Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Zoning board unanimously waives 12-month and 50% limits to allow completion of renovation at 22664 East River Road

5765109 · August 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

On Aug. 26 the Grosse Ile Zoning Board of Appeals approved Appeal 25-003 to allow a property owner to exceed the township

The Grosse Ile Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 26 voted unanimously to approve Appeal 25-003, waiving the township's usual 50% investment cap and the associated 12-month limit so the owner may finish renovating a secondary dwelling at 22664 East River Road.

The petition before the board asked that the nonconforming-structure rules in township ordinance 18.6 'which limit reinvestment to 50% of a building's value within a 12-month period'be relaxed so the owner could complete a large remodel without stopping when that cap was reached. Brian Borden, the township zoning official, told the board that "they have the ability to invest up to 50% of the value of the building within a 12 month time frame," and that a permit for that initial work was issued in April.

Why it matters: The building is roughly 125 years old and the petitioner said the secondary structure has long been part of the family property. Petitioner Dane Oxlow said the family's plan is to allow his parents to "age in place" in the renovated secondary unit while he and his family occupy the primary residence. The board's action lets the owner proceed without leaving the building partially finished while waiting for the ordinance's 12-month reset.

Zoning facts and how the case reached the board: The property is in an R-1A single-family zone and contains multiple detached accessory structures; the township's zoning ordinance generally allows only one detached accessory building. Borden told the board the secondary dwelling is a legally nonconforming use because the building has been continuously used as a dwelling since before current zoning. He also noted the case implicates the board's variance-review standard in section 23.5(B).

Permit history and cost estimates: The owner obtained a building permit in April limited by the 50% rule and began work. The petitioner told the board the remaining estimated cost to complete the project is about $130,000 to $150,000 and that, if allowed to obtain the full permit now, the work could be completed in roughly six to eight months. Neighbors submitted and read a letter into the record supporting the request and several neighbors spoke in favor during public comment.

Board discussion and rationale: Board members discussed the ordinance's purpose: to limit long-term reinvestment in nonconforming buildings so they eventually conform to current zoning. Several members said the building's age and the extent of existing work supported a finding of practical difficulty, substantial justice and extraordinary or unique circumstances that were not created by the current owner. The board also discussed construction unknowns in older buildings (plumbing, site conditions) and noted certain items (plumbing, HVAC, electrical) do not count toward the reinvestment calculation under the ordinance.

Formal action and immediate effect: Board member John moved to approve Appeal 25-003, specifically waiving the 12-month time restriction and the 50% dollar limitation so the structure could be completed as designed; a second voice supported the motion and the board passed it by unanimous roll call. The board's vote does not remove the requirement to obtain building permits, inspections, or any other approvals required by the building department; Borden said the building official would issue subsequent permits consistent with the board's decision.

What the board did not decide: The board's vote waived the ordinance limits for this property; it did not declare the structure to be formally historic (the township has no record of a historic designation) and it did not change other provisions of the zoning code. The petitioner may still need to return to secure subsequent permits or address conditions identified by the building official.

Context: Several board members noted the renovation aligns with goals expressed in the township master plan'including preserving historic character and increasing options for older residents to remain in place. The board heard public support from immediate neighbors who described the exterior siding and design as intended to blend into the woods.

Next steps: The owner will provide any permit documentation required by the building department to secure the full permit reflecting the board's action. The board's approval allows the building official to issue permits above the earlier 50% threshold so work can proceed toward the stated six- to eight-month completion estimate.