Zoning Board of Appeals- - Minutes 01/291987CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON January 29, 1987
Chairman Gerald Fohr called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairman Gerald Fohr, Vice Chairman Erno, Peter
Passick, Carol Nievinski, Thomas Berken and Zoning Officer Gerald
Lee.
ABSENT Vincent Caporali, Linda Koester
MINUTES Mr. Berken moved to adopt the minutes of the December 4,
19 meeting. Mr. Erno seconded and the motion carried.
APPEAL 1-87 - Thomas Rock Mrs. Rock appeared before the
Board of Appeals to request a 10' offset variance on an already
constructed 12' X 12' shed. The appellants had constructed the
shed without obtaining a permit and were asked by the city to
obtain same. Mrs. Rock explained that they did not realize they
had to purchase a permit for this construction. The storage shed
had been architecturally approved by the Plan Commission. Mrs.
Rock explained that the back of the shed faced undeveloped land
at the present time and was constructed on a wooden foundation
with the skirting and posts nailed into the ground. Also, the
underground electric cables were located in front of the shed and
would have to be dug up and moved if the storage shed was
relocated. Zoning Officer Lee explained the classification that
accessory buildings over 120 square feet were considered as
second garage structures and would have to maintain the offset
and setback requirements of this RS2 district. Accessory
buildings under 120 square feet could be located within 3' of the
lot line.
APPEAL 2-87 - STOECKMAN/MILLERrirs. Miller appeared
before the Board of Appeals requesting a 3' offset variance on
the north side and an 8' 10" variance for distance between house
and garage. Appeal 18-86 was granted to Ms. Stoeckman and Ms.
Miller with exceptions on September 25, 1986. Since that time
they have had to drill a new well which they feel prohibited an
attached 20' X 26' garage. Ms. Miller stated the drilling rig
could not get down the east lot line because it would interfere
with the neighbor's shurbs along this lot line. Mr. Greg Stack,
the owner of the property north of the garage stated he was
concerned about the safety hazards and possible resale value of
his property with the garage so close to the lot line. It was
noted that the well had to be dug 25' from the lake and water
surrounds this property on the west and south.
The Board remained in open session.
BOARD OF APPEALS - Page 2
January 29, 1987
APPEAL 1-87 Mr. Berken moved to approve the appeal as
submitted. Mrs. Nievinski seconded and the motion carried. The
hardship is the electric wires buried where the building should
have been placed.
APPEAL 2-87 Mr. Fohr moved to deny the appeal as
submitted. Mr. Passick seconded and the motion carried. The
reason for denial is that the Board of Appeals thought that the
variance granted on the original appeal was sufficient enough to
construct a garage which could be located away from the well and
5' from the north lot line.
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: Mrs. Nievinski moved to elect Mr. Berken
as Vice -Chairman. Mr. Passick seconded and the motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Berken moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:30
P.M. Mr. Erno seconded and the motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynne Sweet
Recording Secretary
/ls
96 1 0 1/
0
C
C at
Ur z
s
�o
A - New Well prohibits attached garage.
B - Property next to ours on North side has an addition on house that is
basically on Lot Line.
C - The addition to that house is a utility room and a garage,, doesn't
block anyone's view or change the terrain!
D- In order to maintain quality of vehicles over an extended period of
time a garage is necessary to provide proper shelter from the elements!
E- Personal vehicles properly maintained are only means of transportation
to and from work!
January 30, 1987
Ms. Sue Stoeckman
Ms. Louise Miller.
W182 S6581 Garnet Drive
Muskego, WI 53150
Dear Ms. Stoeckman & Miller:
The Board of Appeals wishes to advise you that your appeal
for a 3' offset (north side) and 8110" variance for distance
between house and garage has been denied as submitted. The
reason for denial is that the Board of Appeals thought the
variance granted on the original appeal was sufficient enough to
construct a garage which could be located away from the well and
5' from the north lot line.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF APPEALS
�� �L ,1Ll.Gc.tiZ•C—�
Lynne Sweet
Recording Secretary
/ls
cc: Chairman Gerald Fohr