ZBA Rejects Deck Over Safety Concerns
By Karen Gould

A variance for a proposed deck in Harrisonville that would not meet Mackinac Island's five-foot setback requirement was denied by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) Wednesday, June 20, following a public hearing. The request was made by Lorma Kolatski of 2713 Cadotte Avenue.

While board member Jason St. Onge favored the deck construction, six other zoning board members said they had safety concerns and based their decision on the recommendation of Fire Chief Dennis Bradley.

In a letter to the ZBA, Mr. Bradley said, "The setback of unenclosed structures was to assure the access for the fire department to the rear of properties during emergencies, provide residents with a means of egress, and provide a safety zone between adjacent properties during a fire emergency."

Mr. Bradley also attended the public hearing, reaffirming his position on the matter.

"I'm not in favor of variances," said Mr. Bradley. "They [setback requirements] are there for a reason. In the past, too many have been granted."

Board member Armin Porter, also a member of the fire department, said that to meet variance requirements, Mrs. Kolatski would lose approximately 67 square feet of deck space.

"Sacrificing that for public safety," he said, "public safety triumphs."

Mr. St. Onge, also a member of the fire department, supported the request, and later told the Town Crier that if the variance request had involved a building, instead of a deck, he would have voted against the construction.

Mrs. Kolatski did not attend the meeting, although her sonin law, Ben Mosley, who is the property owner, was in attendance.

The property is zoned high density residential (R-3). The proposed deck was to be 50 feet long and six feet wide and, because the house sits on the lot on an angle, the distance from the deck to the property line would vary between three and one-third feet to five feet. The city ordinance calls for a minimum of five feet between a house and lot line.

Adjacent property owner Richard Grodecki suggested the deck could be angled to keep the required distance to the property line.

In a ZBA meeting following the hearing, Mayor Margaret Doud reminded board members of the issues to address when considering a variance.

Practical difficulties created by the property owner are not eligible for a variance, said city attorney Tom Evashevski, who pointed out that this is applicable to every variance the board may consider.

Under the city's zoning ordinance, "No variance in the provisions or requirements of this ordinance shall be authorized by the board unless the board finds from reasonable evidence that all the following facts and conditions exist:

1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district.

2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the vicinity. The possibility of increased financial return shall not of itself be deemed sufficient to warrant a variance.

3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and will not materially impair the intent and purposes of this ordinance or the public interest.

4. That the condition or situation of the specific piece of property, or the intended use of said property, for which the variance is sought is not of a general or recurrent nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situation."