
Lowell councilmembers convened for two meetings on Monday night. During the first meeting, they met as the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider a variance request. The second meeting was a regular meeting of Lowell City Council. All members were present for both meetings.
Zoning Board of Appeals: Variance Granted
Lowell City Council serves as the city’s Zoning Board of Appeals. This body is required by state law and is tasked with making decisions related to the interpretation of the zoning ordinance. Those decisions include variances which are permanent exemptions from zoning law provisions.
In townships, the ZBA must be a separate board, but cities are allowed to use their legislative body as the ZBA, as the City of Lowell has elected to do. It is unclear what, if any, training councilmembers have received to help them fulfill their duties in this role. When Lowell City Council meets as the ZBA, Jim Salzwedel serves as chair.
The issue being discussed on Monday was a variance request to allow for the construction of an accessory building at 810 Riverside Drive that would exceed both the building size and lot coverage provisions of the ordinance for the R-2 district. The ZBA previously approved a similar request for the property last month.
“Yeah, what I requested wasn’t really quite big enough,” said applicant Kimball Dlouhy. While the previously granted variance was for a 28-foot garage, Dlouhy said he really needed a 32-foot building that could be used to park three vehicles as well as a camper and other items.
As requested, the building would be 1,408 square feet, which is 448 square feet larger than what is permitted in the R-2 district. It would also increase the lot coverage to 40.5% when the ordinance limits lot coverage to 30% in the R-2 district.
According to board member Eric Bartkus, neighbors seem to be in support of the larger accessory building.
Dale Latva, who lives across from the property in question, spoke at the meeting in support of the application, noting there was a “monstrosity of a garage” on his block already. “I would hope you aren’t going to give Kimball and Patty a hard time about this variance,” he said. Resident Perry Beachum also shared his support for the variance.
Garland Berry, a resident on Foreman Street, asked about the ordinance limit of 960 square feet for an accessory building and why that building size was chosen. Salzwedel said he didn’t know. Neither did Trica Anderson, a representative of Williams & Works which provides planning services to the city. However, Anderson did note that a standard two-stall garage is about 576 square feet.
Berry wondered if a larger accessory building might impede emergency service workers when responding to a fire. He also said people generally know what they are getting when they purchase a house, and it is unreasonable to expect to be able to construct a larger building than allowed simply because someone has more items to store.
“I think there is some reasoning why these outbuildings are the size that they are,” Berry said, noting he previously was a member of the Lowell Planning Commission.
Anderson spoke next and explained that variances are usually reserved for situations in which there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances with the land itself. For instance, variances may be used in instances when topography, wetlands or easements make it difficult to adhere to zoning requirements.
In a memorandum prepared for the ZBA, city planning consultant Andy Moore noted that a variance was permission to violate the zoning ordinance and “should not be taken lightly.” Variances should only be granted in situations in which there is a practical difficulty which prevents a property owner from adhering to the zoning ordinance. Moore wrote that “it seems to strain credulity” to say that there would be a practical difficulty in constructing the accessory building which was approved last month.
“We know that the applicant is able to construct an accessory building on this property because the ZBA granted a variance to allow it on September 16,” Moore wrote later in the memo (emphasis his). “Therefore, granting of yet another variance to allow for a larger building can, in our view, harm the integrity of the Zoning Ordinance.”
However, the majority of the Zoning Board of Appeals appeared to disagree with that professional opinion. While the ZBA did not take a final vote on the variance request, it did vote on each of the six standards required for a variance to be approved. After voting on the sixth standard, Salzwedel said the “motion has passed and approved.”
When voting on the standards, Board Members Marty Chambers and Mike DeVore voted no on some standards, saying they had not been met, while Board Members Leah Groves, Bartkus and Salzwedel all voted that each standard had been met.
City Council Meeting: Public Comments
After the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting was adjourned, councilmembers reconvened as Lowell City Council with Mayor Mike DeVore presiding. First on the agenda were public comments.
“When are the barriers going to be removed from Riverside Drive,” Latva asked. He was referring to a temporary barrier erected to prevent traffic from traveling north from Main Street. City Manager Mike Burns said they would be removed shortly.
“I want you to know I hope they never return,” Latva said. “Let’s get our act together and do it right and let Riverside Drive go all the way.”
However, resident Beryl Bartkus, who was next to speak, felt as though the city council should do something to ensure vehicles are not speeding down Riverside Drive. “The problem I see is that it’s not a street when you think about it,” she said. “It’s a parking lot from Main Street to Elm Street.”
On a different subject, Berry requested that councilmembers speak into their microphones. He said that during the night’s earlier discussion, “I didn’t hear a thing you guys were voting on.”
425 Agreement
The most consequential item on the agenda for the evening was a resolution authorizing a 425 agreement with Lowell Charter Township.
The agreement will conditionally transfer a parcel of land near I-96 to the City of Lowell for a period of 50 years. This land is expected to be developed into an industrial park. Once the land is transferred, the city will then be responsible for police services and road maintenance there, but it will also be able to collect taxes from businesses that may be established on the property. The agreement is conditional on new water and sewer agreements with the township being established and a development plan being approved.
In addition, water and sewer lines will need to be run out to the site. To meet the demand of businesses in the industrial park, both the water and wastewater facilities will need to be expanded to double their capacity. The price for this work is estimated at $21 to $23 million, according to the city’s website.
“Obviously, the biggest concern is making sure that the city is paying for only their costs and not paying for the developer’s,” City Manager Mike Burns said. He shared that he had asked engineering firm Williams & Works to provide price estimates for what it would cost to expand the facilities to meet the needs of the city and existing township service area, excluding the business park or any new service area in the township.
In his public comments on the matter, Beachum felt the council should wait to approve the agreement until more information was received about how much utility ratepayers would need to pay both with and without the business park expansion. “I’m afraid that a month, two months down the road that if you agree to it tonight that all of a sudden something gets negotiated and shoved through,” he said.
Residents Tyler Kent, Dennis Kent and Latva echoed the concerns about the cost to city residents and ratepayers. Significant water and sewer rate increases were approved earlier this year to pay for a much smaller project.
“I don’t understand why we need to get involved in a development four miles away from us,” Latva said.
Dlouhy said he thought the location was great for an industrial park and mentioned that it wasn’t uncommon for a project to help foot the bill for infrastructure costs. He asked if that was being discussed. City Attorney Jessica Wood said that would be part of the development agreement discussion.
After public comments, Burns said that the city was looking at approving the agreement now for two reasons. The first was “for the developer to be able to close everything they need on their end.” The other was “to help us with the state to try to get more money to reduce our costs going forward.” So far, the State of Michigan has awarded the project $17.5 million help cover the cost of running utility lines to the site.
It was stressed that the agreement is contingent upon the water and sewer agreements being renegotiated, and those agreements are what will determine how much water and sewer customers pay in the future.
“I hope you trust that the city attorney, myself, Mayor Pro Tem Chambers and Assistant City Manager LaBombard are going to be representing the city’s interests (in renegotiating the water and sewer agreements),” Burns said. “I’m not going to give the city a bad deal. I’ve never done that in the eight years I’ve been here, and I ain’t starting now.”
“This is so the developer can go forward in getting the property which then allows us to talk to them about how much they are paying,” DeVore said. “We can’t go and talk to a developer about improvements to property they don’t have.”
Burns added that if the state required an expansion of the water facility, the city would currently be responsible for 58% of that cost. However, because of this proposed business park, the city is in a position to renegotiate the current water agreement with the township and potentially reduce that amount.
“This allows us to stay in the conversation,” said Councilmember Leah Groves.
Councilmember Eric Bartkus said the agreement offered many benefits to city residents including increased revenues. While Bartkus said that money could be used to cover the cost of utility plant upgrades, it was unclear if he meant property tax revenues from the site or utility payment revenues. Burns has repeatedly said in the past that property tax revenues shouldn’t be used for utility upgrades and that the utilities should be self-sustaining.
Bartkus said the expanded utility plants mean more businesses and neighborhoods can be established in the area and that there is also a possibility of a “Headlee rollback.” The rollback is a provision in state law that limits a municipality’s annual increase in property tax revenue to no more than the rate of inflation. If property from the business park causes city tax revenues to increase past the rate of inflation, it will trigger a reduction in the millage rate.
DeVore said all councilmembers were elected so “I would assume that there exists in this community a certain level of trust, at least minimally, for us. All we’re asking is a chance to prove that you were right to put your trust in us.”
The resolution authorizing a 425 agreement – contingent upon water, sewer and development agreements – was passed on a 4-1 vote. Councilmember Jim Salzwedel was the lone no vote and later in the meeting said he had concerns and felt he needed more information on some of the issues raised.
Other Meeting Items
Other action updates and updates from the meeting included:
- Unanimous approval to pay $22,413 to Northwest Kent Mechanical for the labor to replace a torque tube at the wastewater plant.
- Presentation by Det. Aubrey Culver and Ofc. Bryan Rader of the Lowell Police Department regarding a test run for a traffic unit within the department. This would be a second officer tasked with patrolling streets and providing back-up. The test run was considered a success, and should the department be expanded to include another full-time officer, Culver’s recommendation was that Rader – who has the desired credentials and experience – be moved a traffic unit position.
- Unanimous approval to pay $98,000 to Williams & Works for design engineering work for 2025 road projects.
- Burns said he was interviewing four candidates for the position of Chief of Police. Current chief, Chris Hurst, has announced that he will retire next spring.
The meeting adjourned at 8:33pm. The next regular meeting of Lowell City Council will be Monday, November 4, at 7pm at Lowell City Hall.
“I hope you trust that the city attorney, myself, Mayor Pro Tem Chambers and Assistant City Manager LaBombard are going to be representing the city’s interests (in renegotiating the water and sewer agreements),” Burns said. “I’m not going to give the city a bad deal. I’ve never done that in the eight years I’ve been here, and I ain’t starting now.”
I would trust the city manager about as far as I could throw him. This is an incredibly naive idea that’s going to be funded by the ratepayers of the city, just as every other expansion idea these people come up with. All so we can add a police officer to patrol a parking lot 5 miles south of town? Sounds completely practical.