HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-08
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 of 33 October 8, 2013
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY OF LIVONIA
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 8, 2013
A Regularl Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Livonia was held in the
Auditorium of the Livonia City Hall on Tuesday, October 8, 2013.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Matthew Henzi, Chairman
Craig Pastor, Vice President
Edward E. Duggan, Jr.
Kathleen McIntyre
Robert E. Sills
MEMBERS ABSENT: Sam Caramagno
Elizabeth McCue
OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Fisher, Assistant City Attorney
Steve Banko, City Inspector
Bonnie J. Murphy, CER2300/CSR22300
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Henzi then 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. Five (5) members were present this evening. The Chairman asked if
anyone wished to be heard by a full Board and no one wished to do so. 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 eight
people present in the audience.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 of 33 October 8, 2013
Sills: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Sills.
Sills: I move that we accept the minutes of the meeting of July 23, 2013.
Duggan: Support.
Henzi: All in favor say aye.
Board: (In unison) Aye.
Henzi: They’re approved.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 of 33 October 8, 2013
APPEAL CASE NO. 2012-09-47: Eric Leventis, on the south side of Meadowbrook,
(32417), between Hubbard and West End, seeking to maintain a 6-foot tall
privacy fence upon a corner lot resulting in the fence being excess in height and
obstructing the vision from the driveway onto Hubbard Road.
Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything that you’d like to add to this case?
Banko: I have a couple points of interest regarding this case. Number one, that fence
was illegally erected on that site and they’re seeking to maintain the illegally erected
fence. Also the fence is a fence on a fence and thirdly, the fence is tied to the existing
chain link fence.
Henzi: Thank you. Any questions for the Inspection Department? Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: Mr. Banko, how did you become aware of the situation with the numerous
violations?
Banko: It was either picked up by a Building Inspector or there would have been a
complaint that was called into the Inspection Department’s attention.
McIntyre: Thank you.
Henzi: Anything else? Good evening. Could you tell us your name and address?
Petitioner: Eric Leventis, 32417 Meadowbrook.
Henzi: Tell us why you want to maintain the privacy fence.
Petitioner: First of all I’d like to apologize for not coming here to start. I would have
come if I had known and thanks for hearing my case. Really the fence, I put it up
because I’m on a corner lot and I have no privacy on Hubbard which I can say is almost
a main road with the Rec Center right there and it just has a lot of traffic. I get a lot of
garbage in my backyard and I had a fence there to begin with so I figured I didn’t need a
permit or anything like that to put a fence up in its place. You know, if you can approve
this today, I have no problem taking the chain link fence down, putting posts in and do it
all to building standards. That’s really all I have.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: There’s a letter dated today that’s in our packet from Sergeant Gibbs from the
Traffic Bureau, were you provided a copy?
Petitioner: Was I? I don’t believe so, no.
Henzi: I’ll give you a second to read it but in short he’s saying that the panels on the
north side are too close to the sidewalk and it’s going to obstruct vision of pedestrians
and drivers, he’s saying bring that closer to the house one car length and run it at an
angle; do you have any problem with that?
Petitioner: No.
Henzi: Then he says on the south side the panels have to be removed near the
sidewalk because that would be an obstruction. Go ahead and read his letter, I’ll
give you a second.
Petitioner: It looks like I can’t argue with that.
Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioner?
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: How long have you lived at this address?
Petitioner: Since July 15th of 2011.
Pastor: What facilitates you putting up the privacy fence today instead of when you
moved in?
Petitioner: Money. I would have put it up to begin with but you know I was 23 when I
bought the house so I was just starting out. I would have put it up but initially when I
bought the house I didn’t think Hubbard was as bad as it was. To be honest, I wouldn’t
buy a house on a corner lot again just because of the traffic, it’s a 25 mile per hour road
but everybody does 40 down it.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 of 33 October 8, 2013
Pastor: So what’s your practical difficulty? I mean you have certain criteria you have to
follow and if you listened to the Chairman when we first came out, if you have a
practical difficulty you have to prove to us why you need this.
Petitioner: Well, I feel, you know, everybody deserves a little bit of privacy and I’m on
Hubbard and right there there is no privacy.
Pastor: That’s all I have for now.
Henzi: Any other questions? Then just to clarify, so if you’re approved, do you
understand you can’t have a double fence?
Petitioner: Oh, yeah, I’ll take it all down and pull the permit and have the posts
Inspected and put it in the way the Traffic officer said.
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. Seeing
no one coming forward, can you read the letters, please?
McIntyre: Yes. Virginia Kempainen, 14750 Hubbard, approval, (letter read).
Objection, (letter read), John Yonish, 32432 Meadowbrook. Approval, (letter read),
Jeanne L. Finnigan, 32416 Barkley. Approval, (letter read), Michael Simigian, 14764
Hubbard. Objection, (letter read), Janice Nadratowski, 32601 Meadowbrook.
Objection, (letter read). And an objection, (letter read), Georges Lahoud, 32415 Barkley
Street. Those are the letters, Mr. Chairman.
Henzi: Mr. Leventis, anything you’d like to say in closing?
Petitioner: Yes. Everyone that seemed to write an objection objected to the traffic
view and I’d be more than happy to clear that up. You know if I fix that, I don’t know
why they’d have an issue with that anymore.
Henzi: What do you mean clear that up?
Petitioner: Well, based on what the traffic report is here, I’d have to change that, I’d
have to come in anyway and that’s what everybody seemed to object for, because
there’s kids walking down the sidewalk. So if that changes, I would hope their opinion
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 of 33 October 8, 2013
would change as well.
Henzi: It sounds to me like there’s a letter from your next door neighbor in opposition,
did you ever go to your next door neighbor and ask for approval to put the fence up?
Petitioner: I only put it on the corner side, I didn’t think you know someone that lives
next to me, I didn’t think it affected as many people as it did, I guess.
Henzi: Okay. Anything else?
Petitioner: That’s it.
Henzi: I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with
Mr. Sills.
Sills: At first I didn’t see anything wrong with the fence but then when I got the letter
from the Police Department it kind of opened my eyes a little bit and I went back and
looked at it and I was in agreement with the Police Department. I could support this
if you would go along with the findings of the Police Department and do what they
asked, eliminate the one panel on the south side and kind of angle the one
on the north side towards the garage, I think I could approve it then if you did that.
Petitioner: Okay. Thank you.
Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: I appreciate and welcome young people coming into the city, I do think it’s
concerning when you don’t take the time to understand what the zoning requirements
are and what Livonia has I think a reasonable set of zoning requirements. Some cities
are so restrictive, we have laws to maintain a certain quality of life. I’m not comfortable
voting in favor of this until I go back --- the problem for me is visually, it’s jarring, and to
see that second fence, I understand you’re willing to take it down. I would like to table
this until I can go back and take the new letter from the police today and try to lay it out.
I was there the other day and I can kind of visualize what that would look like, but I’d like
an opportunity to go back with that letter and look at it and reconstruct it in my mind with
the letter.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 of 33 October 8, 2013
Pastor: Yes, I don’t think I can approve what you’re asking to be approved right now.
The fence on fence, doing it without a permit, I’m getting a lot of heartburn about this.
I will go along with the tabling motion but I won’t approve this right now.
Henzi: Mr. Duggan.
Duggan: I, you know, I see you’re on the corner, you’re right there on Hubbard, I see
the reason why you need a privacy fence, I get that, and I would approve that but as
you built it, you know, in my opinion you’d have to go along with Sergeant Gibbs in the
Traffic Bureau and you expressed an openness to do that. So if you’d be willing to go
by that, by his letter as well as the condition of taking out the double fence and you
know we’d probably have to give you a fine for not going through the Inspection
Department. But if you’re willing to do and abide by the letter by Sergeant Gibbs, I’m
open to you keeping the privacy fence.
Henzi: Me, per se, I agree with Mrs. McIntyre. Because there’s going to be these
gates, it’s hard for me to imagine what it’s going to look like with the gates if you’re
going to put it up the way Sergeant Gibbs says to do it, so I too would like to go back, so
to be fair to you I will go along with a tabling resolution, you don’t have to pay to
come back that way and then we’ll all visit the property again and when you turn in
your paperwork, if you so choose, I would suggest you look at his letter and redraw a
site plan as to how it’s going to look.
Petitioner: I can do that.
Henzi: That’s my suggestion.
Petitioner: Is there any way I can compare it to any other fences in the neighborhood,
does that make any difference?
Henzi: It might.
Petitioner: Okay. Because there’s a few in my neighborhood that are the same.
Henzi: We see that all the time. If you drive through Kimberly Oaks and say, look,
on all the corners.
Petitioner: There’s three that I know of on the corners.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: They all have it. Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: Just make sure that for my benefit at least apples to apples.
Petitioner: Oh, yeah.
McIntyre: I have a child at Kennedy and I’m very aware of the pedestrian traffic on the
way to school and I looked along Hubbard to see if there were other fences that
created the kind of lack of visibility and I understand it’s going to be addressed because
you are willing to accommodate what Sergeant Gibbs is asking for.
Petitioner: Right.
McIntyre: Just make sure that it’s apples to apples.
Petitioner: It’s apples to apples now, I’m willing to change it, I’m talking about the
ones that are like that now. I don’t want mine to be like that if that’s an issue. There’s
some in my neighborhood that are exactly like mine.
Henzi: Yes, we always look for that but it’s a big sub and if you said here’s the corners
and 80 percent of them have privacy fences then that will help.
McIntyre: With the same kind of issue of visibility backing out onto Hubbard.
Petitioner: There’s no way that I can talk to Sergeant Gibbs and there’s no way that I
can put a mirror on top of the fence so I can see down on the sidewalk, that doesn’t
change anything? I could back into my driveway every time, too, you know.
Henzi: Yeah, you might, but a person who buys the house from you won’t.
Petitioner: Everybody has to look both ways as you’re backing out, that’s just how it
goes.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: That’s true. But all it takes is one kindergarten student riding a bike, getting hit,
and you know, me personally, I can’t have that on my conscience, I would never
approve that.
Petitioner: I understand.
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Upon motion by Pastor, supported by Duggan, it was:
RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-09-47: Eric Leventis, 32417 Meadowbrook,
seeking to maintain a 6-foot tall privacy fence upon a corner lot resulting in the fence
being excess in height and obstructing the vision from the driveway onto Hubbard Road.
Fence Height
Allowed: 5 ft.
Proposed (Existing): 6 ft.
Excess: 1 ft.
The property is located on the south side of Meadowbrook, (32417), between Hubbard
and West End, Lot No. 086-03-0001-000, R-1A Zoning District. Rejected by the
Inspection Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090,A,bii,A(4a) and
15.44.090A(bii), “Residential District Regulations,” be tabled to allow the Board more
time to look at the new recommendations submitted.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: Pastor, Duggan, Sills, McIntyre, Henzi
Nays:
Absent: Caramagno, McCue
Henzi: This is tabled so you just call the ZBA office and talk to Bonnie and ask for a
new date.
Petitioner: Thank you.
Henzi: Good luck.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 of 33 October 8, 2013
APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-50: John Wallace, on the west side of Flamingo
(19335), between Gable and Haldane, seeking to erect an addition to a detached
garage while maintaining an attached garage, previously granted by the Zoning Board
of Appeals (8707-134), resulting in excess number of garages and garage area.
Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case?
Banko: I have nothing to add to this case, sir.
Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Hearing none, good evening.
Petitioner: (John) Good evening. This is my wife, Sandra, my name is John Wallace,
19335 Flamingo.
Henzi: Can you tell us a little bit about your project?
Petitioner: (Sandra) We have his mom living with us now and we’re trying to get her
house ready to be sold and we just need more space for her furniture and that’s why we
came to ask for another variance. We have a one and a half car garage and that’s why
we had to go with the second garage and now we have to make room for more storage
to combine the two households.
Henzi: Have you contracted with a builder?
Petitioner: (Sandra) My brother is in construction and he wrote the plans, we’ll
probably go professionally for the cement work and then my brother will help us put the
rest up.
Henzi: All right. Can I presume it’s going to blend and look just like the existing
garage?
Petitioner: (Sandra) We’re putting a new roof on and so it will like it’s all new and we’ll
use the vinyl siding.
Henzi: Do you have a basement in your house?
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 of 33 October 8, 2013
Petitioner: (Sandra) Partial. It’s not a full basement.
Henzi: Can you tell us a little bit about what you’d store there?
Petitioner: (Sandra) Well, his dad was a pack rat and he’s a pack rat so we’ve had to
empty out his basement and garage so that’s mostly the stuff that will go in there, their
Furniture.
Henzi: Any questions?
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: Explain to me, you said one garage was a car and a half garage, which garage
what that?
Petitioner: (Sandra) The one that’s attached to the house. That’s why we have the
original variance, because we needed another garage for our vehicles at that time, 26
years ago. We haven’t asked for anything else since but now that we have his mom
living with us in this situation, now we’re asking for more storage.
Pastor: You own the lot next store?
Petitioner: (Sandra) Yes, we own almost three quarters of an acre.
Pastor: But they’re two separate lots.
Petitioner: No, it’s one. I think what happened was the neighbor next to us sold that
lot, her lot.
Pastor: So it’s a separate lot?
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 12 of 33 October 8, 2013
Petitioner: (Sandra) Our lot?
Pastor: yes, it’s a separate lot. If you had to sell it tomorrow, you could sell it.
Petitioner: (Sandra) No, because the neighborhood has 150 foot front, half acre lots
and that house could never --- we could never .----
Pastor: That’s a platted lot, you can sell it.
Petitioner: Oh, well, we were always told we couldn’t. Not that we would anyway.
Pastor: I assume it’s a platted lot. Thank you.
Henzi: Any other questions?
Duggan: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Duggan.
Duggan: So you said he’s a pack rat, how much stuff could he possibly have?
Petitioner: (Sandra) He’s got a whole basement full and a garage.
Duggan: And what about the alternative as far as throwing things out, that’s not
possible?
Petitioner: (Sandra) I don’t know whether it is, if this doesn’t work, I don’t know.
Duggan: What about a storage unit or throwing stuff out?
Petitioner: (Sandra) No, he doesn’t want anything thrown out.
Duggan: How long do they plan on living with you?
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 of 33 October 8, 2013
Petitioner: (Sandra) We’re getting ready for their house to be sold.
Duggan: All right, 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. Seeing none coming forward,
can you read the letters?
McIntyre: Objection, (letter read), Charles R. Main, 19384 Flamingo. Approval, (letter
read), Monroe A. Horn, 19182 Flamingo. Objection, (letter read), Lawrence Brophy,
19323 Hillcrest. Approval, (letter read), Raymond and Joyce Santo, 19330 Flamingo.
Approval, (letter read), Cathy Noble, 19320 Milburn. Approval, (letter read), Randy
Tracy at 19350 Milburn. Approval, (letter read), Sandra and Charles Dreyer, 19385
Flamingo. Approval, (letter read), Randy and Janice Teeters, 19350 Flamingo.
Approval, (letter read), at 19220 Flamingo.
Fisher: Mr. Chair, to the suggestion that this was multiple lots, I’m looking at an aerial
from our GIS, an aerial view per our GIS and it shows it’s one lot.
Henzi: Okay. Mr. and Mrs. Wallace, anything you want to say in closing?
Petitioner: (Sandra) Well, as far as the Brophy’s are concerned, they’re over another
block over and he was the association president at one point.
Henzi: Thank you very much.
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: You say there’s an association?
Petitioner: (Sandra) There was.
Petitioner: (John) When we first moved there twenty-six years ago.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 of 33 October 8, 2013
Petitioner: (Sandra) Yeah, twenty-six years ago but I haven’t heard of any meetings or
anything called.
Pastor: Because I believe if there is an association, they have to approve this as well.
Petitioner: (Sandra) Well, that’s Mr. Brophy, at the time he was president of the
association. But I am really sure there is no association now because I haven’t heard
anything for years.
Pastor: Thank you.
Henzi: Anything else? I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s
comments with Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: I could support this, given the layout of your lot, it’s a large lot, one of your
garages is not actually on Flamingo, so you know when I went and looked and if I’m
understanding with the materials and what we had, what you want to do is keep what
you have now, correct? No expansion to anything, just what it is now. I wouldn’t have
any problem with that given the nature of the neighborhood and again, you have a side
entry garage so I don’t have any concerns.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: You are expanding this garage so by a couple hundred square feet but I don’t
think I can approve of this. I feel like the other neighbors, you’ve already got a second
garage and I just don’t see the need for --- I don’t think I can approve this.
Henzi: Mr. Duggan.
Duggan: You know originally I was uncomfortable overturning the resolution that was
before the Board even if it was a long time ago, but considering you have the existing
garage that you’re adding onto, you do have a big lot, it is unique in its location how the
house is built where the garage is located, that due to the unique nature of the house
and the property, I think I could go along with it.
Henzi: Mr. Sills.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 of 33 October 8, 2013
Sills: I think I can support it. They want to add an additional 12 feet to the existing
detached garage, you have an exceptionally large lot, your property is well maintained, I
don’t think that it would affect the property lines at all so I could be in full support.
Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: I’m sorry, I misspoke. You’re not adding an additional garage, you’re
adding on to an existing one.
Petitioner: (John) It’s an addition to an existing garage.
McIntyre: I’m sorry.
Henzi: I, too, would approve it. I think the excess is not significant considering the size
of the lot. Quite frankly I think if you had asked for something this size in 1987 you
probably would have gotten it and so for that reason and that reason alone I would go
along with it. So the floor is open for a motion.
Upon motion by Duggan, supported by Sills, it was:
RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-50: John Wallace, 19335 Flamingo,
seeking to erect an addition to a detached garage while maintaining an attached
garage, previously granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals (8707-134), resulting in
excess number of garages and garage area.
Number of Garages Garage Area
Allowed: One Allowed: 720 sq. ft.
Proposed/Existing: Two Proposed: 1128 sq. ft.
Excess: One Excess: 408 sq. ft.
The property is located on the west side of Flamingo (19335), between Gable and
Haldane, Lot No. 007-99-0138-000, RUF-A Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection
Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 2.10(5) “Definition of Miscellaneous
Terms; Garage, Private” and 18.24, “Residential Accessory Building,” be granted for
the following reasons and findings of fact:
1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the layout of the property, its
large size and unique location.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 of 33 October 8, 2013
2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner
because they wouldn’t have the storage available to accommodate the
addition of another family member and their belongings.
3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because they have the support of the majority
of their neighbors.
4. The Board received seven (7) letters of approval and two (2) 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 it be built as presented to the Board.
2. That the variance is good for six months.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: Duggan, Sills, Pastor, McIntyre, Henzi
Nays: None.
Absent: Caramagno, McCue
Henzi: The variance is granted, you’ve got to build it as you presented it with the
materials that you presented here and the variance is good for six months, that doesn’t
mean it expires, it means you’ve got six months within which to build it.
Petitioner: (Sandra) What’s the process now?
Henzi: Just get with the Building Department.
Petitioner: (Sandra) Okay, thank you very much.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 17 of 33 October 8, 2013
APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-51: Scott Morgan, on the south side of West Chicago
(35809), between Richland and Midland, seeking to erect a cover over an existing front
porch resulting in deficient front yard setback.
Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case?
Banko: I have nothing to add at this time.
Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Good evening.
Petitioner: Good evening. My name is Scott Morgan, I live at 35809 West Chicago
Street, Livonia. I have applied for a variance to build a reverse gable on the front of my
house. The reason I requested this is we have a current overhang that does not
completely cover the front porch area and over the past seventeen years or so that I’ve
lived there, we’ve had erosion of the brick and I’ve had to have the porch pumped up
because it had --- I’m sorry, not the porch, the front walkway area, because the wind
and the rain come down and it’s turned into a slip hazard. We are --- it’s time to have
the roof done, and while we’re doing that we feel the need to have a reverse gable to
cover that porch. Unfortunately, I have to apply for this variance because I would be
going about one and a half to two feet over what the current overhang is and that’s why
I’m here today. I’ve brought some photos, also I know you have the building permits, I
also brought some photos of the front of my house showing my neighbor’s front porch
with the overhang that exceeds quite a distance over where my home is. And I have
also forwarded a photo there that shows the erosion of my front porch, the damage that
the wind and rain has caused and I’d like to keep that off for safety reasons.
Henzi: Are you going to match the shingles to the roof when you re-roof?
Petitioner: We are actually going to replace the entire roof, house and garage, ,and
that’s why we wanted to have this done all at one time so we don’t have a mismatched
colored roof, we’d like it to also be more esthetically pleasing to the neighborhood and
bring up the property values, we definitely don’t want to bring those down anymore.
Henzi: The same for the roof vents and siding?
Petitioner: That is correct. All of them will not necessarily be one color but we will have
matching colors and something that would be pleasing to the eye.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 18 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: Thanks. Any questions? Just give us a second to look at the photos. Your
neighbor had their covered front porch redone since you’ve lived there?
Petitioner: Yes. I believe that was built --- both of us, we had to change the front of
them since the homes were built, I knew the previous owners and I believe the house
was built in 1958 and there hasn’t been any structural changes to the front of the
residence, mine or my neighbor’s.
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 up. Seeing no one coming forward,
are there letters?
McIntyre: Yes, there are. Approval, (letter read), Janet Mathieu, 35810 W. Chicago.
Approval, (letter read), Marcy C. Wilhelm, 35818 W. Chicago. Objection, (letter read),
David Spender, 35851 West Chicago. Approval, (letter read), Frank R. Baron, 35824
W. Chicago. Approval, (letter read), William Schager, 35832 W. Chicago. Approval,
(letter read), Tracy Stewart, 35801 W. Chicago.
Henzi: Mr. Morgan, anything you’d like to say in closing?
Petitioner: Just I’d appreciate the approval, if possible. I just want to bring the property
values and maintain our house appropriately.
Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s
comments with Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: Yes, this is a small approval and there’s a porch right across the street, I
assume this will be very similar to so I have no objections to approve this at all.
Henzi: Mr. Duggan.
Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I think it will be an improvement to your property, I
think you need it and I think everyone should have a cover on a porch so I will be in
support.
Henzi: Mr. Sills.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 19 of 33 October 8, 2013
Sills: You don’t intend on expanding the porch at all, do you?
Petitioner: I don’t, sir. We want to make the peak, the reverse gable symmetrical and
also center it directly on the middle of the house so we have the proper pitch and then
we’re going to put the proper drainage so the water will go away from the house.
Sills: You don’t have any intention on enclosing this porch?
Petitioner: No, sir, no.
Sills: I think you’ve got a very nice neighborhood and I think that what you’re asking is
not unreasonable and I will be in full support.
Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: Absolutely, no objections, I think it’s great when people want to do things to
improve their home and will also add to the esthetics of what is really a beautiful street
in Livonia there. There are many other covered porches very similar to yours and I think
in every case it will only enhance the utility of the residence and the attractiveness of
the residence and makes a nicer place for you to live in and improves the neighborhood
so I will be in full support.
Banko: Just as a point of interest to the Petitioner, from looking at the one picture of the
porch, I would just upon your approval make sure there is a footing underneath that
slab. When I’m looking at the picture, it’s hard to tell whether there is or is not and I
mean and that’s for building purposes more than anything else.
Petitioner: Okay, thank you very much.
Henzi: It’s important because when it gets inspected you want to make sure it’s got the
footing in place beforehand rather than after the fact.
Petitioner: Absolutely.
Henzi: And I, too, will support. I think it’s great. I think it’s a good looking plan. So the
floor is open for a motion.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 of 33 October 8, 2013
Upon motion by McIntyre, supported by Pastor, it was:
RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-51: Scott Morgan, 35809 W. Chicago,
seeking to erect a cover over an existing front porch resulting in deficient front yard
setback.
Front Yard Setback
Required: 25 ft.
Proposed: 20 ft.
Deficient: 5 ft.
The property is located on the south side of W. Chicago, (35809), between Richland
and Minton, Lot No. 125-01-0327-000, R-1 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection
Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 4.05 “Schedule of Minimum Front
and Rear Yard Requirements in R-1 through R-5 Districts,” be granted for the
following reasons and findings of fact:
1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the nature of the home and
the where the property line is located.
2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner
because he would continue to sustain damages from water run off.
3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because there are many similar homes in the
neighborhood with covered porches and deficient setbacks and it would
improve the esthetics of the neighborhood.
4. The Board received five (5) letters of approval and one (1) 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 it be constructed as described.
2. That proper footings are in place.
3. That it not be enclosed.
4. That the variance is good for 120 days.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: McIntyre, Pastor, Sills, Duggan, Henzi
Nays: None.
Absent: Caramagno, McCue
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: The variance is granted with the following conditions, that it be built as
presented and as described, you have to have the footing which is something you have
to do anyway to get the permit, you’ve got to complete it within 120 days and you can’t
enclose it.
Petitioner: Thank you very much.
Henzi: Good luck.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 22 of 33 October 8, 2013
APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-52: Christopher Andrus, on the east side of Parkville
(19462), between St. Martins and Vassar, seeking to erect a covered front porch
resulting in deficient front yard setback.
Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case?
Banko: Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Hearing none, good evening.
Petitioner: Good evening.
Henzi; Could you tell us your name and address?
Petitioner: Chris Andrus, 19462 Parkville Street.
Henzi: Mr. Andrus, can you tell us about why you want the covered porch?
Petitioner: Yes. I have a statement to read, it’s easier I think. My name is Chris
Andrus, I am the homeowner of 19642 Parkville Street and an 18-year resident of
Livonia. I am asking for the variance to replace my existing front porch with a larger
porch, and put a roof over it for the following reasons:
1. I was unaware that the front 5 feet of my house is nonconforming. If it was
nonconforming at the time I bought the house 18 years ago, I probably would have
chosen to move somewhere else. Now that I have lived here in Livonia I would prefer to
improve my home rather than move.
2. Having decided to stay, I want to improve the safety and accessibility of the
entryway to my home.
As shown in Drawing 1, which depicts my front porch and the arc of the storm door
when it opens, to let someone into the house they are required to either step to the
edge of my porch (unsafe), or to step back down the step off the porch (inconvenient
and possibly unsafe). Certainly no more than one person at a time can be on my porch
when I open the door. The issue became even clearer to me a few years ago when my
94-year old mother, who has since passed away, was required to use either a walker or
sit in a small wheelchair. When she was brought to my house she had to wait on the
walkway in front of the porch until the front door could be held open and she was either
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 of 33 October 8, 2013
assisted up the stair onto the porch or carried in her wheelchair onto the porch and into
the house.
I want my visitors to be able to wait on a covered porch, protected from the snow, ice
and rain, and for those who need assistance, to have the room to assist them up and
down the steps. This is also the reason why the proposed porch design has two wider
steps leading up the porch instead of one, and the addition of a handrail.
My older siblings, two of whom are in their 70’s, have health and mobility issues which
make going up and down steps difficult. I want to ease their and anyone
else’s,accessibility issues to my house.
While it isn’t an issue in front of this Board, improving the accessibility to my front door
is also the reason I am adding a sidewalk down the length of my driveway, so that when
multiple cars are parked in the drive, visitors are not possibly forced to walk onto the
lawn, especially a snow covered lawn in the winter.
3. I believe that a deeper, wider, covered porch would improve the look of the
house, and in return, the look of the neighborhood.
4. My porch does have snow and ice damage, which has to be repaired, possibly
to the point where it would be necessary to have a variance just to repair it.
Putting a roof over the porch would help prevent future damage, but I don’t
believe that a roof over a small porch would be as pleasing to those looking at
the house as it does a larger porch, and the safety issue of stepping off the
porch would still exist.
The difference between the existing porch and the proposed porch, in regard to the
nonconformance, is only two feet closer to the street. Drawing 2 shows the existing
porch overlapped with the proposed porch (the existing step is hidden for clarity). The
proposed porch won’t be detrimental or detract from the feel of the neighborhood. I
think it will enhance it.
If the purpose of the zoning is to keep the feel of a rural or suburban area, I think the
view from my house, looking at the back end of an office building’s parking lot, partially
enclosed by a 6-foot high brick wall, is more detracting than the extra two feet I’m
asking for. The three pictures on the sheet show the view from my house towards my
neighbor across the street, a closer view of the parking lot wall, which extends half a
block, and the view back towards my house. From the pictures I’ve given you, I think
you can tell that the wall goes right to that property’s right-of-way. It’s a lot of wall. Far
more obtrusive than a porch that will still be 40 feet away from the right of way and
about another ten feet or more from the street itself.
That’s all I’ve got. I thank you for your time.
Henzi: Any questions?
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 24 of 33 October 8, 2013
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: Do you ever plan on enclosing this porch?
Petitioner: No.
Pastor: Are you going to put any power or lights on it?
Petitioner: I have a porch light and I’m thinking about putting in ceiling lights eventually
in there.
Pastor: Okay. That’s all I have.
Henzi: I thought I saw in your drawing you’re going to match the shingles?
Petitioner: I’m redoing the whole roof actually. Upgrading the shingles.
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. No one coming forward, are
there any letters?
McIntyre: Yes. Approval, (letter read), Margaret Couch, 19443 Weyher.
Henzi: Mr. Andrus, is there anything you’d like to say in closing?
Petitioner: I think I’ve said it all, that’s the purpose of having it written down.
Henzi: Thank you. I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s
comments with Mr. Duggan.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 of 33 October 8, 2013
Duggan: I will be in support. I think it is definitely an upgrade, especially since your
neighbor directly next to you has the same porch or a very similar concept. I think it’s
definitely an upgrade and I will absolutely be in support.
Petitioner: Thank you.
Henzi: Mr. Sills.
Sills: I will also be in support. I’m glad that you’re expanding the porch and you’ve
stated some good reasons for expanding the porch and covering and I will be in full
support.
Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: Full support, very nice job on your preparation and you taking the time to lay
out all of the reasons for exactly what you’re doing. I think anything to allow somebody
to stay in the city, improve the house, improve the neighborhood and just make it a
house that will be even more useful for you and whoever lives there, I will be in full
support.
Petitioner: Thank you.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: Yes, I’ll be in support.
Henzi: I, too, will support it. I think the deficiency is minimal and you’ve already got a
nonconformity. I’d like to thank you for your preparation. You articulated many reasons
of why this is going to improve your quality of life and also enhance the neighborhood, I
think you stated your reasons very well, I wish all petitioners were as well prepared as
you were quite frankly. And I’d just say thanks, I think you’re going to make your street
look a lot nicer.
Petitioner: Thank you.
Henzi: So the floor is open for a motion.
Upon motion by Duggan, supported by Sills, it was:
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 of 33 October 8, 2013
RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-52: Christopher Andrus, 19462 Parkville,
seeking to erect a covered front porch resulting in deficient front yard setback. The
existing home is nonconforming based on its existing front yard setback of 45.1 feet,
where 50 feet is required.
Front Yard Setback
Required: 50. ft.
Proposed: 39.1 ft.
Deficient: 10.9 ft.
The property is located on the east side of Parkville (19462), between St. Martins and
Vassar, Lot No. 003-01-0407-003, RUF Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection
Department under Zoning Ordinance 543, Section 5.05 “RUF District Regulations -
Front Yard,” be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact:
1. The uniqueness requirement is met because the Petitioner’s house has a
nonconforming setback currently.
2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner
because it would deny safe ingress and egress into the home for himself and
his guests.
3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because many homes in the neighborhood
have similar porches.
4. The Board received one (1) 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 it be constructed as presented to the Board.
2. That it not be enclosed.
3. That the variance is good for five months.
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: Duggan, Sills, Pastor, McIntyre, Henzi
Nays: None.
Absent: Caramagno, McCue.
Henzi: You’ve got to build it as you presented it, you’ve got five months within which to
complete it and you can’t enclose it.
Petitioner: Thank you.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 27 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: Good luck.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 of 33 October 8, 2013
APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-53: Justin Reohr, on the west side of Riverside (14893),
between Henry and Lyndon, seeking to erect a 6-foot tall privacy fence upon the side
street lot line of a corner lot resulting in excess fence height.
Henzi: Mr. Banko, anything to add to this case?
Banko: Not at this time, sir.
Henzi: Any questions for Mr. Banko? Go ahead, Mr. Reohr.
Petitioner: My name is Justin Reohr, I live at 14893 Riverside. I’m requesting a privacy
fence along my backyard six feet high. The reason for this fence is we just got a new
dog and we want to contain the dog within the yard and as far as getting a fence we’d
like a six foot high privacy fence to provide privacy, we’re on a corner lot and anyone
coming down Henry can see in our backyard, through the windows and on our deck.
The privacy fence is going to come down at the corner of the house to the sidewalk
which creates no visual distractions from cars, people walking on the sidewalk, that’s all
I have.
Henzi: Any questions for the Petitioner?
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: I’m looking at your photos, and it appears that you have chain link fence on the
north side of your house and in the back of your house.
Petitioner: Yes, I do.
Pastor: You know you can’t put a fence on a fence, that chain link has to come down.
Petitioner: This proposal that we have on the sidewalk, the chain link fence is going to
stay as it is.
Pastor: I’ve got it.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 of 33 October 8, 2013
Henzi: Mr. Sills.
Sills: I notice that your neighbor in the rear has a privacy fence that is 5-feet high with
lattice, about a foot from the top, is there some reason you wouldn’t try to match that?
Petitioner: I guess there’s no reason but I wanted to go six feet high, not five feet high
because there’s that added privacy to the backyard and the lattice on the top, you can
kind of see through that.
Sills: Okay.
Henzi: Any other questions?
Pastor: Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: How far off the sidewalk are you proposing to put this fence?
Petitioner: It’s the same as all the other three neighbors on the other street, it’s about
maybe six inches to a foot.
Pastor: Okay. Mr. Chair.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: Mr. Banko, is this yard considered a side yard?
Banko: Pardon me, I didn’t hear you.
Pastor: The location of the fence, isn’t that considered a side yard?
Banko: Yes, a corner side yard but it would be same as any other corner. It would be a
side yard parallel with the house on a corner lot. But always remember that privacy
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 30 of 33 October 8, 2013
fences that we’ve dealt with are basically the same. The difference between this one
and some of the other ones we’ve dealt with, come up into the side yard where the
house is and basically this starts at the rear of the house.
Pastor: Okay, 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. Seeing no one coming forward,
can you read the letters.
McIntyre: An approval from Gayle Cassar, 14879 Riverside, (next door neighbor). An
approval, (letter read), from Amy Christena, 14813 Gary Lane. An approval, (letter
read), from Vivian Hutira at 14860 Riverside Drive. An approval from Ruth Robinson at
14837 Gary Lane, (letter read). An approval, (letter read), from Patrician Penman,
14931 Gary Lane. An approval from Denise Stein at 14882 Riverside. And an
approval, (letter read), from Kenneth Steinke at 14904 Riverside.
Henzi: I’ll close the public portion of the case and begin the Board’s comments with Mr.
Sills.
Sills: I could approve this petition, he’s got an awful lot of support from his neighbors,
the property is well taken care of and I like how they’re ending the fence at the rear of
the house.
Henzi: Mrs. McIntyre.
McIntyre: Full approval. I went by the house and I drove by and I looked at the site,
directly across the street is exactly the same fence. The house is very well taken care
of. This is consistent with the one across the street and many corner lots in that
neighborhood so I will be in support.
Henzi: Mr. Pastor.
Pastor: I guess I can approve this. Obviously there’s other fences similar to this. I’m
not a real big fan of so close to the sidewalk and what not, but I’ll go along with it.
Henzi: Mr. Duggan.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 31 of 33 October 8, 2013
Duggan: I, too, will be in support. I think all three of the houses right next to you have
privacy fences, don’t they, so I will be in support.
Henzi: I, too, will support the request for all the reasons that were stated so the floor is
open for a motion.
Upon motion by Duggan, supported by McIntyre, it was:
RESOLVED, APPEAL CASE NO. 2013-10-53: Justin Reohr, 14893 Riverside, seeking
to erect a 6-foot tall privacy fence upon the side street lot line, resulting in excess fence
height.
Fence Height
Allowed: 5 ft.
Proposed: 6 ft.
Excess: 1 ft.
The property is located on the west side of Riverside, (14893), between Henry and
Lyndon, Lot No. 082-06-0019-000, R-2 Zoning District. Rejected by the Inspection
Department under Fence Ordinance, Section 15.44.090A,4bii, “Residential District
Regulations,” be granted for the following reasons and findings of fact:
1. The uniqueness requirement is met because of the location of the property on
a corner lot.
2. Denial of the variance would have severe consequences for the Petitioner
because he would be denied privacy in his backyard.
3. The variance is fair in light of its effect on neighboring properties and in the
spirit of the Zoning Ordinance because of the overwhelming support of all of
his neighbors and there are other properties with privacy fences in his
neighborhood as well.
4. The Board received seven (7) 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 with the following conditions:
1. That it be built as presented to the Board.
2. That it align with the neighbor’s fence.
3. That the variance is good for five months.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 of 33 October 8, 2013
ROLL CALL VOTE:
Ayes: Duggan, McIntyre, Sills, Pastor, Henzi
Nays: None.
Absent: Caramagno, McCue.
Henzi: The variance is granted, I will list the conditions. You’ve got to build the house
as presented and then you’ve got five months within which to complete it and it must
aligned with the neighbor’s fence.
City of Livonia, Zoning Board of Appeals Page 33 of 33 October 8, 2013
Motion by Pastor, supported by McIntyre, to adjourn the meeting.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at
8:10 p.m.
_________________________
SAM CARAMAGNO, Secretary
_________________________
MATTHEW HENZI, Chairman
/bjm