|
OCTOBER 17, 2006
6:30 p.m.
AGENDA
Call to Order:
Pledge of Allegiance:
Introduction:
Approval of Agenda:
Call to the Public: (Please Note: The Board will not begin
any new business after 10:00 p.m.)
1. 06-23…A request by Larry Nastwold, Section 22, 4054 Clifford,
for a side yard variance to construct an attached garage.
2. 06-28…A request by Patricia Drew, Section 1, 7728 Price Drive,
for a variance to split property into two non-conforming lots.
3. 06-30…A request by Punch and Pat Investments, Section 14, 6300
Grand River Ave., is for a sign variance.
4. 06-31…A request by Susan Mayer, Section 32, Unit #5 Crystal
Valley Drive, for a front yard variance to construct a new home.
5. 06-32…A request by Kim Cybart and David Harris, Section 10,
5221 Wildwood, for a front, two sides, rear and waterfront yard
variances to construct a new home.
6. 06-33…A request by Paul Ellis, Section 26, 4140 Bauer Road,
for a variance to allow a detached accessory structure in the front
yard.
7. 06-34…A request by T-Mobile, Section 33, 4440 Brighton Road,
for a front yard and side yard variance to construct a cellular tower.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS:
A. Approval of minutes for the September 19, 2006 Zoning Board of
Appeals meeting.
B. Correspondence
C. Member Discussion
D. Adjournment
MINUTES
Chairman
Doug Brown called the regular meeting of the Zoning Board of appeals to
order at 6:30 p.m. at the Genoa Township Hall. The Pledge of the
Allegiance was then said. The following board members were present
constituting a quorum for transaction of business: Doug Brown, Barbara
Figurski, Kevin Brady and Joe Perri. Also present was Township staff
member Adam Van Tassell and approximately 13 persons in the audience.
Chairman
Brown gave a brief introduction of the board members and on why the
Zoning Board of Appeals exists.
Moved
by Figurski, supported by Perri, to approve the agenda with the moving
of case #7 to #1 to hear public comment only. Motion carried
unanimously.
06-34…A request by T-Mobile, Section 33, 4440 Brighton Road, for a
front yard and side yard variance to construct a cellular tower.
A call to the public was made with the following response: Sandra
Skolnik, 4448 Brighton Road, I live directly to the south of the site. I
have done a lot of research and have turned the information into the
Planning Commission. These towers are a physical danger to people where
they work and go to school. This has been documented to cause damage in
children. The church has head start classes being taught there. The
cellular tower omits harmful high frequency waves and this is a heavy
residential area with 350 homes in Oak Pointe alone. I challenge the
Board to recognize the facts. Farmers located by the cellular tower on
Nixon Road have stated that even their livestock has stopped producing
offspring. This tower that will be 210 feet tall will also be in the
middle of the St. Joseph and University of Michigan hospital flight path
and also a flight path for small aircraft. I think that the federal
aviation should also review this cellular tower location. I have learned
that they can attach 4-5 more antennae to this tower that will emit the
same level of frequencies. We are opposed to this cell tower. John
Deluca, 4365 Timberview Drive, I live within one mile of this site. Mr.
Deluca stated that he works in the medical field and that he agrees with
Mrs. Skolnik’s concerns. James Evans, 5192 Pine Hill Circle, I have
lived here for 20-25 years. I am in support of my neighbors petition to
stop this eye sore. I do not want this monstrosity looming over us. For
the church to put this cellular tower on their property is insulting to
the neighbors and we are not happy. There is plenty of vacant land where
this tower can go that would not have a direct impact on the people. A
majority of the people that attend the church do not reside in the
direct area. Rich Miller, 4400 Brighton Road, I live to the right of the
proposed site. I am greatly concerned that in the 15 years that I lived
here the erection of the tower will affect our property value. We
purchased here for the natural environment and the wildlife which is in
abundance. Our property values will decline and with the conditions of
Livingston County, it will only get worse. I am in support of my
neighbors and protest this cellular tower. Charlie Guerriero, 4690 Pine
Eagles, I have done some reading of a variety of articles that states
that these frequency can hurt people both mentally and physically. My
neighbors are all against this cellular tower.
06-23…A request by Larry Nastwold, Section 22, 4054 Clifford, is
for a front yard variance to construct an attached garage.
A call to the public made with no response.
Moved by Perri, supported by Brady, to approve case #06-23 for
Larry Nastwold for an 8.1 foot front yard variance with a 26.9 foot
setback to construct an attached garage. Conditioned upon the garage
being guttered and by Certificate of Occupancy issuance the metal shed
to the west be removed. The practical difficulty is the topography and
slope of the land. Motion carried as follows: Ayes- Brady, Perri, and
Brown. Nays- Figurski.
As noted on plan the additional garage will be heard at a later date
in order to be published and neighbors notified.
06-30…A request by Punch and Pat Investments, Section 14, 6300
Grand River Avenue, is for a sign variance.
A call to the public was made with no response.
Moved by Perri, supported by Figurski, to approved petitioner’s
request to change the dimensional variance to an administrative decision
variance. Motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Brady, supported by Figurski, to approve the petitioner’s
request for two wall signs. The Board of Appeals found that the order by
the Township Zoning Administrator denying the petitioner’s sign permit
was based on an erroneous finding of the Planning Commission’s review
and approval. Motion carried unanimously.
06-31…A request by Susan Mayer, Section 32, Unit #5 Crystal Valley
Drive, for a front yard variance to construct a new home.
A call to the public was made with no response.
Moved
by Brady, supported by Perri, to approve case #06-31 for a front yard
variance of 10 foot with a 40 foot setback from the front property line.
The practical difficulty is the topography of the land and the location
of the existing septic field. Motion carried unanimously.
06-32…A
request by Kim Cybart and David Harris, Section 10, 5221 Wildwood, for a
front, two sides, rear and waterfront yard variances to construct a new
home.
A call to the public was made with no response.
Moved by Perri, supported by Figurski, to approve petitioner’s
request of case #06-32, 5221 Wildwood, for a front yard variance of 24
feet with a setback of 11 feet, an east side variance of 3 feet with a 7
foot setback, a west side variance of 6 feet with a 4 foot setback, a
rear yard variance of 21 feet with a 19 foot setback and a waterfront
variance of 7 feet with a setback of 33 feet to construct a new home.
Conditioned upon the new home being guttered. The practical difficulty
is the narrowness of the lot. Motion carried unanimously.
06-33…A request by Paul Ellis, Section 26, 4140 Bauer Road, for a
variance to allow a detached accessory structure in the front yard.
A call to the public was made with no response.
Moved by Brady, supported by Figurski, to approve case #06-33 for
a front yard variance to construct a detached accessory. Conditioned
upon that, one of the two existing detached accessory buildings be
removed or attached by time of Certificate of Occupancy issuance. The
practical difficulty is the topography of the lot and the location of
large trees that prevent any other locations for a detached accessory
structure. Motion carried unanimously.
Moved by Figurski, supported by Perri, to approve the Zoning
Board of Appeals minutes from the September 19, 2006 meeting with
corrections. Motion carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Amy Ruthig
|
