GEORGETOWN CHARTER TOWNSHIP

BUILDING/ZONING DEPARTMENT

1515 Baldwin Street

PO Box 769

Jenison, MI 49429-0769

616-457-2690

 

01/05/2007

 

Jack Holsem

505 Jackson St. 

Grandville, MI  49418-9504

 

RE:     Construction of an accessory building at 505 Jackson St. P.P. # 70-14-36-300-022,

zoning district: RR

 

Dear Jack,

 

After the meeting we had at the Township office on Friday, January 05, 2007 at 11:00 a.m., I conducted more research and consulted with other Township officials regarding the question of whether the proposed accessory building with a barn-like design was architecturally similar to the existing structure at the above noted property.

 

Findings.

1.                  On December 20, 2006, a building permit application for an accessory building was submitted to the Township for the above noted property.

2.                  The application was for a 1500 square foot accessory building which was to be used for general storage purposes.

3.                  Along with a single family house, an additional agricultural building is located on the site for uses related to the keeping of horses.  (The ordinance permits an agricultural use in the RR district with an approved special use permit; however, the use is non-conforming since it has been in existence for many years without an approved special use permit.)

4.                  Beginning October 2006 Henry Kamps, Kamps Construction LLC, and you began regularly contacting the Township office regarding information to construct an accessory building at the above noted property.

5.                  Copies of the Township ordinances relating to accessory buildings, specifically Sec. 3.4, were provided which detail ordinance requirements for the construction of an accessory building.

6.                  Specifically, Sec. 3.4 states: “Any accessory building with an area greater than 120 square feet shall be permanently constructed on a concrete foundation and shall conform to all applicable building and other similar codes for such a structure.  The architectural character of all such buildings (excluding buildings accessory to agricultural operations in the AG or RR districts) shall be compatible with and similar to the principle building with respect to materials, scale, design, and aesthetic quality, as determined by the zoning administrator.”

7.                  As was explained to you and your representatives both in person, on the phone and in a letter dated January 3, 2007, the accessory building as proposed in the building permit application does not meet the requirement of being architecturally similar to the main structure with respect to materials, scale, design and aesthetic quality since the proposed building is shown as a barn-like style which is a totally different design including roof lines from the design of the existing house.

8.                  Your proposal to add a very small cupola to the roof of the barn-like building and to add a decorative shield to the face of the barn-like building does not sufficiently change the design of the barn-like structure to be considered architecturally similar to the main structure, in my determination.

 

In conclusion.

Since the Zoning Ordinance gives the zoning administrator the responsibility to determine if a proposed structure is architecturally similar to the main structure, I am making the determination that the barn-like structure as proposed in the building permit application dated December 20, 2006 is NOT architecturally similar to the principle structure at the above noted property since the lines, roof and overall design are totally different. 

 

The proposal to add a decorative shield to the front face of the proposed building and to add a small cupola to the roof of the proposed building does not sufficiently change the design and/or lines to warrant the determination that the proposal is similar to the principle building.  

 

A Zoning Compliance Certificate will NOT be issued for the application as proposed and the building permit application will NOT be forwarded to Professional Code Inspections for Building Code review and issuance of a building permit.

 

Several options exist for this situation.

1.                  The building permit application could be withdrawn.

2.                  The Zoning Compliance Certificate could be denied by the Township, which would automatically stop all dealings with this permit application.

3.                  New drawings could be submitted with a proposed structure that is architecturally similar to the existing building.  (In other words, build an accessory building that looks similar in design and lines including roof line to the main structure).

4.                  A variance to construct a barn-like structure that is NOT architecturally similar in design to the main structure could be sought.

5.                  Appeals by any person aggrieved by the ruling of the zoning administrator could be taken to the ZBA.  (In other words, you have the opportunity to appeal my determination to the ZBA and ask that they make the determination that the building you proposed is, in fact, architecturally similar to the main structure.)

 

In summary.

I understand that you are ready to begin construction at this time and are simply waiting for a building permit to be issued.  However, the ordinance requirements were made known to you and your representatives back in October 2006.  Regardless of that fact, no one at the Township office has the authority to approve a Zoning Compliance Certificate for a building permit application when the proposed construction has been determined to not comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 

 

It is evident that there are unique circumstances since the existing house has an architecturally unusual design.  It also makes sense why you would not want to construct an accessory building that looks like the house.  Further, in my determination, an accessory building with a barn-like design would be compatible with and similar to other such structures in the neighborhood.  I agree that the proposed structure with a barn-type design would be well-suited to the site and the neighborhood even though the design is not similar to the principle structure. 

 

Unfortunately, I am compelled as zoning administrator to uphold the requirements of the ordinance and to make determinations that I believe in good faith are correct according to the ordinance and consistent with past determinations.  Therefore, I make the determination that the barn-style structure is not architecturally similar to the principle building regardless of whether or not I agree that it would be an acceptable structure on the site and in the neighborhood. 

 

With just such unusual or unique circumstances in mind, the Township made it possible to vary from the requirements of the ordinance when such a variance is reviewed and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals.  In fact, the ZBA is the ONLY body (other than a higher court) that has the authority to waive the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, regardless of whether or not Township officials agree that the situation would be best served if the applicant was not held to the ordinance requirements.

 

It appears as though your proposal would make a good case for a variance request since there are unusual and unique circumstances based on the design of the house, and the proposed barn-like accessory building would seem to fit the rural residential area and not be detrimental to the neighborhood.  The ordinance requires that a proposal meet seven standards in order for a variance to be granted.  While I have no authority to guarantee that a variance would be granted and I make no such statement, it appears to me that you may meet these standards since there are unique circumstances pertaining to your property.

 

Your building permit application and check will be held at the Township office while you make a determination as to how you want to proceed.  Again, your options include withdrawing the request, submitting drawings that are architecturally similar to the principle building (look like your house), appealing my determination that the proposal is not architecturally similar to the principle structure, or applying for a variance.  Unless you would like to pursue scheduling a special Zoning Board of Appeals meeting (cost is $600 plus the variance application fee of $300), the next scheduled ZBA meeting is February 28, 2007.  The deadline is noon on February 7, 2007 and a pre-application meeting would have to be held at least five business days prior to the deadline date.

 

If you have any further questions, please contact me at 457-2690 ext. 243.  However, please keep in mind that unless the design of the structure is changed to be architecturally similar to the principle building (in other words to look like the house), the determination I made that the barn-style structure is NOT architecturally similar to the principle building will not change, even with the addition of decorative features or a small cupola.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Mannette Minier

Zoning Administrator

 

cc:        Henry Kamps, Kamps Construction LLC, 306 Ransom, Grandville, MI  49418