in this area it’s the country living and the large area that everybody likes. And that’s the way--it would be nice to keep it that way. Thank you. Henzi: Thank you. Anybody else? Seeing no one else coming forward can you read the letters? Caramagno: Letters of approval from Derek Robbins, 30451 Puritan (letter read), Mary Jane Lamb, 30511 Puritan (letter read), Daniel Lohman, 30531 Puritan (letter read), Doug Shatter, 30510 Puritan (letter read), Rose Stenrose (30410 Puritan), James Kruppa, City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 57 of 63 September 29, 2015 30158 Greenland (letter read), Patricia Walsh, 30146 Greenland (letter read), James Walsh, 30146 Greenland (letter read), Walter Salczynski, 30450 Puritan (letter read) and letters of objection from Thomas and Darlene Caimotto, 30465 Greenland (letter read), Jacqueline Sorel, 16165 Henry Ruff (letter read), and WC Follmer, 30410 Greenland (letter read), Carol Bonamici, 30511 Greenland (letter read), Denise and James Smartt, 30415 Puritan (letter read), Lynette LaPointe, 30145 Greenland (letter read), Katherine and Douglas Carney, 15963 Doris (letter read), Christopher McDonald, 30181 Greenland (letter read), Gerald Perez, 16148 Henry Ruff (letter read) and Jenna Hoffman, 30220 Puritan (letter read). Henzi: Mr. Endersbe, anything you want to say in closing? Endersbe: Sure. Thank you. I was jotting a couple of notes down while everybody was speaking. I guess first how many vacant lots are left in Livonia. So this isn’t a money grab. The next thing is financial gain. I want to come back to Livonia. I’m not going to build in Redford, I’m not going to build in certain parts of Detroit or parts that I would--the value of the property would be less than what I put into it when I was finished. So as far as a financial consideration there are, but it’s not for financial gain. Buildable lot on the purchase agreement, when we signed the purchase agreement it was pending a City-- going to the City and finding out everything and doing our due diligence and this is what we found. So it is contingent upon this approval. The purchase agreement--if we walk out of here tonight without this variance then the purchase agreement is dead. I am a builder, I’m also--I also have two accounting degrees and a MBA. So I think that you just can’t class me as a builder and that tags me for financial gain and then I’m out to build on your beautiful property for any wrong reasons. I--last night I didn’t realize there was such a movement in the neighborhood when I went to speak to the woman selling the property. And I was looking for blue prints and anything else she had just to do some basic due diligence and it came up that there was such turmoil. So I immediately thought to myself, I’m going to go introduce myself to people because they probably have the wrong idea. So I walked across the street and I spoke to her and then I went next door to her neighbor who also probably isn’t the more impartial person because he was the gentleman looking for the variance on the garage that has come up a few times. But I’ve talked to a lot of neighbors and people are from the last time--or the garage ordeal, people are just like listen I don’t oppose it but I’m not signing anything ever again--ever again in this neighborhood. And it was did you meet the woman on Puritan. Okay, so I mean this is- -I don’t know what happens here or how--or what the magic is but I was impressed. The current condition of the property it is literally a shrub. It is a humongous bush. So when we talk about beauty and all of that this is one of the most unkempt pieces of property you will probably find in all of Livonia. So I can assure you when I’m done with it it will look fantastic. You know the other thing too is I’m going through the meeting minutes and I’m not exactly--or the documentation of the last meeting in 2005. It says, “I think I can support this. I think that front yard setbacks although being deficient with the 19 feet from the lot line to the street I think it is deeper than what it appears and it appears to meet the front yard setback deficiency. I think this is unique--this is unique because--I’m sorry I read that twice--and I think that the lots are more consistent with the R-3 designation rather RUF. I think R-3 the fact that it would be 35 feet setback in the front, I think that all City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 58 of 63 September 29, 2015 the house would approximate that. This is a buildable lot. I think we can allow the petitioner the ability to use his property so I would be in support.” Mr. Caramagno. “I’ll also be in support of the setback as stated here. It does appear that the setback is further on the property due to the additional 19 feet to the road. And moving back I don’t think would be--do any justice or be fair to the neighbors behind.” So I kind of I guess want to stress the R-3 idea. And I guess that is my case. Henzi: Thank you very much. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr. Pastor. Pastor: Well back in 2005 I approved this. I see no reason today not to approve it so I will be in support. Henzi: Mr. Neville. Neville: I drove by the property earlier today and quite honestly it is so narrow I can’t imagine putting a home of the size proposed on that lot. And I think there’s been a lot of opposition by the neighboring property owners and I really don’t think the requirements to obtain that variance have been met. I would be opposing it. Henzi: Mr. Baringhaus. Baringhaus: I am in favor of any piece of property in Livonia that’s not being used to be developed and used and produce taxable income. I think we have an opportunity here with this home. I am in favor of supporting the variance. Henzi: Mr. Coppola. Coppola: Quite a history on this piece of property and it seems to me that a little bit of bait and switch occurred with the original separation of that property. It was known at that time it was deficient and that it was not a buildable lot. The neighborhood doesn’t support that. It’s RUF. I might be able to get over that somewhat but I think the other issues in regards to the front yard setback which could easily be removed with a different foot print of the house. So taking into account both of these at this point and based on the history of this and how it was subdivided and what’s been going on, I just--I think at this point I am just not in support of this variance. Henzi: Mr. Caramagno. Caramagno: Well this come before us in 2005, we all know that. And it only came to us for a front yard setback which I looked at as the only thing presented tonight. I was in support of. And I probably am in support of that again tonight. I have no reason to change my mind here. There are other lots that are older homes to the north of this that are small as well. But something that was said early on really struck me as maybe an opportunity. This older house on the corner is run down, it is well beat up as far as I’m concerned. And I think there’s an opportunity to take that piece and this piece and make something very nice here. Maybe a couple of house very nice that have minimal variance as far as square footage. That’s my opinion at this point so I’m not inclined to approve this as it sits right now. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 59 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: And I’m going to suggest a tabling resolution. I agree with what Mr. Caramagno just said. I think the petitioner makes some very good arguments about the R-3 characteristics of that stretch of the road. The problem for me is that we are dealing with a complicated lot split dating back ten years and we don’t have all the date. And frankly I never expected there to be this kind of outpouring of neighbor opposition because there wasn’t any ten years ago. But perhaps one of the reasons was the public notice indicated that the variance was only for front yard setback and not for deficient lot. Because we’ve got some folks here tonight that have lived in that neighborhood for a long time who were- -who made impassioned arguments about you shouldn’t be able to build on a deficient lot and I would think that if they had known that was the case ten years ago they would have been here making the same argument. And it sounds like there was nobody here, not one person spoke. So that’s the only thing that I can sort of deduce that we never considered the fact that it was a deficient lot. To me when I read the minute this was a slam dunk. A guy comes in and says I deeded away the front 19 feet of my property. I’m 19 feet short so give me the variance. I don’t want to build in the back because that would be impinging on the folks in the back. That made perfect sense to everybody. This went down without a hitch. But now that we know there is opposition due to the lot split, I think--I can’t vote without seeing the history. And I also think that Mr. Caramagno makes a very point which is that this is not a good looking corner. I had noticed that this corner has not looked good for a long time because I remember that at least driving by. And this might be a good opportunity to do something really special that transforms the corner. So having said all that I would propose a tabling resolution. The floor is open for a motion. Pastor: Mr. Chair. Henzi: Mr. Pastor. Upon Motion by Pastor supported by Coppola, it was: RESOLVED: APPEAL CASE NO. 2015-09-49: An appeal has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Jerone and Rosalie Stenrose, 30410 Puritan, Livonia, MI 48154, seeking to erect a single family dwelling with attached garage, resulting in deficient lot area and front yard setback. Lot Area: Front Yard Setback Required: 0.500 acre (21,780 sq. ft.) Required: 50.0 ft. Existing: 0.378 acre (16,466 sq. ft.) Proposed: 39.2 ft. Deficient: 0.122 acre (05,314 sq. ft.) Deficient: 10.8 ft. The property is located on the west side of Henry Ruff (16135), between Puritan and Greenland, Lot. No. 054-99-0022-003, RUF Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 60 of 63 September 29, 2015 Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section, 5.04, “Minimum Lot Size” and Section be tabled to allow the petitioner an opportunity to consider the 5.05, “Front Yard,” Board’s comments. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Pastor, Coppola, Baringhaus, Neville, Caramagno, Henzi NAYS: None ABSENT: Schepis Henzi: So this was tabled, Mr. Endersbe. The next available meeting is October--I think th I misspoke earlier, it’s October 27. You’ve got to contact Marilyn in the office by October nd 2. And then we will--Mr. Fisher if you could remind Marilyn to--maybe if we could have both those files in our packets. Fisher: Yeah, I’ll look to see if there is some other variance or something. Henzi: And then that way you can review it and you will be able to tell us the legality of the lot split and all that kind of stuff. Sound good? Endersbe: Sure. Henzi: Okay. Mr. Endersbe, do you want this back? Endersbe: Yes, please. City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 61 of 63 September 29, 2015 thth Henzi: All right, do I have a motion for minutes. August 11 and 25. Coppola: Is this proper. Henzi: Yeah, they were given to us the last time. Coppola: No the issue is the members present correct? Is this the one that I chaired? Henzi: Yeah, you did. You’re mentioned in there but not in the members present part. Coppola: But you’re in the minutes here. I’m confused. th Henzi: I think the 11 I wasn’t there. Recorder: You know I will look at them. Marilyn said another one I sent over was switched on it. Coppola: Yeah, this doesn’t make sense because Matt is-- Recorder: Put those to the side and I will look at them. Coppola: I was acting chair, I don’t remember exactly which one it exactly was because I think the one I chaired was four and I got two of them to go away. th Fisher: Is the one on the 25 good? th Caramagno: You were definitely here on the 11 that was the guy with the overhang for the motor home. Coppola: So the opening must not be right. th Henzi: No I was here for the 25. Caramagno: You were here. Coppola: I’m just saying this may not be correct. thth Recorder: Is that the 11 or the 25? th Coppola: The 11. And then the rest of inside maybe, I don’t recall. Recorder: I will look at it. My notes are at home. ththth Henzi: Let’s save the 11, but the 25 I know is right. Is that okay if we wait on the 11 then? Fisher: Sure. th Henzi: Just do the 25? th Coppola: So a motion to approve the minutes of the 25. Baringhaus: Second. Henzi: Motion and supported, all in favor say aye. Board Members: Aye. Henzi: And then Craig abstained from that one. Coppola: Who else was missing? City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 62 of 63 September 29, 2015 Henzi: That was it, just Bowling and Schepis. And then is there a motion adjourn? Pastor: I make a motion to adjourn. Coppola: Support. Henzi: All in favor say aye. Board Members: Aye. Henzi: We’re adjourned. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. _______________________________ Matthew Henzi, Chairman ______________________________ Sam Caramagno, Secretary /pcb City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 63 of 63 September 29, 2015