MINUTES OF BOARD MEETING
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
BARTON HILLS VILLAGE
April 10, 2023
The meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was called to order by President Holmes at 6:00 PM at Walter Esch Hall.
ROLL CALL Present: Trustees Al-Awar, Conlin, Haitam, Hensinger, Holmes, Perry Popp and Smith. Absent: Trustee Darden.
Others attending: Zoning Admin. Capozza, Asst. Treas. Carey, Supt. Hnatow, Atty. Munzel, BHMC President David, two residents and five guests.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the March 13, 2023 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting were approved as printed. (Smith/Conlin/P)
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE 320 Juniper Lane (Alawi/Karim)
Trustee statement. Randolph Perry stated that although he had been employed by the Bodman law firm for 20 years, retiring in 2004, and that his name is still listed on the firm’s website, he has no contractual relationship with the firm. He does not believe he has any conflict of interest with the application to be reviewed and has not had any conversation or contact with the members of the Bodman firm concerning this application. The Trustees had no objection to Mr. Perry participating fully in the review.
Request. Variance was requested from BHV Zoning Ordinance Section 4.08 to construct a stairway/retaining wall in the front setback.
Introduction. Zoning Administrator Dennis Capozza summarized the variance application, noting that only the setback request would be reviewed and that the stairway/retaining wall elements require a wall permit/public hearing that has not been officially noticed and therefore must be reviewed at a future meeting. He described communications that have been sent to the applicant, adding that some requested information was just received today. Considerations in this review include opposition by the neighbors, questions about the feasibility of the proposal, difficulties in reaching resolution of issues, and the requirement of the Zoning Ordinance to be a minimal intrusion in the setback.
Applicant presentation. Project representative Charles Bultman and attorney Emily Palacios were present. Mr. Bultman’s presentation (attached to these minutesA) included:
–Project plans indicate that the original house renovation approved in July 2020 included approval of variances for the house, stairway portion, and retaining wall portion that were already in the front set back (new house constructed on the footprint of the original house/variance approved for continuing non-conforming structure).
–The original stairway was located parallel to the road and included retainment of the hillside. Some portions of the original retaining wall still exist and other portions were destroyed during the house construction.
–While the plans approved in 2020 called for the new stairway to run perpendicular to the road and against the side of the house, once the construction was done the owner felt the stairway was too close to the lower level door and the space felt confining. The variance request would accommodate the change in plans that the owner wants to make.
–The specific variance request is to allow additional encroachment in the front setback of an area about 20 square feet. This would allow the stairway to be placed in the same location as the original stairway, parallel to the road.
–Photos of the original house were shown (attached to these minutesB), as were multi-layer drawings of the proposed stairway with the original stairway superimposed.
–The site plan of the entire lot illustrated that the continuing non-conforming lot is about 1/3 of an acre, with a substantial portion consisting of steep slope to Barton Pond. Given the footprint of the house, the septic field, and the reserve field, options for other elements are very limited.
–Regardless of which way the stairway is oriented, a retaining wall parallel to the road is still needed. The proposed design was presented as more suitable, with one wall of the stairway also serving as the retaining wall.
–Drainage and erosion issues with the slope along the road and the retaining wall are also factors in the design.
–The options proposed by the architect hired by the neighbor across the street have issues with safety, drainage and view intrusion that do not make them more suitable than what the applicant is requesting.
Public Hearing. The public hearing was convened at 6:29 PM.
Persons of interest (owners of property within 300’).
–Walter and Victoria Power, 321 Juniper Lane. Mrs. Power was present, along with her attorney Harvey Berman, and architect Brian Bagnick of Hobbs + Black. Mr. Bagnick commented on his designs submitted on behalf of the Powers as suitable alternatives to moving the stairway that would not involve additional encroachment in the front set back (attached to these minutes C). He also questioned the feasibility of the applicant’s plans. Mr. Berman commented on the history of the project review and the threat the project presents to the Powers’ historic view of Barton Pond (written commentD and photosE attached to these minutes). He contended that the application was not complete and that the procedures/provisions of the Barton Hills Village Zoning Ordinance were not being followed. Mr. Berman cited Section 10.03 E(2) of the Ordinance, stating that there were no exceptional characteristics of the property that warranted the proposed change, that there were personal preferences by the current owner in play and that the proposal was harmful to the property values, comfort and welfare of the Powers and all the neighbors on the Lane. Since there were other viable options, and the Powers were extremely opposed, the variance should not be granted.
It was noted by the Trustees that the design of the wall was not included in this review, only the additional encroachment into the front setback. Further, there is no provision in the Zoning Ordinance for specific protection of views.
–Mrs. Power spoke, describing her distress when the unauthorized concrete block was erected that significantly filled her view. She stated her willingness to negotiate but felt she had not been included in discussions/emails, and that the proposed stairway railing and retaining wall would permanently harm her view.
Other Public Comment
–Jeff David, President of the Barton Hills Maintenance Corporation, stated that the Board of Directors of the corporation has been part of this project review since the beginning, and has participated in recent discussions with all involved. He felt the two neighbors were not that far apart in their positions and encouraged continued efforts to come to a suitable resolution.
Applicant Rebuttal Ms. Palacios received confirmation to her question that if the variance were granted, it would be done by reference to the Zoning Ordinance standards. She contended that the proposed change was consistent with the neighborhood and more like the original house/design. It was a small extension of the historic encroachment and would be keeping the status quo/preserving the neighbor’s view. Once the owners had experienced the exterior spaces created when the house was actually constructed, they made an informed decision to return to the original stairway location. Mr. Bultman added that the original stairway shown in the photos had a railing that was 66% opaque, compared to the proposed 30% opaque railing, with
4 ½” spaces between rails rather than the original 2” spaces.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:35 PM.
Board Discussion.
Trustee comments included:
–This request for a new variance is not a greater encroachment in the front setback than the setback variance approved in 2020. The original stairway was completely in the front setback; the proposed stairway now would only encroach partially.
–The Zoning Ordinance does not provide view protection, only the ability to consider the view, which is being done in this case.
–There is minimal impact on the view. The concrete block walls being overbuilt was an error that has been corrected.
–The stairway/retaining walls are not relevant to this variance request, which only pertains to the setback encroachment. There will be a subsequent, separate review of the stairway/retaining walls by the Board of Trustees for a wall permit.
Findings regarding the standards of Zoning Ordinance Section 10.03 E (2) were:
- There are exceptional characteristics of the property that would make compliance with the dimensional requirements substantially more difficult than would be the case for the great majority of properties in the same district.
–The lot is only 1/3 acre in size.
–A substantial portion of the lot is steep slope to the waterfront.
–Location of the septic field and the required reserve septic field are set by the
Washtenaw County Environmental Health Department.
–There is very little other available space on the property to work with.
- Not applicable. There is no other location involved.
- Lot size and topography are not personal in nature.
- The lot size and topography were not created by the owner or previous owner.
- View impairment is minimal, and no evidence has been submitted concerning impairment that would unreasonably diminish property values.
Motion Request for variance from Section 4.08 of the Barton Hills Village Zoning Ordinance to allow construction in the front setback was approved, based on the drawings identified as page 3A and page 12 in the submitted application, and with the understanding that approval is only for the setback encroachment and no approval is given for a stairway, retaining walls, or other constructed elements, as these require a separate review and permit. (Perry/Al-Awar/P with Al-Awar, Conlin, Hensinger, Holmes, Perry, Popp and Smith voting yes; Haitam voting no)
There being no further business or objections, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 PM.
Janice K. Esch, Deputy Clerk
Approved 5.8.2023