Loading...
Zoning Board of Appeals- - Minutes 05/26/2005ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDINGS OF FACTS A dimensional variance is hereby granted to Patrick Gerrits, by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Muskego in Appeal ##05-2005 to permit a 400 square foot variance to the mother-in-law/family unit size limit, permitting a 1,200 square foot mother-in-law/family unit for the property at S63 W15487 College Avenue / Tax Key No. 2166.998, based upon the applicant having met the specifics of the City Ordinance with respect to granting variances. It was found that the variance is allowed due to the exceptional circumstances that apply. More specifically, the granting of the variance provides the property owners with the needed space for their medical needs. Also, the property rights of other property owners are preserved, and no detriment is caused to an adjacent property. Signed this 71h day o�une Dan Schepp Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Signed _ GYM --- Adam Trzebiatowski Associate Planner ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES CITY OF MUSKEGO MAY 26, 2005 Meeting was called to order at 7:10 P.M. PRESENT: Chairman Dan Schepp, Dr. Barb Blumenfield, Mr. Horst Schmidt, Dr. Russ Kashian, Mr. William Le Doux, and Associate Planner Adam Trzebiatowski. EXCUSED: Mr, Henry Schneiker STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE: The Secretary stated the meeting was noticed on May 19, 2005, in accordance with Open Meeting Laws. NEW BUSINESS: APPEAL #04-2005 Petitioner: Glen Roethle and Christine Shaver, W191 S6456 Hillendale Dr 1 Tax Key 2177,992. REQUESTING under the direction of Chapter 17 Zoning Ordinance: Section 3.08(1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks the following variance: Chapter 17 — Zoning Ordinance: Section 5.02 Building Location. (1) Location Restricted: No building shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or relocated on a lot except in conformity with the following locational regulations as hereinafter specified for the district in which it is located. A setback of 40-feet is required from any right-of-way line on the above mentioned corner lot. The petitioner seeks a setback of 23.5-feet from the right-of-way to permit the relocation of an existing garage, and is therefore requesting 16.5-foot variance from the northern property line. Dr. Blumenfield administered the oath to Mr. Roethle. Mr. Roethle explained the foundation of his garage is cracking and needs repair. The structure itself is in good condition but needs to be moved out of the way of the foundation in order to replace the foundation. Mr. Roethle stated the neighbor to the south would not give permission to temporarily move the garage onto their property. Therefore, Mr. Roethle is requesting to move the garage back to the rear property line. The garage is 26-feet long and the distance to the rear property line is 20-feet which leaves a 6-foot difference. Mr. Roethle explained the contractor needs the garage completely out of the way to construct the new slab. Mr. Roethle is requesting a variance to build a portion of the new slab five feet closer to the front lot line. Dr. Blumenfield noted there could be safety issues with the vision corner if the garage were moved closer to School Drive. Mr. Schepp questioned if a contractor would do the concrete work with the garage lifted up. Mr. Roethle stated he received 3 different quotes and no one would do the work under the garage due to liability concerns. Mr. Schepp questioned the hardship. Mr. Roethle stated the hardship is if the foundation were to worsen and then possibly need to replace the entire garage structure. Mr. Trzebiatowski gave the City's opinion. This is the only garage that the petitioner currently has on the property. The petitioner is limited on where another garage could be placed but there are options if the garage was completely reconstructed. The existing garage and house are non -conforming and the petitioner wishes to make the non -conforming garage more non -conforming. The building file for he property showed that the current garage location was allowed to be placed in its non -conforming location through an approval from a past building inspector. Staff is recommending denial of the appeal citing that the variance does not preserve the intent of the Zoning Ordinance because there are not exceptional conditions applying to the parcel that do not apply to other properties. Also, a non -self imposed hardship is not found for the appeal. There are other options that could be pursued on this parcel in order to still allow a garage. A new garage could be built on this site that would be conforming if so desired. APPEAL #05-2005 Petitioner: Patrick D. Gerrits, S63 W 15487 College Avenue 1 Tax Key 2166.998. REQUESTING under the direction of Chapter 17 Zoning Ordinance: Section 3.08(1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks the following variance: Chapter 17 — Zoning Ordinance: Section 8.01 (B) Permitted ZBA Minutes 5/26/2005 Page 2 Accessory Uses. 12. Mother-in-law Units: Any portion of a single family residence, intended to be occupied by a resident(s) related through blood, marriage or adoption to a host resident occupant, being no greater than 800 square feet in size, that has an independent wing or area that is self-supporting in terms of livable needs (i.e. unit includes a kitchen, bath, den and bedroom), but is dependent on utility infrastructure of the primary residence. Access to this wing or area may be obtained via one door to the outside and a second non -lockable door or passageway to the main portion of the host residence. Access is permitted to a garage area having no service door. (Ord. #947-10-02-97) All such requests are subject to building, site and operational plan approval of the Plan Commission following written notice being distributed by the Plan Commission to neighboring property owners within 100 feet of the subject property. (Ord. #947-10-02-97) An 800 square foot size limit is placed upon Mother-in-Law/Family Units. The petitioner seeks a 1,200 square foot Mother -in -Law Unit, and is therefore requesting a 400 square foot variance to allow for a larger Moth er-in-LawlFamily Unit. Dr. Blumenfield administered the oath to Mr. Gerrits. Mr. Gerrits explained his daughter, a nurse, and her family will be moving into the house he and his wife currently occupy. Mr. Gerrits went to the Planning Commission and received approval for a 800 sq ft mother-in-law unit in which he and his wife would be moving into. Mr. Gerrits explained he currently has arthritis and his wife has osteoporosis. They have seen the effects of these illnesses in both their parents. Mr. Gerrits is requesting 1200 sq feet for the mother-in-law unit to accommodate hospital beds or wheelchairs if necessary in the future to accommodate their medical needs. Mr. Le Doux noted from experience being a rescue person it is nice to have extra room to move around. Mr. Gerrits stated medical circumstances are the hardship for the extra square footage. Mr. Trzebiatowski gave the City's opinion. The existing house is non -conforming in location. Due to this, the addition (if approved) has to follow the 50% Rule. This means that if there is an addition to a non- conforming structure, the value of the materials of the addition can not exceed 50% of the existing Fair Market Value of the home (the land value is not included) according to the Assessor's records. If this variance is granted, the petitioner will need to submit a material cost to the Plan Department. At that time the Plan Department will evaluate if the cost is within the allowed range. Staff is recommending approval of appeal 05-2005, allowing a Mother-in-Law/Family Unit total of 1,200 square feet, a 400 square foot variance; citing that the variance does not meet the code requirements but staff feels that due to the stated medical concerns and needs, the larger unit should be allowed. The grating of this variance does not cause any harm to the surrounding properties. DELIBERATIONS: APPEAL 04-2005 — Dr. Kashian moved to approve appeal 04-00205 as submitted. Dr. Blumenfield seconded. Dr. Blumenfield explained if the foundation were to worsen the structure could possibly fall down and the neighbors would have to look at that. Dr. Blumenfield also noted improving the condition of the property has been acceptable by the Board in the past. Mr. Schepp stated the 5-feet is not an issue for sight lines to the road. Upon a roll call vote, Appeal 04-2005 is approved 5-0. APPEAL 05-2005 — Dr. Blumenfield moved to approve Appeal 05.2005, allowing a Mother-in- Law/Family Unit total of 1,200 square feet, a 400 square foot variance. Seconded by Mr. Le Doux. Dr. Blumenfield agreed with staff recommendation citing the medical concerns and needs, the larger unit should be allowed, and granting this variance does not cause any harm to the surrounding properties. Upon a roll call vote Appeal 05-2005 is approved 5-0. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Dr. Kashian moved to approve the minutes of March 24, 2005. ZBA Minutes 5/26/2005 Page 3 Seconded by Mr. Schmidt. Motion carried 5-0. MISCELLANEOUS: None. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before this Board, Dr. Blumenfield moved to adjourn. Mr. Schmidt seconded. Upon voice vote, meeting adjourned at 8:20 PM. Respectfully Submitted, 6�(Oe—' Kellie Renk, Recording Secretary CITY OF MUSKEGO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA May 26, 2005 7:00 PM Muskego City Hall, Muskego Room, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF CLOSED SESSION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Board of Appeals of the City of Muskego may convene, upon passage of the proper motion, into closed session pursuant to Section 19.85 (1) (a) of the State Statutes for the purpose of deliberating concerning cases which were the subject of a quasi-judicial hearing; said cases being the above listed appeals. The Board of Appeals will then reconvene into open session. Detailed descriptions are available for public inspection at the Clerk's office. All interested parties will be given an opportunity to be heard. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS 1. APPEAL #04-2005 Petitioner: Glen Roethle 1 Christine Shaver Residence: W191 S6456 Hillendale Drive 1 Tax Key No. 2177.992 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Chapter 17 Zoning Ordinance: Section 3.08(1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks the following variances: Chapter 17—Zoninc�Ordinance: Section 5.02 Building Location (1) Location Restricted: No building shall be hereafter erected, structurally altered or relocated on a lot except in conformity with the following locational regulations as hereinafter specified for the district in which it is located. A setback of 40-feet is required from any right-of-way line on the above mentioned lot. 'Tbe petitioner seeks a setback of 23.5-feet from the right-of-way to permit the relocation of an existing garage, and is therefore requesting a 16.5-foot variance from the northern property line, 2. APPEAL #05-2005 Petitioner: Patrick D. Gerrits Residence: S63 W15487 College Avenue / Tax Key No. 2166.998 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Chapter 17 Zoning Ordinance: Section 3.08(1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks the following variances: Chapter 17--Zoning_ Ordinance: Section 8.01(B) Permitted Accessory Uses 12. Mother-in-Law/Family Units: Any portion of a single family residence, intended to be occupied by a resident(s) related through blood, marriage or adoption to a host residence occupant, being no greater than 800 square feet in size, that has an independent wing or area that is self- supporting in terms of livable needs (i.e. unit includes a kitchen, bath, den and bedroom), but is dependent on utility infrastructure of the primary residence. Access to this wing or area may be obtained via one door to the outside and a second non -lockable door or passage way to the ZBA 05r'2712004 Page 2 main portion of the host residence. Access is permitted to a garage area having no service door. (Ord. #947 - 10-02-97) All such requests are subject to building, site, and operational plan approval of the Plan Commission following written notice being distributed by the Plan Commission to neighboring property owners within 100 feet of the subject property. (Ord. #947 - 10-02-97) An 800 square foot size limit is placed upon Mother-in-Law/Family Units. The petitioner seeks a 1,200 square foot Mother-in-Law/Family Unit, and is therefore requesting a 400 square foot variance to allow for a larger Mother-in- Law/Family Unit. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE March 24, 2005 MEETING. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ADJOURN It is possible that members of and possibly a quorum of members of other governmental bodies of the municipality may be in attendance at the above -stated meeting to gather information; no action will be taken by any governmental body at the above -stated meeting other than the governmental body specifically referred to above in this notice. Also, upon reasonable notice, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of disabled individuals through appropriate aids and services. For additional information or to request this service, contact Janice Moyer, City ClerklTreasurer at Muskego City Hall, (262) 679-5625. City of Muskego Zoning Board of Appeals Supplement 05-2005 For the meeting of: May 26, 2005 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Chapter 17—Zoning Ordinance: Section 8.01 (B) Permitted Accessory Uses 12. Mother-in-Law/Family Units: Any portion of a single family residence, intended to be occupied by a resident(s) related through blood, marriage or adoption to a host residence occupant, being no greater than 800 square feet in size, that has an independent wing or area that is self-supporting in terms of livable needs (i.e. unit includes a kitchen, bath, den and bedroom), but is dependent on utility infrastructure of the primary residence. Access to this wing or area may be obtained via one door to the outside and a second non -lockable door or passage way to the main portion of the host residence. Access is permitted to a garage area having no service door. (Ord. #947 - 10-02-97) APPELLANT: Patrick Gerrits LOCATION. S63 W 15487 College Avenue 1 Tax Key No. 2166.998 PREPARED BY: Adam Trzebiatowski BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting to build a 1,200 square foot Mother-in-Law/Family unit onto their existing home. The parcel is zoned RS-1, Suburban Residence District and is located on College Avenue. The petitioner seeks the following variance: An exception to the 800 square foot limitation for Mother-in-Law/Family units. The zoning code states that Mother-in-Law/Family units are allowed with Plan Commission approval up to 800 square feet in size. The petitioner has already received Plan Commission approval for the Mother-in-Law/Family Unit but they are seeking a variance because they want their unit to be over 800 square feet. They are requesting a 1,200 square foot unit, which requires a 400 square foot variance. DISCUSSION This Mother-in-Law/Family unit is proposed to be attached to the west side of the existing house. As stated above, the Zoning Code allows Mother-in-Law/Family units up to 800 square feet in size with Plan Commission approval. The petitioner has stated a need to allow for an increased size (up to 1,200 square feet). The information submitted by the petitioner stated that into the future as they age they would like to able to live in their current house along with their children and grand children. The petitioner also stated that the large sized unit would insure them the future space for any medical equipment that may be needed for their health. Their intentions have stated that the petitioners would reside in the Mother-in-Law/Family unit while their children and grandchildren will reside in the main portion of the home. Appeal # 03-2005 ZBA 3-24-2005 Page 1 One additional item that is present is that the existing house is non -conforming in its location. Due to this, the addition (if approved) has to follow the "50% Rule". This means that if there is an addition to a non -conforming structure, the value of the materials of the addition can not exceed 50% of the existing Fair Market Value of the home (the land value is not included) according the Assessor's records. If this variance is granted, the petitioner will need to submit a material cost to the Plan Department. At that time the Plan Department will evaluate if that cost is within the allowed range. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Approval of Appeal 05-2005, allowing a Mother-in-Law/Family Unit total of 1,200 square feet, a 400 square foot variance; citing that the variance does not meet the code requirements but staff feels that due to the stated medical concerns and needs, the larger unit should be allowed. The granting of this variance does not cause any harm to the surrounding properties. Appeal # 03-2005 ZBA 3-24-2005 Page 2 Appeal #05-2005 Supplemental Map LEGEND Agenda Item(s) Property �v Right-of-way �- Hydrography - CITY OF Prepared by City of Muskego UC�VOI Planning Department Petitioner: 2166.998 Patrick D. Gerrits S63 1N15487 College Avenue CITY OF MUSKEGO BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICATION FOR DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE Appellant's Name'. F�TXLe-- Subject Property Address: �&3 L015-43 i Telephone- Day- q;,Z - 1 a9 ., Evening: Property Zoning: 0:11 - _ Tax Key- Petitioner's relationship to property (circle applicable): Owner f Date inspector denied zoning permit: Lessee Other Requesting variance to Code Section To allow: 6A)o19-&,e- 1 o ��v t�t���z•v-� �� �1-7` 04 l Zvo 15 T" A literal enforcement of the terms of the above -referenced section would result in practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship because: (.-, -) -;J s r- Vak Rew,(. S `7L�, b,:t�f 'T{!� i I��csyS�i � rvk i&rH �z �'ST�� eRos�• .,�'js�. y-" �ilf •�: -� s�,.+ it .tti �Et A rui 21r L1iF �r� iiF7� l r,�1[;rL lQrU5 n7}/ i v (�f� f � ec�YftS °1 di 'r�t��•tL. wz,*- Akr,i,, f"-i. ud y}- lr<.%��L±.�,�;� R�,� �r•=� r�F ��� k o �- i�; l�� e.;L t s� ' �,G, � o �c,c. P�.UTs "• �rG-s�. 'r/�,�nsf-s S .G. ,��YH l 7r7 � R � R'e9�k� �i �4,G ��✓� Y�c C-�+��c �- 'tF/F rtn A%o >. ;il 71it',�.� �!%.+1�5 ��- The variance, if granted, wiltnot be contrary to the public interest and will be in accord with the spirit of the code because: � ;u� r � LZ �r A4- it f-c lk� � ,i ..`�E� wv;f `!?ter% 7lts /t +1A.) 1Qb�ei7�n� .1F�E K IL The variance, if granted, will not adversely affect public safety or jeopardize public welfare because: 1,z26 , b ?7V,. ! pr t2 6L%� r y r3uF x �o� ►�w'.r» +F'.vv �L-V, -t i3 SeT 7r7 O � crL i � .� y f o .5� �✓c> t' �. °C C 6� I�1r, C� r} J+JQifx c XJ 2 5:1CITYHALLNPlanning\FORMSIBOA-Dimensional Appeal Application.doc Last printed 6/24/2004 8:47 AM SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE REQUESTS At the direction of the Zoning Board of Appeals, the following information is required to be submitted with the application (10 copies of each): ■ For any variance pertaining to a parcel of land, a Plat of Survey, prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, must be submitted. The Plat of Survey must be dated, with no time requirements, and include the original seal of the surveyor. Plat of Survey must contain the following: 1. The parcel in question with dimensions, bearings and a description of the exterior boundaries. 2. Abutting streets, properties, lakes and/or rivers, etc. 3. Location and size (with dimensions and area) of any existing buildings or structures. 4. Ordinary High-water Mark, 100-year Flood Elevation, 2-foot about the 100- year Flood Elevation, Easements, etc. 5. Location and size of culverts, ditches, trees, wells, septic system, retaining walls, driveways, sidewalks, patios, or any other items pertinent to the variance requested —including area calculations. 6. Elevations at corners of parcel, building corners, grade breaks and any other elevations pertinent to the variance requested. 7. Proposed building, structure or appurtenance for which the variance is being requested. The scaled construction drawings of the appurtenance, addition, or structure for which the variance is being requested. ■ Fee in the amount of $200.00 Account # 100.01.18.03.4327 SIGNATURE OF APPELLANT "'�L� DATE SIGNATURE OF OWNER (if different) DATE PLEASE BE INFORMED THAT ANY LEGAL, ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATIVE FEES INCURRED BY THE CITY, IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING A PROPOSAL OR APPLICATION, BUT NOT INCLUDED IN THIS FEE SCHEDULE, WILL BE CHARGED BACK TO THE PETITIONER / APPLICANT / OWNER / DEVELOPER FOR 100% RECOVERY. (Ch. 3.085/Ord. #908) S:ICITYHALL1Planning\FORMS180A-Oimensional Appeal Application doc Last printed 6/24/2004 8:47 AM IV � 1 1 l r C :e P I t—} P I ell N p r Planning Board of Appeals April 28 h, 2005 My name is Pat Gerrits and my wife is Shirley Gerrits. We are petitioning for a variance from the In -Law Suite ordinance which limits an In -Law Suite to 800 square feet. We moved to Muskego in 1973 and have lived at S63 W15487 College Ave for the last 32 years. Our 7 children were raised here and lived with us in our 4 bedroom home. The children have all grown up and have left for their own families and homes. Our home as mentioned is a 4 bedroom on two floors with a full basement. The laundry room is in the basement. Our front entrance is off front porch which is 4 steps up from the drive way and then another step up into the house_ As we are getting older and both have medical problems, the three flights of stairs ( second floor: bedroom area, main floor, basement: laundry area )as well as the entry steps are becoming a problem for both of us. My wife has, among other things, osteoporosis. I am on medication for arthritis. Neither of these illnesses get any better with age but tend to worsen. I will be 70 on my next birthday (August) while my wife will be 68 (November).With the illnesses that we have and the way they seem to progress ( as we've seen in both my wife's parents and in my parents), we would like to be in a position where if necessary we would be able to have separate bedrooms with the room available that is necessary for long term care. Our youngest daughter and her husband with their 5 children presently live in Waukesha. They have a 2'/z bedroom home. Needless to say, they are rapidly outgrowing their present home. Our daughter is presently attending college to become a nurse. If we can add on to our present home as we currently would like to, they could move into our present home. This would be advantageous to them and to us. They would acquire the additional room that they need for their family. We in turn would have an apartment that is all on one level and would have all the things in it that we would need to remain independent. Additionally, we would be able to help them with the children on a part time basis. They in turn would be able to take care of our place while we are absent. We like to travel and are gone from home extensively during the summer months. Currently, we have to get someone to look into our place periodically, take in the mail, etc. We are asking for a variance to 1200 square feet. This would allow us to have a small kitchen and living room as well as 2 bedrooms with a full bath and a utility room. Our front entrance would be at ground level, no steps.. Thanking you in advance for your consideration. Patrick Gerrits. HTML Viewer Legend ROW 7 ONING .. y '`T }•, �, — PROPERTY 4g= PAVEMENT STRUCTURES ST C01 EFC, Land Use Current Single Family Residential RS E Multi -Family Residential N 10. A.� Condo Retail and Service Govt, Inst, and Utility Landfill, Extractive Operati Manufacturing Recreation - Private Recreation - Public Agriculture and Open Spa, n 137 Feet Map created %qth ArdMS - Copyright (C) 1992-2005 ESRI Inc. EASEMENT WATER Muskego Ortho High - 255 Low *. 0 L_i _s `1 AhL e+, L`LI, the 1.stoiiefield company inc 2851 5.88 th west allis wi. P .414 708 3331 home Improvements Proposal Submitted To: 5/14/2007 Barb Getrits Proposal # 5.63 W. 15487 College Ave. Muskego, Wi Wi perch\ ;uhnlit the ii014M1n!_' shedricutions and estimates tor: 2007210 General Synopsis To include the following components FraminglRough Carpentry Dormer (southeast corner) Build dormer to Replicate existing at southwest corner -build exterior walls approx. 12 LF wide by 13 LF high (front) approx 22 LF east/ west. -frame exterior wall to accommodate two Approx.24 x 48 " windows -frame/build roof framing with 2x6 rafters to match existing roof pitch and design -install/enforce all existing wall/roof framing to accommodate new dormer. -install approx. 600 SQFT roof decking and applicable underlayments -install all siding and aluminum trim to match existing house approx.210 SQFT *project price reflects materials and labor for building of roof dormer, (homeowner to supply windows and vinyl siding) Total Proposed Price 4,819.56 Total Proposed Price $4,819.56 (Price includes standard labor rate and material costs) We propose to hereby furnish labor, materials and debris removal in accordance with the above specifications. Payment is expected to be made as follows: deposit amount noted above upon acceptance of proposal, and remainder due upon receipt of final invoice. All material is guarantied to be as specified. All work will be completed in a workman -like manner, according to standard practices. Any alterations or deviations for the above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders. This will result in an extra charge over and above the estimate. Owner is responsible for fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Owner to furnish all applicable building permits. Authorized Signature Date This proposal may be withdrawn if not accepted within thirty (30) days from the date stated above. I he abo\c prices..pccifications acid condition. are satisfactor\ and are herch-, accepted. You are aulhori/ed to du the +\ork as specified above. Deposit \\ill be included \1 ith this accepted proposal. and the final pa\ntcnt \%ill be made as detailed abore, payable to the j. stonetield company. Authorized Signature Date