6880 Dexter-Pinckney Road
Dexter, MI 48130
James Cormier, Alt.
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Tuesday, July 7, 2015
Members present: Donald Darnell, Chairperson; Brook Smith, Vice-Chairperson; Steve Burch, Planning
Commission Representative; Beth Filip; and Janis Miller.
Absent: James Drolett, Secretary (with notice).
Also Present: Zach Michels, Planning and Zoning Director; and DeNette Bolyard, Recording Secretary.
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Darnell at 6:00 p.m.
In the absence of Secretary Drolett, Filip volunteered to be Acting Secretary.
Burch requested to be given the opportunity to address the Board and update them on the
Planning Commission’s activities at the end of the action items.
The Board agreed to approve the agenda as amended.
Chairperson Darnell introduced the case as noted above and did not read aloud persons noticed for this
E:\Zoning Board of Appeals\ZBA Minutes\2015 ZBA Minutes\Approved Minutes\ZBA
Report dated June 26, 2015, was summarized by DPZ Michels, and the report has been placed in the property
Q & A with DPZ, Michels:
street and if so can it be split? DPZ Michels indicated that yes, it was included in the lot
calculations and no, it cannot be split.
measurement with overhang is 9’.
Miller asked about the reconfiguration of the driveway.
Applicants Jason Truskowski and Meghan Truskowski (formerly known as Meghan Miller) were present
and addressed the Board concerning their construction plans.
There were numerous letters from neighbors on record in support of the Truskowskis.
Was present and stated he was in support of the Truskowskis’ variance request and added that it would be
a great addition to the neighborhood.
(The answer was no.)
Applicants request a reduced front-yard (road) setback of twenty point two (20.2) feet rather
Applicants request a reduced rear-yard setback of six point eight (6.8) feet rather than the
Applicants request a reduced rear-yard setback of five (5) feet rather than the thirty (30) feet
After discussion by the Board regarding the setback requests it was determined that C) the rear-
yard setback should be 9 feet (9’) instead of five (5’). Therefore Burch made a motion to
change C) setback to 9’, supported by Smith. Carried by voice vote.
Notes: Burch - Strict application would make the lot unbuildable
Notes: Especially due to odd shaped lot.
The property was platted and the house was built before the current ownership. The
The variances for the proposed roof work appear to be very minimal, as they will not
Notes: Not affecting the footprint.
The requested variances appear to be consistent with the intent of the Zoning
Smith moved to approve the variance as follows:
Reduced front-yard (road) setback of twenty point two (20.2) feet rather than the twenty-
five (25) feet required. Reduced setback is from Glencoe to the north.
Reduced rear-yard setback of six point eight (6.8) feet rather than the thirty (30) feet
required. Reduced setback is from the western lot line.
Reduced rear-yard setback of nine (9) feet rather than the thirty (30) feet required.
Reduced setback is from the eastern lot line. And to recognize the following existing
nonconformities: Lot area is less than required in the Lakes Residential District and
northwest corner of the house is closer to the front-lot line than allowed.
Roll Call Vote:
Moved by Smith, seconded by Burch, to approve the May 6, 2015, meeting minutes.
Moved by Smith, seconded by Miller to approve the June 6,
2015, meeting minutes as amended
by adding clarification that Smith recused himself in the Huddleston variance request.
Concerns of Board Members, Planning Director, Recording Secretary:
1) Hanover Glen was granted another extension on their site plan.
2) Warm Fuzzies Preschool- Public hearing deferred until questions are adequately
3) Burch said the items this Board asked him to take to the Planning Commission were
discussed and they will be on their agenda in the future.
a) Define practical difficulty
b) Temporary structures
Identification badges were ready for Filip and Miller.
Many of the zoning permits that were still outstanding were being closed by the Intern,
nonconforming structure. His interpretation is that a nonconforming structure can be
expanded as long as the absolute distance between the existing nonconforming structure
and the lot lines are not reduced. DPZ Michels said his interpretation is that the structure
within the required setback and not the distance is the nonconformity and that any
expansion of a nonconforming structure needs to meet the current setbacks or receive a
Chairperson declared the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.