Zoning Board of Appeals 21-1995DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING
Matthew G. Sadowski, Plan Director
(414) 679-4136
July 31, 1995
Mr. & Mrs. David De Angelis
W178 56961 Shady Lane
Muskego, WI 53150
RE: W178 56961 Shady Lane
Dear Mr. & Mrs. De Angelis:
The Board of Appeals wishes to advise you that your request for a
variance from Section 17:5.07(2) and 17:9.07(5) was approved as
submitted.
Sincerely,
Gct�d z
Carlos
cc: Chairman Pionek
W182 S8200 Racine Avenue • Box 903 • Muskego, Wisconsin 53150-0903 • Fax (414) 679-5614
CORRECTED
CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON JULY 27, 1995.
Meeting called to order at 7:01 PM.
PRESENT: Chairman Don Pionek, Vice Chairman Henry Schneiker, Mr.
Terry O'Neil, Mr. Frank Kerr, Mr. Dan Schepp, Mr. Michael Brandt,
Mr. Matt Sadowski, and Mr. Carlos Trejo.
ABSENT: Mr. Ed Herda.
MINUTES: Mr. Schneiker cited a misspelling of his name. Mr.
Herda made the motion to amend and adopt the minutes from the
June 22, 1995, meeting, Mr. Brandt seconded. Upon a voice vote
the motion to adopt the minutes of the June 22, 1995, meeting
passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
Appeal # 18-95 Russ and Vern Moeller, W208 S8543 Hillendale
Drive, Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for
Russ and Vern Moeller. Also in attendance and sworn in were
Kenneth Pulczinski of Big Bend, Art Dyer of W208 S8903 Hillendale,
and Mr. Chuck Dykstra, Director of the Building Department.
Requesting relief from an Administrative decision which requires
all Pole Buildings in an Agricultural Zoned District follow
Chapter 30--Building Code, Section 30.02--Application of
"Wisconsin Administrative Building and Heating,_Ventilating and
Air Conditioning Code", which applies ILHR 53 Commercial
Structural Requirements for applicable buildings. The petitioner
is requesting a variance to build a pole building without applying
commercial building standards.
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning, acreage, and permitted building
space of the parcel and deferred discussion of the building code
to Mr. Dykstra.
Mr. Dykstra discussed the three (3) primary building codes
utilized by his department and the history of the building code
requirements for agricultural pole buildings. With the adoption
of the City's Building Code, agricultural pole buildings were
required to be issued permits. However, the City does not have a
specific section which applies to agricultural pole buildings in
agricultural districts. The City, therefore, applies Wisconsin
Uniform Building Code standards. The Wisconsin Uniform Building
Code standard requires truss load weights to meet 401bs. The City
has applied all roofs with a 3-12 pitch or lower to meet 401b
loads and those higher pitched meet 301b loads. After requesting
counsel from the City's attorney, Mr. Dykstra was advised to
enforce truss loads no less than 301bs. Mr. Russ Moeller is
requesting 201b truss loads.
Mr. Pulczinski informed the Board on the practices of other
municipalities. He stated most municipalities exempted
agricultural pole buildings through the use of the same
Administrative Building Code.
CORRECTED
CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON JULY 27, 1995.
Meeting called to order at 7:01 PM.
PRESENT: Chairman Don Pionek, Vice Chairman Henry Schneiker, Mr.
Terry O'Neil, Mr. Frank Kerr, Mr. Dan Schepp, Mr. Michael Brandt,
Mr. Matt Sadowski, and Mr. Carlos Trejo.
ABSENT: Mr. Ed Herda.
MINUTES: Mr. Schneiker cited a misspelling of his name. Mr.
Herda made the motion to amend and adopt the minutes from the
June 22, 1995, meeting, Mr. Brandt seconded. Upon a voice vote
the motion to adopt the minutes of the June 22, 1995, meeting
passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
Appeal # 18-95 Russ and Vern Moeller, W208 S8543 Hillendale
Drive, Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for
Russ and Vern Moeller. Also in attendance and sworn in were
Kenneth Pulczinski of Big Bend, Art Dyer of W208 S8903 Hillendale,
and Mr. Chuck Dykstra, Director of the Building Department.
Requesting relief from an Administrative decision which requires
all Pole Buildings in an Agricultural Zoned District follow
Chapter 30--Building Code, Section 30.02--Application of
"Wisconsin Administrative Building and Heating, Ventilating and
Air Conditioning Code", which applies ILHR 53 Commercial
Structural Requirements for applicable buildings. The petitioner
is requesting a variance to build a pole building without applying
commercial building standards.
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning, acreage, and permitted building
space of the parcel and deferred discussion of the building code
to Mr. Dykstra.
Mr. Dykstra discussed the three (3) primary building codes
utilized by his department and the history of the building code
requirements for agricultural pole buildings. With the adoption
of the City's Building Code, agricultural pole buildings were
required to be issued permits. However, the City does not have a
specific section which applies to agricultural pole buildings in
agricultural districts. The City, therefore, applies Wisconsin
Uniform Building Code standards. The Wisconsin Uniform Building
Code standard requires truss load weights to meet 401bs. The City
has applied all roofs with a 3-12 pitch or lower to meet 401b
loads and those higher pitched meet 301b loads. After requesting
counsel from the City's attorney, Mr. Dykstra was advised to
enforce truss loads no less than 301bs. Mr. Russ Moeller is
requesting 201b truss loads.
Mr. Pulczinski informed the Board on the.practices of other
municipalities. He stated most municipalities exempted
agricultural pole buildings through the use of the same
Administrative Building Code.
Page 2 Board of Appeals, July 27, 1995
Mr. Dykstra explained that the Wisconsin Administrative Code does
exempt pole buildings, but the City requires permits for all pole
buildings, thus some type of building standard needs to be
applied. Mr. Dykstra further noted that a literal interpretation
of the Wisconsin Administrative Code allows further exemptions on
similar pole buildings, including pole buildings used for other
than agricultural purposes in which it is in the City's best
interest not to allow reduced building standards.
Mr. Brent Ryan, sales manager for Morton Buildings, was sworn in.
Mr. Ryan informed the Board of the practices he has experienced
from his sales area, which included all of Southeast Wisconsin and
portions of Illinois. Mr. Ryan stated most municipalities
referred to the Wisconsin Administrative Code, which exempts
agricultural pole buildings. Mr. Ryan also spoke of the quality
and safety of these buildings and cited of no recollections of
major incidents involving the structural capability of these
buildings.
Discussion ensued over the amount of live load and dead load
weight agricultural pole buildings should handle.
Mr. Dyer, the neighbor to the north of the Moellers, addressed the
Board. Mx. Dyer cited:
1. That the Wisconsin Administrative Code discusses pole
buildings and exempts them from commercial standards.
2. The City is trying to conform to a code that doesn't
exist.
3. The Moellers have displayed a unique and thorough
hardship.
Mr. Wayne Salentine was sworn in. Mr. Salentine expressed the
financial burden that would be placed on all farmers applying the
commercial standards.
Mr. Russ Moeller expressed his concern that such enforcement would
have an effect on all farmers, the quality of the buildings for
their specific use, and what other municipalities apply to such
structures.
Appeal # 19-95 Gilbert M. Spieler, W180 56583 Hardtke Drive,
Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for Mr.
Spieler, Kurt Moberji of W180 56588 Hardke Drive, and Fred
Scheunert of Remax Realty. Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 8.07 (1) and (2)-TRS-2, 20,000
square foot Suburban Residence District, Lot Size and Density.
Said sections define the needed lot area and minimum lot width for
legal lots for an RS-2, 20,000 square foot district with a minimum
average width of 110 feet. The petitioner is requesting a
variance to subdivide a parcel with 16,991.8 square feet and an
average minimum width of 83.9. The zoning is RS-2, 20,000 square
foot Suburban Residence.
Page 3 Board of Appeals, July 27, 1995
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning issues related to the parcel and
cited that this appeal was presented to Plan Commission. The Plan
Commission deferred action to the Board to see what their actions
would be in granting a variance to a non -conforming lot.
Chairman Pionek referred this item to Appeal # 13-95, by Terry and
Bernice Evans, in which the Board established practice not to
review Plan Commission items that had not been adopted or denied.
Mr. Sadowski cited that the Plan Commission understood the Board's
practice, but the Plan Commission's intent was to save Mr. Spieler
time by allowing him to apply for a variance before submitting for
a final land division due to the non -conforming issues involved.
Discussion ensued whether Mr. Spieler could rezone the property to
allow division of the lot. Mr. Sadowski cited that rezoning would
be difficult due to issues of the lot being in conformity with its
present district, rezoning could be interpreted as an issue of
spot zoning, and that rezoning the lot would give Mr. Spieler an
unfair advantage over neighboring RS-2, 20,000 square foot
Suburban Residences.
Mr. Schneiker swore in David De Angelis who cited that Mr.
Spieler's appeal is to ensure that once his property is sold that
the new owner would not turn around and subdivide the parcel and
sell them for a profit in which Mr. Spieler was denied and that
Mr. Spieler is trying to exhaust all options that could lead to a
subdivision of the property.
Discussion ensued that no real hardship exists for the Board to
grant a variance to subdivide the lots. Mr. Schepp made a motion
not to hear the appeal based that the Board has established past
precedence not to hear items not yet approved or denied by the
Plan Commission, to refund Mr. Spieler's fees, allow Plan
Commission to decide if the subdivision can be approved, and then
let Mr. Spieler decided if he wishes to pursue the appeal. Mr.
O'Neil seconded. Upon a voice vote, Appeal #19-95 was dismissed
unanimously.
Mr. Spieler expressed to the Board that his prime motive was to
exhaust all alternatives to subdivide the property and to ensure
when his lot was sold, it would not be subdivided.
Appeal # 20-95 Paul and Laura Balistreri, S74 W14829 Woods
Road, Muskego, Wisconsin. Mr. Pionek read the appeal for Paul
Balistreri. Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter 17--Zoe
Ordinance, Section 5.02 (1) Building Location, Setbacks, and
Section 8.07(3)--RS-2, 20,000 square foot Suburban Residence
District, Building Location. Said section restricts any building
to be placed behind the base setback line, which is located forty
(40) feet from the road right-of-way/front property line. The
petitioner is requesting a variance to construct a house addition
with a covered porch extending 3.5 feet into the setback area,
creating a 36.5 base setback line. The zoning is RS-2, 20,000
square foot Suburban Residence.
Page 4 Board of Appeals, July 27, 1995
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning issues related to the parcel,
including that the ultimate right-of-way for Woods Road would be
100 feet.
Mr. Balistreri cited his hardship being that the pre-existing
location of his home leaves no other possible place to place his
covered porch and that he is only seeking a three (3) foot
infringement into the setback area. Mr. Balisteri also expressed
safety concerns over the current 24 inch drop off due to the lack
of a porch.
Appeal # 21-95 David and Tracy De Angelis, W178 S6961 Shady
Lane, Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for Mr.
David De Angelis. Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter 17--Zoning
Ordinance, Section 5.07 (1) Open Space as defined under Section
2.02 (39) Definitions, and Section 9.07(5)--OED Existing
Development District for an RS-3 15,000 square foot Suburban
Residence District. Said section requires 66.7% of the lot area
be left as open space. The petitioner is requesting a variance to
construct a concrete driveway, reducing the percentage of open
space to 59.0% of the total lot area. The zoning is RS-3/OED,
15,000 square foot Suburban Residence in an Existing Development
District.
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning issues related to the parcel.
Mr. De Angelis informed the Board he would like to pave an
existing gravel driveway that would enhance and be in compliance
to the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
Appeal # 22-95 Lois M. Jakumbowski, W185 S6710 Jewel Crest
Drive, Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for
Lois M. Jakumbowski and her son Philip. Petitioner seeks relief
from Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 4.06 (2)A.2 Legal
Nonconformity, Nonconforming Structure. Said section requires
that if repairs and alterations to such structure exceed 50% of
the current fair market value of the structure, the structure must
be made conforming to zoning district regulations. The petitioner
is requesting a variance to raise the roof of a nonconforming
garage over 50% of the current fair market value. The zoning is
RS-3/OLS, 15,000 square foot Suburban Residence in a Lake Shore
District.
Mr. Sadowski explained the zoning issues related to the parcel.
Ms. Jakumbowski explained to the Board of how her garage needed
repairs, the current garage door was too low to allow her van
inside, and how the new garage would be in conformity with her
home and the character of the neighborhood.
Appeal # 23-95 Barbara Fields, S68 W18123 Island Drive,
Muskego, Wisconsin. Chairman Pionek read the appeal for Ms.
Barbara Fields and Richard and Bonnie Hayden, who currently reside
Page 5 Board of Appeals, July 27, 1995
at the residence. Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter 17--Zoning
Ordinance, Section 5.02 (2)B Basic District Regulations, Building
Location and Section 9.04 (3) RS-3/OLS 15,000 square foot
Residence District and Lake Shore District, Building Location .
Said section requires a minimum setback of 25 feet. The
petitioner is requesting a variance to construct a garage with a
three (3) foot setback. The zoning is RS-3/OLS, 15,000 square
foot Suburban Residence in a Lake Shore District.
Mr. Sadowski explained to the Board the zoning of the lot.
Mr. Hayden cited that he would like to construct a garage for the
lot. He explained that everyone else in the cul-de-sac had one
and that the shorter set back would not interfere with snow
plowing, presented a signed petition in support of the garage from
the neighbors, and discussed how the garage would be within the
spirit of the neighborhood. Mr. Hayden stated that the house was
put up for sale but was being pulled from sale August 1st and
would not be in the market again until next year. The hardship
cited was the need for a covered way for Ms. Fields safety, due to
her physical handicap.
Matt Soik, neighbor to the north, was sworn in. Mr. Soik
expressed he was in favor of the garage, but had concerns over the
care taking of the City property between the Field's lot and his
and expressed concerns over snow and garbage removal.
DELIBERATION OF APPEALS
APPEAL #18-95 Discussion began over the lack of a specific
building code to apply to agricultural pole buildings in
agriculturally zoned districts used for agricultural purposes.
The Board determined that in the absence of a standing code, past
practice should be applied. Mr. O'Neil made a motion to refer the
appeal as submitted to the Building Department's past practices on
standards for roof loads in agricultural pole buildings in an
agricultural district. The hardship cited is a lack of a building
code specifically addressing agricultural buildings in an
agricultural district; the Building Department, therefore, should
continue past practice until a new ordinance is established. Mr.
Kerr seconded. Upon a roll call vote, Appeal #18-95 passed
unanimously.
APPEAL #19-95 Appeal #19-95 was dismissed during new business
proceedings.
APPEAL #20--95 Mr. Schepp made a motion to approve the appeal
as submitted. The hardship stated was the pre-existing location
of the home would make it impossible to add an entry into the home
and that a literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would
result in a practical difficulty and a safety hazard. Mr. Brandt
seconded. Upon a roll call vote, Appeal #20-95 passed unanimously.
Page 5 Board of Appeals, July 27, 1995
APPEAL #21-95 Mr. O'Neil made a motion to approve the appeal
as submitted. The hardship stated was the conditions due to the
existing substandard lot size and that permitting the drive would
be in conformity and within the spirit of the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Schepp seconded. Upon a roll call vote, Appeal #21-95 passed
unanimously.
APPEAL #22-95 Mr. Kerr made a motion to approve the appeal as
submitted. The hardship stated was that use of the garage has
been made impractical for van access and that permitting the
higher roof would be in the spirit of the zoning ordinance and not
contrary to public interest. Mr. O'Neil seconded. Upon a roll
call vote, Appeal #22-95 passed unanimously.
APPEAL #23-95 Mr. O'Neil made a motion to approve the appeal
as submitted. The hardship stated was the pre-existing location
of the primary structure leaves no other place for a garage to be
placed, the garage would be in conformity and within the spirit of
the zoning ordinance, and the garage would not be contrary to the
public interest. Mr. Brandt seconded. Upon a roll call vote,
Appeal #23-95 passed unanimously.
MISCELANEOUS BUSINESS
The Board discussed if there still was a need to contact members
prior to meetings. After discussion, the Board decided that such
calls would no longer be necessary and that members will now be
responsible to inform the secretary if they are unable to attend a
meeting.
Discussion ensued over the research done over sheds that was
assigned in the last meeting. Mr. Brandt informed the Board of
his findings. After discussion, the Board agreed to the need to
allow for a higher height for sheds with an increased setback.
The agreed upon height and setbacks for sheds was a maximum nine
(9) foot height for a three (3) foot offset, a nine (9) to
thirteen (13) foot height for a five (5) foot offset, and all
other sheds to conform to the zoning district's regulations.
Mr. Schreiker made a motion to adjourn, Mr. Kerr seconded. Upon a
voice vote, the motion to adjourn passes unanimously. With no
further business to come before the Board, the meeting was
adjourned at 11:05 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Carlos Trejo
Recording Secretary
CITY OF MUSKEGO
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute 62.23
(3) 6. that a Public Hearing will be held at the Muskego City
Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue, at 7:00 P.M., Thursday, July 27,
1995, to consider the following petitions for appeals to the
Zoning Ordinance of the City of Muskego:
Appeal # 18-95 Russell J. and Vern Moeller
W208 S8543 Hillendale Drive
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from an
Administrative decision which requires all Pole
Buildings in an Agricultural Zoned District follow
Chapter 30-- Building Code, Section 30.02--Application
of "Wisconsin Administrative Building and Heatinq,
Ventilating and Air Conditioning Code", which applies
IHLR 53 Commercial Structural Requirements for
applicable buildings.
The petitioner's is requesting a variance to build a
pole building in an Agricultural Zoned District without
applying commercial building standards.
Zoning: Agricultural
Appeal # 19-95 Gilbert M. Spieler
W180 S6583 Hardtke Drive
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 8.07 (1) and (2)--RS-2,
20,000 square foot Suburban Residence District, Lot Size
and Density. Said sections define the needed lot area
and minimum lot width for legal lots for an RS-2, 20,000
square foot district with a minimum average width of 110
feet.
The petitioner is requesting a variance to subdivide a
parcel with 16,991.8 square feet and an average minimum
width of 83.9.
Zoning: RS-2, 20,000 square foot Suburban Residence
Appeal # 20-95 Paul and Laura Balistreri
S74 W14829 Woods Road
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 5.02 (1) Building
Location, Setbacks, and Section 8.07(3)--RS-2, 20,000
square foot Suburban Residence District. Buildina
Location. Said section restricts any building to be
placed behind the base setback line, which is located
forty (40) feet from the road right-of-way/front
property line.
BOA 7/27/95
Page 2
The petitioner is requesting a variance to construct a
house addition with a covered porch extending 3.5 feet
into the setback area, creating a 36.5 base setback line.
Zoning: RS-2, 20,000 square foot Suburban Residence
Appeal # 21-95 David and Tracy De Angelis
W178 56961 Shady Lane
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 5.07 (1) Open Space as
defined under Section 2.02 (39) Definitions, and Section
9.07(5)--OED, Existing Development District for an RS-3,
15,000 square foot Suburban Residence District. Said
section requires 66.7% of the lot area be left as open
space.
The petitioner is requesting a variance to construct a
concrete driveway, reducing the percentage of open space
to 59.0% of the total lot area.
Zoning: RS-3/OED, 15,000 square foot Suburban
Residence in an Existing Development District
Appeal # 22-95 Lois M. Jakumbowski
W185 56710 Jewel Crest Drive
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--ZoningOrdinance, Section 4.06 (2)A.2 Legal
Nonc-6nformity, Nonconforming Structure. Said section
requires that if repairs and alterations to such
structure exceed 50% of the current fair market value of
the structure, the structure must be made conforming to
zoning district regulations.
The petitioner is requesting a variance to raise the
roof of a nonconforming garage over 50% of the current
fair market value.
Zoning: RS-3/OLS, 15,000 square foot Suburban
Residence in a Lake Shore District
Appeal # 23-95 Barbara Fields
S68 W18123 Island Drive
Muskego, WI 53150
REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1)
Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks relief from Chapter
17--Zoning Ordinance, Section 5.02 (2)B Basic District
Regulations, Building Location and Section 9.04 (3)
RS-3/OLS 15,000 square foot Residence District and Lake
Shore District Building Location . Said section
requires a minimum setback of 25 feet .
The petitioner is requesting a variance to construct a
garage with a three (3) foot setback.
BOA 7/27/95
Page 3
Zoning: RS-3/OLS, 15,000 square foot Suburban
Residence in a Lake Shore District
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.
Board of Appeals
City of Muskego
Donald Pionek, Chairman
Dated this 14th day of July, 1995
PLEASE NOTE: 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 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 Jean K. Marenda, city Clerk, at Muskego City Hall, 679-5625..
CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
DATE July 27, 1995 APPEAL # 21-95
NAME David & Tracy De Angelis
ADDRESS W178 S6961 Shady Lane
TELEPHONE
PROPERTY LOCATION ON WHICH VARIANCE IS REQUESTED
ADDRESS W178 S6961 Shady Lane
TYPE OF ZONING RS-3/OED
1) Appealing Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, petitioner
seeks an appeal from an administrative decision rendered under
the authority of Chapter 17, Section 5.07(1) as defined under
Section 2.02(39) and Section 9.07(5)Open Space_ as defined
under Definitions and OED, Existing Development District for an
RS-3, 15,000 square foot Suburban Residence District of the
Municipal Code. Said Sections set minimum open space
requirements for all lots. Petitioner requests relief from the
open space requirement as it applies to residential lot.
80.00 FEE TO BE PAID AT TIME OF APPLICATION
DATE PAID 07-07-95 RECEIPT NUMBER 139084
DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
CHAIRMAN PIONEK dh�
VICE-CHAIRMAN SCHNEIKER
MEMBER O'NEIL
MEMBER SCHEPP
MEMBER KE
FIRST ALTERNATE HERDA
SECOND ALTERNATE BRAN
Secret
Date_ 2/-2
APPROVED
I
DENIED
CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
Application for Variance
Applicants Name. �; d lrz�o_,! 1�� f-/,✓4/,s
Subject Property Address: W1, _S6 9 6/
Telephoned
7 property Zoning- Key Key # 2 I (e
Petitioner's relationship to property (circle applicable):
owne lessee other
Fees: $80.00
-- Date inspector denied permit:
Requesting variance to Section
To allow: 7z L,14F - Wa �
A literal enforcement of the terms of the above -referenced section
would result in practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship
because:
CA 4:'414 w �i�. iJ: N G a 1/'VB ,;Z�oc /
The variance, if granted, will not be contrary to the public
interest and will be in accord with the spirit of the code because:
The variance, if granted, will not adversely affect public safety
or jeopardize public welfare because:
A
0
/ ^J
Y �r
W
�
to
'�=
7
vi
Q
?
J
W
W
CQ=
Y
Z
N '
J O
1
Pero L) eA Sl ,r-115
-t-,Uo Brave +Ajic4re4
_ j
TL
ro
a
q)
Ln
O
O
AAA
m�aa—
,-_
mOw= <
rn o
m_z�m
O 5 0 a
N 0 N
m
3 A Q A 4
on�a�
m-w
u a r
m �� 7
m b
om000.
33- ng
Q m
mEr�m
�mamg
• @ x
3 a m C a
9•D
mm=m
_ = n
4m m�
A mA
'0m a
=r Tr
o A m
m a m ph
o m Sm
n=
7 m
m � q
b = C A
m as
s r
3 m m m
0r7m.
m ti
O a ?
ro o
Ada=
m z a o
65.85
N 49° 30' W 150'
N 49° 30' W 1
sole
b <n k
�
f+
o
��y
N
u
�h {
37.41 4
m
3L5B
115
1 1 ran
P200
I
b
CAI
m
U
* 9
rrb
CI
i�
n
cn!
r%
r
sic of* FoREST avow.0
Cp
N
�w
IL
'K
Cri
m
o
m
n
m
m
z
m
N
-n
0
Z
C rD r+
prPT,
C
CL
fD to �
�•C
p
(A rrm w
n7 Y
r
b
J
¢
Z
CO
ZD
n —
(n
O 0
n
r+
LC
`°
LAr
nJ•
� c+ �
rD
M
m
m
En
O 3
O
D
0
Ln
0
�7�,
x::
m
to M
.
r—
C:)
V
c
Ul�
Cz
C-)
M
rn
77 (f3
N C?`
V)
C7 rD
C
m
C
LO
rD
l<
a. CL
V)
O
r-r c
•
ff
rD d
LDJ.
L
C7 C
CD
N)
i•
'
4
o
it n
0
c� r
fi
O r?t
V, s,
77
-0
crD
o �
r+
O
N
O
23
0
MP
/O/� 3
Y+ m
Xm�
a v G
? C) m
O
N CC•i m
N m I A
N - Z
Cnz
„qz�
D m G _
X cn Cl) Z
g 0 C m
M
ONi C O Z
7 M !:'!
M
n n
OD