BRADY TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MINUTES OF MEETING HELD OCTOBER 21, 2008

A meeting of the Brady Township Zoning Board of Appeals was held October 21, 2008. Chairman James Dyke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Members Present: Chairman James Dyke

                                Mike Oswalt

                                Ed Haberle

                                Joe Timko

Absent was Aileen Greanya.

Also attending were four citizens.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

A motion was made by Jim Dyke and seconded by Mike Oswalt to approve the minutes of the September 30, 2008 meeting as printed. The motion was carried.

REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE by Jeff Rohrstaff

Jeff Rohrstaff has requested a variance for relief from side yard setbacks as set forth in Brady Township Zoning Ordinance Article XIV. He wants to have a shed at his residence at 7605 S Indian Lake Drive in Brady Township. The R-1 zoning for this property requires a 10’ side yard setback, and the shed has a 3’ setback.

A memo concerning the variance request has been received from Township Attorney Craig Rolfe and distributed to the Zoning Board members and to Mr. Rohrstaff.

Chairman Dyke opened the Public Hearing.

Mr. Rohrstaff stated that he removed an existing shed on a cement block because it was rotted out and in very bad condition. His intent was to improve the shed. He states that there is no other location on his property to place the shed.

Joe Timko explained that the 10’ side yard setback on each property is to allow easy access

for emergency and rescue vehicles as well as to help prevent the spread of a fire from one house to another. He stated that the 10’ setback is less than in other areas in the township, because the smaller sizes of these lakefront lots were considered.

Norman Drake, 7601 S Indian Lake Drive, a next-door neighbor, stated that he feels the new shed is a great improvement. Jim Campbell, 7616 S Indian Lake Drive also stated that he has no objections to the shed’s location. Chairman Dyke noted that the township received a letter signed by several area residents who do not object to the shed. It was noted that the neighbors’ views are considered, but that the current zoning ordinances must be enforced.

Chairman Dyke stated that this Zoning Board will try to determine if this property has a practical difficulty with the placement of the shed in a conforming manner.

Mr. Rohrstaff stated that there is no other site on the property to place the shed. He stated that he could not place the shed between the house and garage, which would conform to the setback minimum, because that side of the house is all windows.

It was noted that the house itself is non-conforming, as well as the porch that was removed.

The Public Hearing was closed.

The Zoning Board of Appeals considered the variance request with the variance standards as published in Article XXIII, Section 23.8 of the Brady Township Zoning Ordinances. After discussion, the members of the ZBA found the following:

1a. The reason of exceptional topographic conditions or of size, shape, etc. practical difficulties

      has not been met because there is nothing exceptional about this 65’ wide lot in this lakefront

      area.

1b. A variance would be of a detriment to adjoining properties because it could possibly prevent

      emergency vehicle access.

1c. There is nothing exceptional about this property in this neighborhood.

1d. The shed would allow the Rohrstaff family to enjoy their property in the same way as others

      in this area who have sheds.

2. There is no economic hardship requested or presented.

3. This is a self-created difficulty—when the original, legal non-conforming shed was removed, the current zoning ordinances came into effect.

Jim Dyke made a motion to deny Mr. Rohrstaff’s request for variance relief because the shed does not meet all of the variance standards as set forth in Article XXIII, Section 23.8 of the Brady Township Zoning Ordinances. Joe Timko supported, and the motion was carried unanimously.

Mr. Rohrstaff stated that there was no other place to put the shed.

There was a motion by Ed Haberle to adjourn at 8:00 p.m. Mike Oswalt supported, and the motion was passed unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________________

James Dyke, Chairman

Brenda Brock

Recording Secretary