Zoning Board of Appeals 23-1992Lify
(-W-M
p BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
W182 S8200 RACINE AVENUE • 30X 903 • MUSKEGO, W1 53150-0903 • 11414) 679-41 '.0
June 29, 1992
Mr. Harry Krase
S69 W17741 Wildwood Dr.
Muskego, WI 53150
Dear Mr. Krase:
The Board of Appeals wishes to advise you that your request as
amended has been denied due to lack of hardship.
Sincerely,
BOARD OF APPEALS
Stella Dunahee, CPS for
Jill Blenski
Recording Secretary
SD/lam
cc: Chairman Gerald Fohr
City of _line Redidenfia[. Jnau.Sfriaf and Recreational Jatibi¢j
CITY OF MUSKEGO
BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON JUNE 25, 1992
Vice Chairman Terry O'Neil called the meeting to order at 7:30
P.M.
PRESENT: Vice Chairman Terry O'Neil, Lloyd Erno, Thomas
Berken, Darryl Rowinski, Robert Vitt, and Chuck
Dykstra, Sr.
ABSENT: Gerald Fohr, Donald Pionek
MINUTES: Mr. Rowinski made a motion to approve the minutes of
the May 28, 1992 meeting, and Mr. Vitt seconded. Upon a voice
vote, the motion to adopt the minutes passed unanimously.
APPEAL 23-92- Harry Krase, S69 W17741 Wildwood Drive,
Muskego, Wisconsin. Vice Chairman O'Neil read the appeal
requesting a 5'4" offset variance from west property line and
358 sq. ft. size variance and elimination of the required
firewall for garage reconstruction. Zoning: RS-3/OED. Mr.
Dykstra explained that he would like to amend the variance for
the west side to 817" and to include a 718" variance to the
south property line. The existing garage had been granted an
appeal in the past to increase the size of the garage so it is
approved to be in that location. To put a building back in the
spot would need no variance whatsoever. It can legally be in
the area for that size. The question being he wants to expand
it to the west and on the south side, he would be extending it
4' farther to Wildwood Drive. That 4' is not in the original
approval and so he would need a variance for the 4' of the 718"
that we are talking about from that south property line. The
building would normally be allowed 480 sq. ft. based on 60% of
the home size. The existing building is 602 sq. ft. and
approved by the Board previously so the existing is in
compliance. They desire to make this 960 sq. ft. minus the 602
sq. ft. that is allowed gives the 358 sq. ft. variance
required. Obviously at 960 sq. ft., we are over the 720 sq.
ft. maximum limit if we are not going to include any type of
firewall. To go over the other two variances that we amended
to, the 514" had been previously calculated to the west and we
had neglected to notice that the home itself already occupies
the narrowest offset (of the two offsets, one is bigger) and we
were allowing one on one side the garage and the other on the
other side of the garage, yet the home is so close to the
property lines that it has to take the narrower (closest)
offset and that changes the one on the west. We are actually
looking for an 817" variance from the required to the west line
and a 718" variance from the required to the south line and a
358 sq. ft. size variance, and variance to required firewall.
Mr. Harry Krase appeared before the Board. He is going to tear
Minutes, Board of Appeals, June 25, 1992 2
down the existing garage and reuse the materials in
constructing a new garage. The garage will be used for
storage, cars, boats, tires, lawn mowers, tools. There is no
height variance. He was not the original owner when the first
variance was approved. James Sass, S70 W17764 Muskego Drive,
owner of Lot #13, appeared to express his concern that if the
variance is given, Mr. Krase's problem will become his
problem. He mentioned that Mr. Krase had a lot of junk in his
yard. He was against the variance being approved. Chuck
Dykstra clarified that the garage would not be any closer to
Lot #13, but it would be closer to Lot #9. Cynthia Waters,
W177 S6981 Wildwood Drive, complained about the junk and is
afraid more junk would be accumulated and affect the property
values. She presented a letter from the neighbors to the Board
members. The neighbors have no objection to the garage if the
yard is cleaned up.
APPEAL 24-92 - Laverne Brown, S70 W17536 Muskego Drive,
Muskego, Wisconsin. Vice Chairman O'Neil read the appeal for a
10'6" variance from Muskego Drive to construct front porch with
roof that will include ramp for wheelchair access. Zoning:
RS3/OPD. Mr. Dykstra stated that the petitioner wants to
build a standard front porch on their house which will be
covered by a small roof. The required setback is 701; 30'
which is one-half of the 60' right-of-way and the 40' required
setback. It is possible to reduce that amount through
averaging adjacent properties and count the existing buildings
for the averaging purposes which will bring the required amount
to 67.5 from the center line. They are proposing to have this
set at 57 feet which leaves 10'6" setback variance that they
are requesting from Muskego Drive. Mr. Brown said that in
addition to providing the porch itself, it would make it easier
for his wife who uses a wheelchair to gain access to the home.
By adding a porch and ramp, she'll be able to maneuver her
chair more independently.
APPEAL 25-92- Johnny's Petroleum Products, S76 W17871
Janesville Road, Muskego, Wisconsin. Vice Chairman O'Neil read
the appeal to relocate existing vehicle fueling island canopy
to east loading island and install new vehicle fueling island
canopy. Zoning: B-3. Chuck Dykstra explained that the B-3
zoning is a zoning intended primarily for business use. He
would like to amend the setback variance requested to a smaller
amount, from 29'6" to 16'6" and a height variance may have to
be added. Anthony Kotkowski, the contractor, stated the
clearance for the facia would be 1416". There would be a 6"
drop for lights. Clearance to the bottom of the lights would
be 14'; clearance to the bottom of the facia would be 1416".
It is a 3' facia. Chuck Dykstra said that a 15' height is
allowed so a variance of 216" is required; therefore amend the
variance to include. Mr. Kotkowski explained that Johnny's
wants to use the space to facilitate a greater flow of traffic
by adding the third island to the north. Existing islands
serve four cars, by adding an island, can increase service to
six cars without increasing hoses. He wants to give comfort to
Minutes, Board of Appeals, June 25, 1992 4
of 10'611. Zoning: RS-2/OPD. Chuck Dykstra stated that there
was permit request for a shed that was existing and a deck.
They issued the permit for the deck but not the shed because it
was too high. The owners didn't know that a permit was
required until they were informed by an adjoining property
owner. Mrs. Pruszka said they constructed the shed last
summer. They were told they could put the shed and deck on the
same permit and were told of the 120 sq. ft. maximum size and
the offset for the property, but no mention of height. In
looking around the neighborhood, he saw 12' and 13' high sheds
with no variances and used those as a guideline. The shed is
used for storage of bikes, riding lawn mower, tools. It is set
on concrete blocks and has a water barrier. Chuck Dykstra
clarified that there is no code in Muskego for the floor or
anchorage of sheds. No response from the audience to this
appeal.
APPEAL 29-92 - Christine Howland, W180 S6865 Muskego Drive,
Muskego, Wisconsin. Vice Chairman O'Neil read the appeal
requesting a 29' setback variance from Muskego Drive to
construct a garage. Zoning: RS-3/OLS. Chuck Dykstra
explained that this is an existing, non -conforming lot,
narrower than the standard width and on lake shore property so
there are several exceptions which will allow it to be as close
as the 5' depicted on the drawing to the property line itself.
However, the variance is for the distance from Muskego Drive
and the distance right now along the north side of the proposed
garage from the existing home to the edge of the pavement is
about 38' and no other way for the petitioner to put a garage
on the property. Ms. Howland stated the garage would be for
two cars and would store a small boat above in the garage. If
more storage is needed in the future, there is room on the
property for a small storage shed on the lake side. The other
cars she has can still park out front along the lot line. No
response from the audience to this appeal.
CLOSED SESSION: Mr. O'Neil moved to convene 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 -hearing; said cases being the above -listed
appeals. Mr. Erno seconded. Upon a roll call vote, the motion
for closed session passed unanimously.
The Board of Appeals reconvened into open session at 9:00 p.m.
APPEAL 23-92- Harry Krase, S69 W17741 Wildwood Drivt, Mr.
Rowinski made a motion to deny the appeal as amended to an 817"
variance from the required to the west line and a 718" variance
from the required to the south line and a 358 sq. ft. size
variance, and variance to required firewall. Denial due to no
apparent hardship. Mr. Vitt seconded. Upon a roll call vote,
the motion to deny the variances as amended passed unanimously.