ZBA minutes 6-28-06

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE GEORGETOWN CHARTER TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD JUNE 28, 2006

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Daniel Lennington.

Members Present: John Fanthorpe, Greg Honderd, Joyce Weise, Daniel Lennington and

Carl DeVree

Members Absent: none

Others Present: Mannette Minier, Secretary and Zoning Administrator, and the applicants

#060628-01 - Approval of the minutes

The minutes of the regular meeting held on May 24, 2006 meeting were presented.

Moved by Joyce Weise, seconded by Greg Honderd, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held on May 24, 2006, as presented.

MOTION CARRIED.

#060628-02 – (VAR0609)

Chase Bank (Icon Identity Solutions), 1418 Elmhurst Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL, is requesting to have a freestanding sign located 48 feet from the centerline of Baldwin, a variance of 12 feet from the 60 feet required in Sec. 25.6(B)(2), in a (OS) Office Service Commercial district, on a parcel of land described as P.P.# 70-14-13-175-007, located at 615 Baldwin, Georgetown Township, Ottawa County, Michigan.

Kurt Kunkle, Icon Identity Solutions, represented the applicant and presented the request.

The zoning administrator presented a review as follows.

The request is to reface an existing sign for Chase Bank located at the northeast corner of Baldwin and Thomas St. The sign and bank building have been in existence for many years and both were undoubtedly constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance that requires the extra distance for setbacks on Baldwin. The sign does not extend over the right-of-way on Thomas because it is several feet back from the sidewalk on Thomas. The sign is located on a small piece of grassy area at the corner of the site and could not be moved to the north to increase the setback because a light pole is situated immediately to the north and to the north of the light pole is the entrance driveway to the bank site. There is no other place on the site for the pole sign unless it was to be located in the parking lot. A similar variance was granted for Dr. Dadd’s Dentistry to the west of the site in February 2006 (minutes from the February ZBA meeting are attached). The sign is proposed to be approximately 71.5 square feet which is slightly less than the 75 square feet permitted in the ordinance. No variance was requested for height and the maximum height allowed is 25 feet.

Variance standards in Sec. 28.11(C) are required to be met in order for a variance to be granted. The standards that have objectively been met are noted with an “X” in the “yes” column and the standards that have objectively not been met are noted with an “X in the “no” column. The ZBA should determine if they concur with this determination.

Variance ID

VAR0609

Applicant

Chase Bank

Address

615 Baldwin

Request

Freestanding sign located 48 ft. from CL of Baldwin, variance of 12 ft. from 60 ft.

Date

June 8, 2006

#	YES	NO	CONDITIONS (Chapter 28.11-C)
1	X		Granting the variance(s) will be in the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed.
2	X		Granting the variance shall not permit the establishment within a district of any use which is prohibited, nor shall any use variances be granted.
3	X		That there are practical difficulties in complying with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance resulting form exceptional, extraordinary, or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question, that do not generally apply to other property or uses in the vicinity in the same zoning district; and have not resulted from the adoption of this Ordinance.
4	X		That the granting of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity; or, that the application of conditions of an approved variance will eliminate or sufficiently mitigate potential detrimental impacts.
5	X		That granting such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district.
6	X		That granting such variance will not cause any existing non-conforming use, structure, or condition to be increased or perpetuated, contrary to the provisions of Chapter 27 of this Ordinance, except in accordance with Section 27.12.
7	X		That the variance is not necessitated as a result of any action or inaction of the applicant.

Findings.

The determination can be made that all the standards have been met for the request. The ZBA should discuss those findings and determine if they agree with the determinations. The following is provided for information and discussion.

Standard #1 - Granting the variance will be in the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed.

Met. The spirit of the ordinance is to provide setbacks for structures and buildings to provide for any future widening of Baldwin. The bank building and sign were constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance requiring the extra distances on the roads identified in Chapter 24 footnote b. The ordinance recognizes that businesses should be allowed to have both a freestanding sign and wall sign. With the pre-existing situations, it would be difficult to meet the setback for the sign since a light pole is located immediately to the north of the sign and the driveway is located to the north of the light pole. See the attached pictures.

Standard #2 - Granting the variance shall not permit the establishment within a district of any use, which is prohibited, nor shall any use variances be granted.

Met. The use would continue to be the same.

Standard #3 - That there are practical difficulties in complying with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance resulting from exceptional, extraordinary, or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question, that do not generally apply to other property or uses in the vicinity in the same zoning district; and have not resulted from the adoption of this Ordinance.

Met. The unique circumstances of the property are the fact that this site, both the building and the sign, were constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance requiring the extra distances for setbacks. In addition, there is no landscaped front yard area and has not been for many years. If the sign were to be located in the correct location, it would either be in the center of the parking lot or in the driveway entrance.

Standard #4 - That the granting of such variances will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity; or, that the application of conditions of an approved variance will eliminate or sufficiently mitigate potential detrimental impacts.

Met. It does not appear that granting the variance would be a substantial detriment to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity due to the fact that other businesses in the area have legal non-conforming signs located in nearly the same locations. In addition, the sign has been at this location for many years without being detrimental to the vicinity.

Standard #5 - That granting such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district.

Met. Other properties in the vicinity have varying setbacks, some closer to the road and some farther away. In every instance possible, signs are required to be located in a spot that meets ordinance requirements. Those that do not would have to obtain a variance. The business has a right to have a sign. Other variances have been granted for signs for existing businesses on Baldwin, including for Dr. Dadd’s dentistry which is the site to the west of the bank (see the minutes after the pictures).

Standard #6 - That granting such variance will not cause any existing non-conforming use, structure, or condition to be increased or perpetuated, contrary to the provisions of Chapter 27 of this Ordinance, except in accordance in Section 27.12.

Met. The site has several non-conforming issues. The existing parking in the row adjacent to Baldwin is located entirely within the front setback area that is required to be landscaped and not used for parking, loading or accessory structures. The sign, of course, is located too close to the centerline of Baldwin. By granting the variance, the sign could continue to exist in its non-conforming location. No non-conforming situation would be increased.

Standard #7 - That the variance is not necessitated as a result of any action or inaction of the applicant.

Met. Bank One has changed to Chase Bank at all locations. Due to the fact that the bank has changed, the sign must also change.

Discussion

Minutes from the meeting when a similar variance was approved for a sign location for an existing business structure on Baldwin have been provided after the pictures. In addition, similar variances were granted for Strikers on Baldwin, Dr. Powell’s Dentist on Baldwin, for BP Gas Station on the corner of Port Sheldon and 28^th Ave., and for the (former) Red Tomato Restaurant at 450 Baldwin. The situation of non-conforming signs for existing businesses along Baldwin and the changing of these non-conforming signs has been an on-going situation with the Township. In all instances possible, the signs are required to meet ordinance requirements. However, it is sometimes difficult with those sites that were constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance that requires the extra setbacks. It is recognized that these businesses have a right to have a sign to identify the site. It appears as though this is an instance where the ordinance provided for relief from the ZBA.

The zoning administrator stated that the variance request was only for the location of the sign, not the area of the sign. Therefore, the maximum square footage of the sign could be 75 square feet. The applicant indicated that the sign would be 72 square feet. The zoning administrator stated that the ZBA has granted variances similar to this in the past for exiting sites that had no other places for the sign to be located.

The chairman opened the public hearing. No one was present to speak on this topic. The chairman closed the public hearing.

Moved by John Fanthorpe, seconded by Carl DeVree, to approve variance (VAR0609) Chase Bank (Icon Identity Solutions), 1418 Elmhurst Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL, to have a freestanding sign located 48 feet from the centerline of Baldwin, a variance of 12 feet from the 60 feet required in Sec. 25.6(B)(2), in a (OS) Office Service Commercial district, on a parcel of land described as P.P.# 70-14-13-175-007, located at 615 Baldwin, Georgetown Township, Ottawa County, Michigan, for the following reasons:

1. This is a site and structure that has existed prior to the adoption of ordinances which affect setbacks and the location of the sign.

2. At least five other variances were granted for freestanding pole sign along the portion of Baldwin that has already been widened to five lanes, including the Dr. Dadd’s Dentistry located just west of this site.

3. The standards of the ordinance have been met.

4. The variance will be in the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of the ordinance is observed because the sign was presumed to be pre-existing prior to the adoption of the ordinance that required the new location and prior to the widening of Baldwin. It was not their fault that the road was widened and that the ordinance was adopted. It is presumed to have been conforming at the time it was erected and became non-conforming by action taken by the Township.

5. There are practical difficulties in complying with the standards of the ordinance because the relocation of the sign would place it in the middle of a parking lot or driveway.

6. The sign has existed in this location without being detrimental.

7. Granting the variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right because signs are very important to the business. Other business signs in the area are nonconforming as well, and are located the same distance from the centerline of Baldwin.

8. It was not action of the applicant that required the variance, but rather the action of the Township by adopting the ordinance requiring the extra distance and the Road Commission for widening the street.

and with the following conditions:

1. The applicant would incur all expenses relating to relocating the sign if it ever should have to be moved in the future due to any further road widening.

2. The only sign permitted by the variance is a pole mounted sign because a ground mounted sign is required to be located at least an additional 15 feet back from the centerline of Baldwin. If a ground mounted sign is ever erected on the property, it must meet ordinance requirements.

3. The applicant obtains a sign permit for this and any further sign changes and would meet the ordinance in every other regard except for elements approved by the ZBA.

MOTION CARRIED.

The chairman directed that the similar previously granted variances for sign location on the major streets that have the extra distance for setbacks be included in the minutes as follows:

(VAR0603) Dr. Mitch Dadd, 657 Baldwin;
(VAR9801) Strikers, 3003/305 Baldwin;
(VAR0137) Dr. Mark Powell, 2076 Baldwin;
(VAR0105) Ken and Sherri Meines for Red Tomato Restaurant, 428/450 Baldwin; and
(VAR0317) BP Gas, 2805 Port Sheldon.

#060628-03 – (VAR0610)

(VAR0610) Chase Bank (Icon Identity Solutions), 1418 Elmhurst Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL, is requesting to have a freestanding sign located 40 feet from the centerline of Cottonwood, a variance of 10 feet from the 50 feet required in Sec. 25.6(B)(2), in a (CS) Community Service Commercial district, on a parcel of land described as P.P.# 70-14-13-401-031, located at 7550 Cottonwood Dr., Georgetown Township, Ottawa County, Michigan.

Kurt Kunkle, Icon Identity Solutions, represented the applicant and presented the request.

The zoning administrator presented a review as follows.

The request is to reface an existing sign for Chase Bank located at the northeast corner of Cottonwood and Church St. The sign and bank building have been in existence for many years and both were undoubtedly constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance that requires the extra distance for setbacks on Baldwin. The sign does not extend over the right-of-way on Cottonwood because it is several feet back from the sidewalk on Church St. (The applicant was instructed to provide this exact dimension to the ZBA members so that it could be in the record.) The sign is located on a large landscaped area that extends at least ten feet further toward the building.

Unlike the previous variance request, there does appear to be ample opportunity for the sign to be moved to the east to conform to the setback requirement. See the attached pictures. The sign is proposed to be approximately 71.5 square feet which is slightly less than the 75 square feet permitted in the ordinance. No variance was requested for height and the maximum height allowed is 25 feet.

Variance ID

VAR0610

Applicant

Chase Bank

Address

7550 Cottonwood

Request

Freestanding sign located 40 ft. from CL of Baldwin, variance of 10 ft. from 50 ft.

Date

June 8, 2006

#	YES	NO	CONDITIONS (Chapter 28.11-C)
1		X	Granting the variance(s) will be in the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed.
2	X		Granting the variance shall not permit the establishment within a district of any use which is prohibited, nor shall any use variances be granted.
3		X	That there are practical difficulties in complying with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance resulting form exceptional, extraordinary, or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question, that do not generally apply to other property or uses in the vicinity in the same zoning district; and have not resulted from the adoption of this Ordinance.
4			That the granting of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity; or, that the application of conditions of an approved variance will eliminate or sufficiently mitigate potential detrimental impacts.
5		X	That granting such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district.
6	X		That granting such variance will not cause any existing non-conforming use, structure, or condition to be increased or perpetuated, contrary to the provisions of Chapter 27 of this Ordinance, except in accordance with Section 27.12.
7			That the variance is not necessitated as a result of any action or inaction of the applicant.

Findings.

The determination can be made that standards 2 and 6 are met and that standards 1, 3 and 5 are not met. The ZBA should discuss those findings and determine if they agree with the determinations. The ZBA should determine if standards 4 and 7 are met. The following is provided for information and discussion.

Standard #1 - Granting the variance will be in the public interest and will ensure that the spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed.

Not met. In the application, the applicant gives no reason other than the sign exists in the current location and does not pose any type of risk to the public. The spirit of the ordinance is to provide setbacks for structures and buildings to provide for any future widening of Cottonwood. While the bank building and sign were constructed prior to the adoption of the ordinance requiring the extra distances on the roads identified in Chapter 24 footnote b., ample opportunity exists for the sign to be moved to the east to a spot that meets the ordinance requirement. The ordinance recognizes that businesses should be allowed to have both a freestanding sign and wall sign. Even though this is a pre-existing situation, the sign could be moved to another location in the landscaped area to meet the ordinance. The site plan provided does not give a clear picture of the site as it exists. Refer to the attached pictures to view the large area that is available for the sign to be placed.

Standard #2 - Granting the variance shall not permit the establishment within a district of any use, which is prohibited, nor shall any use variances be granted.

Met. The use of a bank is permitted in the CS district.

Not met. There are no exceptional, extraordinary or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property that do not apply to other properties in the area. There are no practical difficulties relating to the property that prevent the applicant from complying with the ordinance.

The applicant answered the question by stating that if the sign were to be moved it would be placed behind a large pine tree. However, the opportunity exists to move the sign to a large area of grassed front yard to the north of the pine tree where the sign would meet the ordinance and be clearly visible. Please see the attached pictures.

The ZBA should determine if this standard is met. No reason was provided by the applicant for indicating that the additional signage would not be detrimental to the neighborhood other than a parking lot exists to the rear of the site. It does not appear as though the sign in the existing location is detrimental to the vicinity.

Standard #5 - That granting such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity in the same zoning district.

Not met. Most other properties in the vicinity have signs that meet the ordinance, such as the sign to the south for the business center.

Met. The site appears to be conforming.

Standard #7 - That the variance is not necessitated as a result of any action or inaction of the applicant.

Met. Bank One has changed to Chase Bank at all locations. Due to the fact that the bank has changed, the sign must also change.

Discussion

There appears to be no exceptional, extraordinary or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property that do not apply to other properties in the area other than the sign currently exists in the requested location. There are no practical difficulties relating to the property that prevent the applicant from complying with the ordinance. In fact, there appears to be a large landscaped area that provides ample opportunity for the sign to be located in a spot that meets the ordinance for setback requirements.

The chairman opened the public hearing. No one was present to speak on this topic. The chairman closed the public hearing.

Dan Lennington asked about the expenses related to moving the sign location.

The applicant stated that the expenses would include two to three hours for labor to change the face, one hour of labor to take the sign down, a call to Miss Dig to have utilities marked, the hole dug, concrete poured for a foundation, electricity ran, along with landscaping and grass issues.

Dan Lennington asked where the sign would have to be located to meet the ordinance and the applicant indicated on the picture on the screen. He asked if the line of sign would be better if the sign was moved to the north.

The applicant indicated that it would be better the more to the north it was located because there would be less impact from the pine trees and he stated that the sign could be located in a spot that meets the ordinance but it would cost more. The applicant stated that they did not want to make a mistake if they had to relocate the sign and cut into a utility line so they would have to contact Miss Dig.

Dan Lennington asked if the applicant was responsible to change all the signs in the area and the applicant indicated that he was changing 22 in the area. Dan Lennington asked if variances were being sought for other signs and was told by the applicant that he was not certain, but some were needed in the Southfield and Detroit areas. Dan Lennington asked about the applicant’s company and was told that he manufactures the signs and hires a subcontractor to install them. The applicant said that he obtained the permits.

Joyce Weise asked if there was a concrete footing and was told yes it was five to six feet deep.

Dan Lennington said that the applicant would be better off removing the pine tree since it was not an aesthetic asset to the site.

Joyce Weise said that they would gain visibility if they moved the sign up the hill.

Dan Lennington said that he drives by the site regularly and that the visibility issue was not a substantial hardship since there was opportunity to move it to the north for more visibility.

Moved by Carl DeVree, seconded by Joyce Weise, to deny the request Variance (VAR0610) Chase Bank (Icon Identity Solutions), 1418 Elmhurst Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL, to have a freestanding sign located 40 feet from the centerline of Cottonwood, a variance of 10 feet from the 50 feet required in Sec. 25.6(B)(2), in a (CS) Community Service Commercial district, on a parcel of land described as P.P.# 70-14-13-401-031, located at 7550 Cottonwood Dr., Georgetown Township, Ottawa County, Michigan, based on the findings that there are no exceptional, extraordinary or unique circumstances or conditions applying to the property, financial considerations are not consistent with the standards in the ordinance, and because standards 1, 3 and 5 in the ordinance are not met.

Dan Lennington said that the first variance application clearly met the standards because there was nowhere else the sign could be locate and there is opportunity to move the sign at this location. He said that this is a good example for the ZBA to review in the future for examples of signs with setback issues.

MOTION CARRIED.

#060628-04 - Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.