CLINTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF APPEALS
REPORT OF MEETING
SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
MINUTES

PRESENT:      Francis Marella, Chairperson
                        Carole L. Schwartz, Vice-Chairperson
                        Robert M. Campbell, Secretary
                        Joann Granata
                        Michael Nickerson
                        Dean J. Reynolds
                        Paul D. Woodring

ABSENT:        None

STAFF:           Mark F. Miller, Assistant Director
                       DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Marella called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. He explained the process of the Board of Appeals and noted that they are permitted to grant variances under the provisions set forth for this Board to act. He indicated that hardship or practical difficulty must be presented and it cannot be based on monetary reasons.

Mr. Marella informed that Item #2 (Nextel Communications at Hillcrest Auto Sales) needs to be deleted from tonight’s agenda at the request of the petitioner.

Motion by Mr. Campbell, supported by Mr. Nickerson, to approve the revised agenda with the deletion of Item #2 (Nextel Communications at Hillcrest Auto Sales). Motion carried.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there were no written replies received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question.

Don Green, 42662 Elizabeth Place, Clinton Township, Michigan, introduced Christine Lind Hage, Director of the Clinton-Macomb Public Library, and Karen Widmar Platz, architect for the new facility. He explained that they need a branch in the south end of the Township and they looked for a long time before they decided on this location. He emphasized that in order to develop this existing building into a facility that will meet their needs, they will need a few variances.

Chris Lind Hage, 43245 Garfield Road, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038, stated she has been the Director for eight months and was hired for the purpose of establishing the Clinton-Macomb Library and a couple of branches. She explained that they looked at a lot of properties in the 15 Mile/Gratiot area before choosing the subject site, but admitted that there is not much from which to choose. She informed that their library serves residents of Clinton and Macomb Townships, and although Hall Road would be the central location, there is a desperate need for a facility in the south end of Clinton Township. Ms. Lind-Hage emphasized that although a millage was passed for this purpose, they are on a limited budget because they are attempting to save money to complete the main branch in addition to a north branch for which a site location has not yet been determined. She noted that the proposed facility is 7,500 square feet and they will be purchasing $500,000 of new books and videos. She assured this facility will not consist of "hand-me-downs". She acknowledged that although there may be a couple of other sites in this area which would afford a slightly larger area, their budget will not allow it.

Karen Widmar Platz AIA, Platz Design Group, Inc., 42244 Shulock, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038, presented a plan of the proposed facility to the Board Members and the audience. She pointed out that if they met the ordinance requirements, they would only be able to provide a total of eight parking spaces, and she stressed that this would not be sufficient for a 7,600-square-foot building. There is an existing fence separating the lot and they are proposing to remove that fence and put in a greenbelt area, which would only add a few more spaces. She stressed that they are trying to comply with the intent of the zoning ordinance by providing a 4-foot greenbelt along Gratiot Avenue. She stated that Sunnyview is unpaved and they would therefore like to request a waiver of the sidewalks along that street. She assured that they are willing to install the required 5-foot sidewalk along Gratiot Avenue, but could see no purpose to putting it in on a dirt road.

Mr. Miller clarified that sidewalk waiver requests are heard by the Clinton Township Board and that this Board does not have the jurisdiction to grant such a waiver.

Ms. Platz added that they may eventually be able to comply with the 25-foot setback requirement if the Township is ever able to acquire the adjacent property. She replied to inquiry that asphalt versus concrete curbing may need to be addressed for this reason.

Mr. Miller explained that the asphalt or concrete curbing is an engineering matter and is not to be determined at this meeting.

Ms. Platz indicated that the 5-foot sidewalk is to be located 1 foot outside of the right-of-way of Gratiot Avenue. She pointed out that the existing site is non-compliant in that the pavement is located in the right-of-way. She stressed that they are trying to achieve the intent of the zoning ordinance as close as possible. She noted that according to this plan, they will be able to provide 20 parking spaces plus one barrier-free space. Ms. Platz replied to inquiry that eliminating the island will not allow them to provide any additional parking.

Ms. Schwark felt that the library will be a wonderful asset to the community. She noted that she and her husband own property adjacent to the subject site and she has no objections.

Ms. Hage mentioned that although they may have as many as 25 patrons in the building at one time, some of these may be children so it will not involve additional cars.

Mr. Campbell commented that this building has been in existence for many years and it does not seem right to ask the community to spend more money to demolish the existing building. He felt that if this were a retail development, more parking would be necessary; however, he felt 20 parking spaces is sufficient for the library.

Mr. Woodring felt the variance is needed; however, he felt they could still put in the berm.

Mr. Miller emphasized that the berm cannot be put in a right-of-way. He noted that there is only a 4-foot distance between the right-of-way and the parking area, which would not be sufficient for street trees, although it may afford sufficient space for planting some type of shrubbery. He replied to inquiry that this Board would have the authority to grant conditional approval requiring some type of shrubbery in lieu of the required street trees.

Mr. Campbell also felt the stipulation should be placed on grant of variance that this approval is only valid while the library occupies this site and if the library would ever vacate this site, the variance becomes null and void.

Motion by Mr. Campbell, supported by Mr. Woodring, with reference to File #5360 and application from Christine Lind Hage, Director, Clinton-Macomb Public Library, 43245 Garfield Road, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038-1115, as represented by Karen Widmar Platz, AIA, Platz Design Group, Inc., 42244 Shulock, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038-6428, for variance to Clinton Township Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1292.01-(m), Land use Regulations: Schedule of Regulations Limiting Height, Bulk, Density and Area: Chart and Footnotes; Minimum Front Yard Setback Requirements in the B-3 General Business District, concerning Lots 9 through 17, inclusive, of William A. Peters Subdivision (Section 27), generally located at the southwest corner of Gratiot Avenue and Sunnyview at 35891 Gratiot Avenue, that request for variance be granted to permit improvements to an off-street parking area for a branch library (Clinton-Macomb Public Library) proposed to occupy an existing building (former Salvation Army Thrift Store) in the B-3 General Business District with: 1) Front yard setback of four 940 feet from the Gratiot Avenue right-of-way being twenty-one (21) feet less than the minimum required setback of twenty-five (25) feet; 2) Zero (0) trees within the setback from Gratiot Avenue being four (4) trees fewer than the required four (4) trees; and 3) No screening buffer between an off-street parking area and Gratiot Avenue as required; further, this variance is granted based on the following stipulations: 1) the site plan must show additional shrubbery in lieu of the required trees; and 2) the variance will remain in effect only as long as this building is used as a library; further, this grant of variance is based on claimed practical difficulty that the existing building is situated close to the Gratiot Highway right-of-way line and it is difficult to provide adequate parking for such a facility; further, this grant of variance is contingent upon compliance with all other requirements of Township ordinances. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Campbell, Woodring, Granata, Reynolds, Schwartz, Marella. Nay - None. Abstain - Nickerson. Motion carried.

Mr. Nickerson noted that he abstained from voting because he is the attorney representing the Clinton-Macomb Library.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This item was deleted from tonight’s agenda.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there were no written replies received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question.

Eric J. Ossling, Project Control Engineering, Inc., P. O. Box 307, Algonac, Michigan 48001, explained that they have revised their plans and are now requesting variances only for the minimum required setbacks from the adjacent existing buildings.

Mr. Nickerson recalled that at the last meeting, he was concerned that the petitioner’s building would be very close to the neighboring buildings and would cause a safety issue. He felt the petitioner has addressed these concerns and he is now in support of the requested variance as revised.

Mr. Campbell noted that the minimum setback requirements in an industrial district have changed over the years and questioned as to whether this is a relatively new change to the ordinance.

Mr. Miller replied that it has recently been changed for the second time. He noted that as few as ten years ago, buildings were allowed to be constructed on the lot line.

Motion by Ms. Granata, supported by Mr. Nickerson, with reference to File #5347 and application from William R. John, 49560 Goulette Pointe, New Baltimore, Michigan 48047, as represented by John T. Monte and Eric Ossling, Project Control Engineering, Inc., P. O. Box 307, Algonac, Michigan 48001 and Brad Bauer, Construction Manager, P. O. Box 765, New Baltimore, Michigan 48047, for variance to Clinton Township Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1292.01-(q) and (r), Land Use Regulations: Schedule of Regulations Limiting Height, Bulk, Density and Area: Chart and Footnotes; Minimum Side Yard and Rear Yard Setback Requirements in the I-1 Light Industrial District, concerning 4.582 acres, more or less, located east of Groesbeck Highway, south of Hall Road (M-59) at 44700 Groesbeck Highway (Sections 1 & 2), that request for variance be granted to permit construction of additions to an existing industrial/warehouse development (B & D Drywall0 in the I-1 Light Industrial District with: 1) Distance of 15.04 feet from a building existing on the north property line being 4.96 feet less than the minimum required distance of 20 feet; and 2) Distance of 12.99 feet from a building existing on the east property line being 7.01 feet less than the minimum required distance of 20 feet; further, this grant of variance is based on claimed hardship being that there are existing buildings on the north and east which were constructed prior to the ordinances being changed; further, this grant of variance is contingent upon compliance with all other requirements of Township ordinances. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Granata, Nickerson, Reynolds, Schwartz, Woodring, Campbell, Marella. Nay - None. Absent - None. Motion carried.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there were two written replies received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question. He read a letter dated August 28, 1999 from Mark L. Greenfield, 34388 Harper Avenue, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, and another letter dated _____ from _____ of Travis Restaurant, 34000 Harper Avenue, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, both expressing their favor of the variance request. In both letters, they stressed the need for additional parking in their shopping center.

Patrick Westerland, Quinlan & Associates, Inc., 31325 Harper Avenue, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, stated that they are requesting a front yard setback variance from Manila so they can provide additional parking spaces. He indicated that the remaining items are being requested because the ordinance has changed since the development was constructed in 1987. He noted that they will be planting seven additional trees but they will not be in the setback from Manila. He stressed they are trying to bring the site up to the current zoning requirements; however, there are certain conditions which make this difficult or impossible to accomplish.

Ms. Schwartz inquired as to how many parking spaces the petitioner has at this time.

Mr. Westerland replied that there are currently 33 parking spaces. He clarified that they are proposing to add 5 more spaces as a result of the setback variance, and they will be able to add 2 more with the restriping to 9-foot spaces. He replied to inquiry that the proposed spaces along Manila will be for parallel parking. He replied to further inquiry that the existing sidewalk is five feet. Mr. Westerland stated there will be 14 feet from the sidewalk to the curb but they are taking 10 of the 14 feet so they can provide additional parking, which will leave a 4-foot distance. He replied to still further inquiry that there will be 5 feet between the sidewalk and the parking spaces.

Ms. Granata objected to the proposed 9-foot-wide parking spaces. She felt this is a safety problem, especially with the larger sport utility vehicles and pick-ups. She acknowledged that there was a time when 9-foot-wide parking spaces were permitted because the average size of the vehicles was smaller. She stressed that maneuverability of the larger vehicles in the smaller spaces is very difficult.

Mr. Westerland clarified that they are proposing to maintain the 10-foot-wide parking spaces in the front, making a combination of both 9-foot-wide and 10-foot-wide parking spaces on the site.

Mr. Woodring agreed with Ms. Granata’s comments regarding the 9-foot-wide parking spaces. He stated that he was recently at a restaurant where the Board of Appeals had granted a variance to allow the narrower parking spaces, and he had a very difficult time getting out of his car. He added that he had voted to deny that particular variance and he is opposed to this part of the variance request.

Mr. Campbell was in agreement with his colleagues regarding the narrower parking spaces. He questioned whether such a sacrifice is really worth gaining only two spaces.

Mr. Westerland indicated they would like as many spaces as possible and he did not see a problem with 9-foot-wide parking spaces.

Mr. Campbell stated he drove past this site and observed that most of the vehicles on the site were pick-up trucks. He agreed that 9-foot-wide parking spaces are too narrow. He felt some of the problem has resulted from the fact that the minimum number of parking spaces required was based on calculations of this being a strip mall; however, if the number of parking spaces required is calculated based on a portion of this being used as a restaurant, the minimum number increases. He stated it is unfortunate that the Township cannot control strip centers and whether restaurants occupy a portion of them. He cited a strip mall at the northwest corner of 17 Mile and Garfield, where Luciano’s, a popular Italian restaurant, is located, and he noted that parking at this center is often a problem. He pointed out that the only time parking is not a problem when a restaurant is located in a strip center is when the center is very large and has an excess amount of parking available. He could see the need for a variance but felt it should be contingent upon 40% of this center being occupied by a restaurant.

Allan Leitch, 34266 New Jersey, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, stated he is actually at tonight’s meeting for another agenda item, but he commented that he visits the subject site at least once or twice a week, and he agreed with the comments by the Board members regarding the 9-foot-wide parking spaces. He inquired as to why the parking lots of the three strip malls along Harper are not connected.

Mr. Marella replied that the three strip centers have different owners and they are not considered one site.

Mr. Miller informed that at the Planning Commission level, this will be addressed. He stressed that property owners are encouraged to grant easements to adjacent properties whenever possible so that such connections can be made.

Ms. Schwartz inquired as to whether overflow parking can be located on Manila.

Mr. Miller replied that if there are no "No Parking" signs along the street, cars are able to park there.

Mr. Westerland indicated that the subject center is at 100% occupancy and because of that, they experience a slight parking problem on occasion.

Motion by Mr. Campbell, supported by Ms. Schwartz, with reference to File #5350 and application from Vito Colombo, 54561 Gratiot Avenue, Chesterfield, Michigan 48047, as represented by Patrick Westerland and William S. Quinlan, Quinlan Associates, 31325 Harper Avenue, St. Clair Shores, Michigan 48082, for variance to Clinton Township Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1292.01-(m), Land Use Regulations; Schedule of Regulations Limiting Height, Bulk, Density and Area: Chart and Footnotes; Minimum Front Yard Setback Requirements in the B-2 Community Business District, and Chapter 1296.02, Off-Street Parking and Loading: Space Layout Standards, Construction and Maintenance, concerning Lots 115 through 118, Jefferson Heights Subdivision (Section 36), generally located at the southeast corner of Harper and Manila at 34384 through 34400 Harper, that request for variance be granted to permit additional off-street parking for an existing retail development (Harper/Manila Plaza) in the B-2 Community Business District with: 1) Front yard setback for four (4) feet from the Manila Street right-of-way being twenty-one (21) feet less than the minimum required setback of twenty-five (25) feet; and 2) One (1) tree within the setback from Manila Street being eight (8) trees fewer than the required nine (9) trees; and 3) No 30"-high berm or wall as a screening buffer between an off-street parking area and Harper Avenue; and 4) No 30"-high berm or wall as a screening buffer between an off-street parking area and Manila Street; further, this grant of variance is based on claimed practical difficulty that this is a small strip shopping center with a restaurant occupying a portion of it, which creates a need for more parking spaces; further, this variance is granted with the condition that this variance remains in effect only as long as a restaurant occupies at least 40% of the center; further, that the request for the variance of parking spaces having width of nine (9) feet being one (1) foot less than the required ten (10) feet, be denied. Roll Call Vote: Aye - Campbell, Schwartz, Woodring, Granata, Nickerson, Reynolds, Marella. Nay - None. Absent - None. Motion carried.

Mr. Woodring was excused from the meeting at this point.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there were no written replies received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question.

Michael Johns, 23916 Cottrell, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, explained that he and his wife took measurements of other similar corner homes in their subdivision and they found the average side yard setback to be ten feet rather than the required twenty-five feet. He stated that the newest home with this type of setback is located on Pennsylvania near Cottrell. He did not feel their request was out of line when considering the rest of the neighborhood. He replied to inquiry that they wish to develop the lot adjacent to their home.

Allan Leitch, 34266 New Jersey, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, inquired as to whether the home will face New Jersey or Cottrell.

Mr. Marella clarified that the house will face Cottrell.

Mr. Johns replied to inquiry that there is an addition to their house which was built partially over the lot line in 1983 or 1984 and they have requested a demolition permit to take that down so they will comply with side yard setback requirements on that side of the house.

Mr. Leitch expressed concern with regards to how long it will take to build this house and inquired as to whether the house will be similar to those on Cottrell or on New Jersey.

Mr. Marella clarified that this Board must be concerned with how the ordinance relates to this particular request and how this house will be situated on the lot.

Mr. Johns compared the proposed home to those facing Pennsylvania and added that it will be approximately 1,175 square feet.

Cynthia Johns, 23916 Cottrell, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, replied that she owned their house before her recent marriage and that is why it is in her name. She replied to inquiry that they would like to have a bigger house and this will enable them to have a basement as well. She indicated that they will sell their present house after they build the new house.

Mr. Johns acknowledged that although this Board considers each request individually, their house would not conform to the standards in their neighborhood if ordinance requirements were met.

Mr. Campbell noted that this is a proposed 38-foot-wide home on a 50-foot-wide lot. He inquired as to whether it will be two-story.

Mr. Johns replied that it will be a one-story ranch design with an attached garage in front.

Mr. Campbell commented that some of the houses referred to by Mr. Johns have more than one story but they do not look like traditional colonial-style homes.

Mr. Johns replied that the homes that appear to be slightly taller are one-story but have cathedral ceilings. He replied to inquiry that he will have cathedral ceilings in the main room but traditional ceilings throughout the rest of the house. He replied to further inquiry that he would be willing to compromise to a 36-foot-wide house but did not feel that anything less than that would serve their needs. He emphasized that there are a mixture of houses in his neighborhood, but added that the largest home is a colonial measuring approximately 1,600 square feet. He reiterated that they would like to build a comparable home to others in the subdivision, but assured that it is nothing "outrageous".

Mr. Campbell stated that while they cannot deny a property owner the ability to build on this corner lot, the current ordinances would allow a 22-foot-wide house, which he felt is ridiculous. He compared this to his house, which is located in a different area but it is a 1,700-square-foot home on a 60-foot-wide lot and yet it is only 30 feet in width. He stated that other houses near him have a garage-forward type design and are slightly larger, but he had a hard time finding a hardship to grant a variance for a 38-foot-wide house. He questioned why they could not go with a house measuring 32 feet or 34 feet in width.

Mr. Johns replied that they feel a 36-foot width would be their maximum compromise. He emphasized that they are trying to keep it similar to other homes in the neighborhood, and going to a smaller house or a colonial-style house will not meet their requirements. He recalled the Building Department informing him that they will not allow a 22-foot-wide house, which is all the current ordinance requirements would permit on this particular lot.

Mr. Marella inquired as to other locations in the Township where there are still 50-foot lots.

Mr. Miller replied that there are still 50-foot lots in the Gratiot area at the south end of the Township. He added that there are a few additional 50-foot lots in the northeast corner of the Township.

Mr. Leitch replied to inquiry that he does not have any objections but came to tonight’s meeting because he was curious about the variance request.

Motion by Mr. Campbell, supported by Mr. Reynolds, with reference to File # 5355 and application from Cynthia G. Rabior, 23916 Cottrell, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, for variance to Clinton Township Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1292.01-c; Land Use Regulations: Schedule of Regulations Limiting Height, Bulk, Density and Area: Chart and Footnotes; Minimum Front Yard and Side Yard Setback Requirements for the R-5 One-Family Residential District, concerning Lot 116, Vineyard Subdivision (Section 35), generally located at the southeast corner of Cottrell and New Jersey at 23916 Cottrell, that variance be granted to permit construction of a single-family residence on a corner lot in the R-5 One-Family Residential District with side yard setback from New Jersey Avenue of eleven (11) feet being fourteen (14) feet less than the minimum required setback of twenty-five (25) feet; further, this grant of variance is based on claimed practical difficulty that the corner lot has been platted as a 50-foot lot and it would be difficult to build a practical size home; further, this home will be consistent with other homes in the neighborhood; further, this grant of variance is contingent upon compliance with all other requirements of Township ordinances. Roll Call Vote: Aye – Campbell, Reynolds, Schwartz, Granata, Nickerson, Marella. Nay – None. Absent – Woodring. Motion carried.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there were no written replies received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question.

Michael Labuda, 39682 Day Drive, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038, clarified that his shed was approved; however, he is requesting a variance to permit construction of a deck.

Mr. Miller stated that he was not aware the shed was approved. He replied to inquiry that a detached accessory structure is required to be set back 10 feet from the main building.

Mr. Labuda stated that he would like to withdraw the portion of his request for the shed. He assured that he already has the permit for the shed and has received inspection approval on a portion of it. He indicated that he would like to build a deck approximately 13-1/2’ wide and is asking for a variance of 5.89 feet. He replied to inquiry he needs this extra width to make room for his furniture and barbeque. He noted that an 8-foot deck would not provide much useful space. Mr. Labuda pointed out that many other homes in the area have attached decks, but he is running into difficulty because his house sets further back on his lot due to the fact that he is located on the curve of a cul-de-sac.

Mr. Miller clarified that although a large portion of the property behind the subject site is unbuildable, there is still a small area of that property which can be developed.

Ms. Schwartz acknowledged that the petitioner’s rear yard is small and inquired as to whether he had this house built.

Mr. Labuda replied that he is the third owner of this house.

Ms. Granata stated that for all intents and purposes, the property to the rear of the subject lot is unbuildable and she offered no objection to the variance request.

Mr. Campbell noted that the petitioner’s print indicates an easement at the rear of the property. He inquired as to whether the fence is located at the rear of the yard or at the easement.

Mr. Labuda replied that the fence is approximately three feet in front of the fence because there are trees on the property line.

Mr. Campbell could see definite practical difficulty in that the house has the garage in front, which sets it back further on the lot, it is located on a cul-de-sac, which sets it even further back, and there is a large easement along the rear of the property.

Motion by Ms. Granata, supported by Mr. Nickerson, with reference to File #5359 and application from Michael Labuda, 39682 Day Drive, Clinton Township, Michigan 48038, for variance to Clinton Township Planning and Zoning Code, Chapter 1298.01-(d); Supplementary Regulations: Accessory Structures (Including Garages) and Chapter 1299.01-(h); General Exceptions; Area, Height and Use Exceptions, concerning Lot 284, River Oaks Subdivision #2 (Private Claim #546, Section 16), generally located fronting the east line of Day Drive, north of Clinton River Road at 39682 Day Drive, that request for variance be granted to permit construction of an uncovered deck for an existing single-family residence in the R-4 One-Family Residential District, projecting a distance of 13 feet 7-1/8 inches into the required rear yard being 5 feet 7-1/8 inches in excess of the maximum permitted 8 feet; further, this grant of variance is based on claimed practical difficulty being the location of the house on the property, the fact that there is a large easement to the rear of the property and the adjacent property to the rear is unbuildable; further, there were no neighbors present to offer objections; further, this grant of variance is contingent upon compliance with all other requirements of Township ordinances; further, to accept the petitioner’s verbal withdrawal of request for variance to permit construction of a detached accessory structure (shed) located 4 feet 10-7/8 inches from the main building being 5 feet 1-1/8 inch closer than the required 10 feet. Roll Call Vote: Aye – Granata, Nickerson, Campbell, Reynolds, Schwartz, Marella. Nay – None. Absent – Woodring. Motion carried.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pertinent correspondence was read and entered into the record. Mr. Campbell indicated that there was one written reply received in response to the mailing of the Notice of Public Hearing to the owners and occupants within 300 feet of the land in question. He read a letter dated ___ from Robert W. Lee, 36136 Farmbrook, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, expressing his objection of the variance request.

Ed Phillips, 40920 Executive Drive, Harrison Township, Michigan 48045, explained that their hardship is the fact that they are not allowed to put up a sign that is not similar to the existing signs in the area. He stated this site is not in a typical industrial subdivision and feels that businesses along Groesbeck Highway have the need for taller signs in order to be visible. He noted that the ordinance requires a 6-foot ground clearance and they are proposing to provide 7 feet, which exceeds ordinance requirements. Mr. Phillips took an inventory of all of the existing signs in their area along Groesbeck Highway and offered to provide the results to this Board. He recalled that a number of years ago, this Board granted him a sign variance for Macomb Printing and he felt the sign is very nice.

Ms. Schwartz acknowledged that although a sign variance was granted for Macomb Printing, that was a different situation because it was located on a curve in the road and the practical difficulty was that the visibility was impeded. She indicated that is not the situation with this particular site.

Mr. Campbell calculated that a lawn sign of 120 square feet is permitted based on revisions made to the Sign Ordinance in 1988.

Mr. Phillips emphasized that they would be willing to sacrifice the additional 40 square feet in order to receive the variance they have requested. He felt confident that 80 square feet will be sufficient if it is at a height of 15 feet.

Mr. Marella pointed out that there are industrial developments in the area that have complied with the current zoning requirements.

Mr. Phillips felt that this is not strictly an industrial area and there is a mixture of zonings along Groesbeck. He felt there should be some type of compensation for industrial developments in this area with regards to their signs.

Mr. Campbell pointed out that the relief given to these industrial developments is that they are permitted a 120-square-foot lawn sign rather than an 80-foot pylon sign.

Motion by Ms. Granata, supported by Mr. Campbell, with reference to File #5362 and application from Addy Machinery, 36055 Groesbeck Highway, Clinton Township, Michigan 48035, as represented by Phillips Sign & Design, 40920 Executive Drive, Harrison Township, Michigan 48045, for variance to Clinton Township Building and Housing Code, Chapter 1488.02-(e)-(6); Definitions and Restrictions; Business Sign, concerning 4.5 acres of land fronting the west line of Groesbeck Highway, south of Metropolitan Parkway (Section 28),

Motion by Mr. Campbell, supported by Ms. Schwartz, to approve the report of the February 24, 1999 meeting as submitted. Motion carried.

Motion by Mr. Nickerson, supported by Ms. Schwartz, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:53 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert M. Campbell, Secretary
CLINTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF APPEALS