|
Zoning Board of Appeals |
|
ZBA votes unanimously once, splits twice. With a 6-1 vote, Chairman Kevin Lapham voting No, the ZBA granted a 2-part variance to Royal Oak Business Association, petitioner, and Royal Oak School District, owner, to allow farming within a One Family Residential zoning district and to waive a hard-surfacing requirement for an off-street parking lot, to permit establishment of a community farm at the former school site located at 1901 E Eleven Mile.
On another 6-1 vote, with Laura Harrison voting No, the Board waived 35 of the minimum required 127 off-street parking spaces to permit conversion of floor space previously used for shops and trades to professional offices located at 1023-1041 S. Main.
Long-time civic activist George Gomez joined the ZBA as Second Alternate. -- 14 Jan 10
The Zoning Board of Appeals is
still on-edge Despite the awkwardness and uneasiness, including the necessity of full members and alternates moving to and from the table as agenda times changed, the ZBA performed well and met its responsibilities: Granted two variances. Revoked three temporary variances. Adjourned one appeal until the ZBA's July meeting. The fourth appearance of a petitioner who wants to build a large house on Mt. Vernon provided the stage for histrionics, especially from well-spoken but contentious residents who were protesting the house. And board member Jim Rasor irritated friend and foe with his repeated and extended lawyerly use of leading questions to make his, too many, points. And chairman Kevin Lapham wasn't quite able to control either Rasor or the obstreperous residents. And member Laura Harrison occasionally lost focus and had to be reminded that her comments or questions were "beyond the scope" of the ZBA's charge. Apparently irregular communication between/among protesting residents, the ZBA, City Hall, and the petitioner -- as well as the petitioner's charge that the ZBA had reversed its earlier approval without due notice -- had led to enough confusion for a legal protest against the city to reach Federal court level. That may no longer be a problem, because the variance was granted 4-3. Yeses were Harrison, Anderson, Lapham, and Rasor. Noes were Androff, Muller, and Remus. That yes/no-mix doesn't seem to confirm suspicion that membership on the board reflects political party appointments Those suspicions are more frequently voiced since Androff, Cochrane, Harrison, and Lapham -- all Republicans -- voted to deny Bordine's second request to erect a tent for seasonal nursery sales on Coolidge. However, a review of minutes for three previous months shows minority no-votes by Androff, Remus, Muller, Poulton, Lapham about this or that agenda item. No discernible party bias there, either. Nevertheless, the fact that three ZBA members -- Androff, Poulton, and Rasor -- are potential candidates for city commissioner means that the board will be under increased scrutiny until the election.
Skittish ZBA conducts good meeting The ZBA's uneasiness about taking any action which might be legally challenged forced a long discussion about the protocol of voting to reconsider and, relatedly, what procedures must be followed, which must be avoided, and in what sequence. Assistant City Attorney Mark Liss, sitting in for City Attorney Dave Gillam, was repeatedly asked for a legal opinion by ZBA members, Chairman Kevin Lapham, and City Planner Doug Hedges. The overall mood of the meeting was subdued. Jim Rasor and Laura Harrison did most of the talking, with Lapham and Hedges commenting along the way. Rasor pushed for written guidance from the city attorney's office about what "reliance" means concerning the behavior of the resident whose approved variances are now to be reconsidered. Harrison was the sole no-vote a couple of times and did not receive a Second for her proposed motion to establish a new policy about making long-lasting temporary variances permanent. -- 15 May 09
Bordine Nursery wins this round, but . . . I was for the renewal, but after reading that the company was hoping to use the variance for "as long as the industrial property remains vacant," I've lost respect for Bordine Nursery. Then there's CITCOM's attempt to get rid of ZBA member Jim Rasor, and the murky presence of Grand Sakwa in this affair, and the confused debate at CITCOM earlier about Grand Sakwa's development plans at Woodward and Thirteen Mile, and the involvement of former mayor, now counselor, Dennis Cowan. It ain't over. -- FJV: 15 Apr 09
Is the sour mood contagious? In this update and ongoing, I'll monitor and comment about developments, granting equal access on this website to responsible opposing viewpoints. L'affaire Bordine's CONTEXT: Last year, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted Bordine's a temporary variance, permitting the nursery to mount a sales area in a portion of the unoccupied industrial zone, best visualized as being north of Fourteen Mile and Coolidge. English Gardens took legal action seeking to prohibit setting up a nearby competitor. Circuit Court ruled in the ZBA's favor. This year, the ZBA refused to renew the temporary variance. Last week, VersagiVoice reported speculation that "the fix was in" to account for the reversal, and residents who agree with each other about most civic/political matters are at odds about this issue. NOW: Proponents for all sides (there are more than two) are claiming that because of a possible legal action they can't publicly say much that will explain it all when finally revealed. In the meantime, here's a sample of what's being tossed around:
There's more, but that's what I remember at the moment. Some of all this is funny; too much of it is ugly. Among the ugliness are political and legal repercussions and implications which need to be addressed in detail -- but slowly and responsibly. Friendships will end before this is over. -- 25 Mar 09During its 3-hour March 2009 meeting, the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA):
The ZBA members listened to and engaged in conversation with petitioners and opponents, and one can appreciate the difficulty for them to grant variances, given the board's institutional mindset which one board member has repeatedly been heard describing as "Our job is to say 'no.'" Indeed, several of us attending this meeting would have voted on opposite sides of the request to build a Bigfoot house. Then there are two former ZBA members who suggest the group has become "dysfunctional." That said, it was disappointing to watch the ZBA waste an hour reaching its decision to deny a renewal of Bordine's request to operate on Coolidge after last year's admittedly trouble-free performance. Disappointing not so much because of their decision but because the way they mad it makes it almost impossible not to suspect that the fix was in. Summarizing:
. . . despite all that, what did they base their denial on? By challenging the appropriateness of what they had already done. Nothing had changed, but they raised such questions as "What's the hardship this year?" and Chairman Kevin Lapham gave a quiet speech raising points that a couple of his fellow-members found hard to grasp the significance of. In a role reversal, Lapham had trouble understanding David Poulton's concerns about the completeness and correctness of the minutes dealing with last year's decision. Essentially, the group overrode the court's approval of their granting the initial variance. Instead, their fuzzy focus on procedure and the make-up of the opposing votes has led to suspicion that "the fix was in" before the meeting began. Not necessarily a monetary fix, but a political one. Some who attended the meeting and some who watched it live mention a political/social circle which includes the ZBA chair, a couple of the ZBA members, and a sitting city commissioner as something to be concerned about. Speculations about motives abound, of course, but that the suspicion is strong enough to be voiced is worrisome. Helpful, rather than worrisome, is the public exposure the meeting gave to two prospective candidates for city commissioner. Both Poulton and Andrew Androff had much to say about the Bordine's matter, and regardless of where an observer stands on that specific issue (they voted on opposite sides), their behavior provided substantial insight to their predispositions and methods of operating in a governmental body.
Time to update the Master Plan? The need to update Royal Oak's (10-year-old?) Master Plan became apparent to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the ZBA has asked Planning (Commission and Department) at least to consider an interim solution to the problems caused by the city's all-but-dead areas zoned Industrial. The issue came to the fore during the intense-but-courteous consideration of Bordine Nursery's request for a variance which would permit the company to place a 60-day minimal gardening center in part of the 10-years-unused manufacturing complex at Coolidge and 14 Mile. Although Board Chair Elizabeth Hollow repeatedly tried to get the participants to focus on the specific issue of whether a transient merchant permit is permitted in an Industrial Zone, the Public Hearing became open debate between partisans for English Gardens and Bordine Nursery. Their respective attorneys jousted brilliantly, but other speakers, including English Garden workers concerned about their jobs, repeatedly focused one way or another on the wisdom of placing competitors so close together. Nor were the ZBA members able to stay focused; they frequently asked questions and made comments more appropriate for a Planning Commission examination of Bordine's Plan of Operation or for the Engineering Department or for the Police Department: How much water will you be using? . . . I don't like that wire fence. . . . I wish the owner were here, so I could ask him if he practiced due diligence in trying to attract Industrial customers. [This, after almost a decade of emptiness at the site.] . . . Speculation re traffic density, despite formal "no-problem" replies from two city departments. By a 5-2 vote, the ZBA granted the variance. Since then, there has been speculation that the two no-votes were "obviously in English Gardens's pocket from the beginning,' countered by "So it wasn't unanimous, but it was a good, solid debate." Although, months earlier, one ZBA member told me, "Our primary duty is to say 'no','" this night the Board granted more variances than it denied, suggesting they focus on the merits of individual requests. As is true of city commissioners, why would anyone want this job? And, for the ZBA as well as for CITCOM, I suggest the lectern be provided with a laser pointer, so 1) observers can more readily recognize what is being pointed to on a photograph or drawing, and 2) the speaker doesn't have to walk away from the microphone and approach the mounted or projected display. Readers Comment
re ZBA piece I have continued to read your in-depth observations of city meetings and events and I appreciate how you keep the community abreast of news. I got a chance to review your latest article and I wanted to respond to your comments regarding the May 8th ZBA meeting. You are absolutely correct in pointing out that the specific issue at hand was whether a transient merchant permit is permitted in an Industrial Zone. In the history of Royal Oak, no transient merchant has applied or been granted that this variance be waived. So we were really exploring un-chartered waters. The reason that I would have liked to see the property owner is because he has a vested interest in our city. He is the one who has continued to pay the taxes on that parcel of land and he is the one who will be collecting $40,000 in rent from Bordine for the 60-90 day period. He stood to be the direct beneficiary of the ZBA waiving the industrial zone use variance. I wanted to hear his experience with the property and what it would mean to him. I did not want to merely make a decision based on speculation and the dreary headlines we read in business reviews and local newspapers. It is commonly recognized the poor state of commercial and residential real estate and how our local industrial businesses are either evaporating or shifting to international operations. However, as a business owner of a commercial and industrial relocation firm, I still see quite a few industrial companies remain and looking to relocate locally to take advantage of lower lease rates, better location, and more modern facilities. In fact, this week my company is moving an industrial firm from Auburn Hills to Troy. As for the question regarding water consumption, it was a separate issue that I inquired about to gain insight for a later conversation that I planned to have with Don Johnson regarding how additional water usage by certain businesses and how it will affect projected future water rates for Royal Oak residents. Finally, my 10+ years background in the trucking industry and limited experience on traffic committee provided me insight to safety issues regarding truck routes. Before the meeting, I visited the proposed site on three separate occasions to really study the layout. It would be completely unadvisable for me not to have made a big deal about establishing a designated truck route that would be separate and distanced from the designated parking area for potential customers. Had Bordine representatives not agreed to designate a truck route, I felt there would be a safety issue and I would not have supported a transient merchant to operate in the requested industrial zone. In the end, this was my first meeting as a voting Zoning Board member and I have much to learn. Tonight, I will be attending ADA training and I am working with the city to receive additional training as it becomes available. I look forward to continuing to serve our city, and I will always welcome any of your criticism that could lead to better decision making and more positive results for our Royal Oak residents and businesses. Your idea about the laser pointer was great and I will send a follow-up email to ZBA board members asking for their consideration. In the meantime, it is evident that it is time to dust off the Master Plan and begin re-engineering the plan to be able to better adapt to today's marketplace. -- Andrew Androff: 21 May 2008
A former ZBA member comments on the same
article. The first time i was on the ZBA it was around the early 90s. The board consisted of five members and no alternates. But our biggest issue was dealing with variance requests of the 90s under a Master Plan that was over thirty years old. Actually, it was almost forty years old before the city finally implemented the "new" Master Plan. And, if my memory serves me right, the city has tweaked the "new" Master Plan twice in the past 5 years. As it should. A city like Royal Oak is constantly in flux and what was new several years ago is not now. Also, areas that have industrial zoning should be changed. Who could imagine what would happen to the industrial base of Michigan? And as the business activities become more global, industrial areas in cities like Royal Oak are shutting down and the vacant buildings need to become useful for other types of businesses. I made the motion at the end of the last ZBA meeting that the planning Department review the industrial zoning in the city and think about altering it to Mixed Use. Before the Beaumont Therapy Center and English Gardens could move into their locations on Coolidge, they had to get a use variance because the zoning was industrial. The city would have lost two great corporations if the ZBA had turned them down. I agree with the statement made in the new Master Plan that zoned areas should be reviewed and amended if necessary every 5 years. -- Laura Harrison
|
Bordine vs. English Gardens? |