Loading...
ZBA-Minutes 27-1989CITY OF MUSKEGO BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 26, 1989. Chairman Gerald Fohr called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. PRESENT; - Chairman Gerald Fohr, Vice Chairman Thomas Berken, Lloyd Erno, Terry O'Neil, Donald Pionek, Daryl Rowinski, Bonnie Posbrig and Director Gerald Lee. ABSENT: No one. MINUTES: Mr. Berken moved to adopt the Minutes of the September 28, 1989 meeting. Mr. Pionek seconded. Upon a voice vote the motion passed unanimously. The Board also discussed the request from Mr. & Mrs. White concerning a change in the 12/8/88 Board of Appeals Minutes for Appeal 23-88. Mr. Fohr made a motion to amend the 12/8/89 Minutes to delete the words which referenced Mr. White as having "wrote a letter to the Building Inspection Office questioning the 3' offset for the turn -around." Mr. Berken seconded. Upon a voice vote the motion to amend the 12/8/89 Minutes passed unanimously. The recording secretary was requested to send Mr. & Mrs. White a copy of the amended minutes. APPEAL 26-89 -- RICHARD SCHLEI - Chairman Fohr requested Mr. Schlei state his case and hara-ship. Mr. Schlei stated that he wished to construct the 12' x 18' storage structure to store his lawnmowers, garden tools, etc. The structure will he on a slab. His hardship is that this spot is the only level area he has and he would keep his structure in line with his neighbor's shed. Mr. Lee said that this is in RS-3 zoning requiring 10' and 15' offsets. This lot is a conforming lot and he explained the reasons for the variance request. Mr. Pionek questioned the neighbor's offset for his shed. Mr. Schlei responded that it is probably a 10' x 12' shed. Mr. Lee stated that it could be located within 3'. Mr. Rowinski questioned if the size was factor in the request. Mr. Lee responded that a structure under 120 square feet could be within 3' of the lot line, but Mr. Schlei has to conform to the offsets because he is over that size. The Plan Commission gave Mr. Schlei architectural approval subject to the Board of Appeals approval on October 17, 1989. Mr. Berken asked how many vacant lots are behind Mr. Schlei. Mr. Schlei responded that there was one. Mr. Erno requested that house numbers be provided to enable people to find the house more easily. Mr. Francesco Sanfillippo, W177 S7859 Canfield Dr., Muskego expressed his opinion that if you make this change for one person, you will have to do it for more. He lives in the Kristin Downs Subdivision, which has deed restrictions. There being no further discussion, the appellant was informed he could call the Building Inspection Office in the morning for a decision or wait for the decision to be mailed to him within 5 days. Page 2, BOA Minutes 10/26/89 APPEAL 27-89 -- ST. PAUL'S CHURCH & SCHOOL - Chairman Fohr requested Mr. Lee bring the Board up to date on this appeal. Mr. Lee stated that he reviewed the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Board of Appeals in May 1968. He stated that in Section 3 (a) Every appeal shall be taken within 20 days from the date of refusal of any order, ruling, decision or determination from which the appeal was taken. A written appeal must be filed within 20 days to the officer from whose decision the appeal is made. When the Fire Department Chief was notified that the church was appealing, he obtained a copy of the rules and asked that the City Attorney review the letter of acceptance of the plan from the Fire Chief and the letter requesting an appeal from the church which were one month apart. It appeared that the Chief had accepted the church's plan and, therefore, no need for an appeal. The church was then notified and they had their attorney call the City Attorney. The City Attorney thought the Board should adjourn the case until if and when the Chief had received and rejected a plan that the church had submitted. The time of filing then could be extended based on both parties agreeing. Chief Dibb responded that he hasn't seen a new plan from the church. Mr. Lee stated that the City Attorney said that the Board could move to refund the $35.00 appeal fee. Chief Dibb explained his part in this appeal. First the plans were submitted and approved. Then, Mr. Heilmann questioned the requirements. He has a problem with the Board "adjourning" this appeal as he feels it would indicate that he had rejected the church's plan, when he hasn't. The contractor (Anderson -Ashton) were to provide the church with a "turn -key" operation. Chief Dibb has talked with the contractor and attended meetings with church representatives where minutes of the meeting were taken. He has not turned down a plan submitted by the church. He feels that the chairman of the church building committee is not satisfied with the plans which were approved and wants to make changes. He is unsure if the committee shares the chairman's views. Mr. O'Neil asked Chief Dibb if he has any objection to refunding the appeals fee? Chief Dibb stated that he did not object. Chief Lloyd Pickart was also present and asked if he could show a film strip on fire protection systems in action. The Board had no objection to seeing the film strip following all the appeal cases being presented. Page 3, Board of Appeals Minutes 10/26/89 APPEAL 28-89 -- EVERETT ELLNITZ - Chairman Fohr requested r. Ellwitz state his case and hardship. Mr. Ellwitz stated that he needs a 10' variance off the corner of the proposed garage addition. He needs the added space for storage purposes. He has contacted the public utility companies concerning the necessary changes on his lot. Mr. Lee stated that this is in RS-3/OPD (Planned Unit Development) zoning. The appeal is for the setback variance only. The Kristin Downs Subdivision Architectural Control Committee must approve this addition since it involves their Deed Restrictions. Mr. Lee asked Mr. Rowinski, who is on the Kristin Downs Board, if the subdivision had approved this request? Mr. Rowinski responded that Mr. Ellwitz had talked with him briefly about this request but the Board had not met yet to approve it. Mr. O'Neil asked if there will be a basement? Mr. Ellwitz responded that the addition will have footings instead. Mr. Pionek questioned the deed restriction offset requirement and the city's. Mr. Lee responded that the deed restriction is the final ruling. The size of the garage was questioned, as the deed restrictions only permit a 2 1/2 car garage. Mr. Ellwitz responded that it will be a large garage, but the stairway cuts into the space. Mr. Francesco Sanfillippo, a neighbor living at W177 S7859 Canfield Drive expressed opposition to having a 3 car garage and wanted the garage built within the boundaries established by the deed restrictions. The Chairman reiterated the fact that the subdivision has the final ruling. Mr. Ellwitz was told that he could call the Building Inspection Office in the morning for a decision or wait for the decision to be mailed to him within 5 days. At 8:15 P.M. Chief Dibb and Chief Pickart showed a film strip '$Fire Power". After the film Chief Dibb told the Board that 4 years ago he began researching the fire codes in various communities since Muskego did not have a fire code. He wanted to add to the State Fire Code Muskego was using. He found that most were the same with the Hales Corners Fire Chief being instrumental in compiling the information for the codes. Chief Dibb stated that the fire departments are interested in the safety of the community, the safety of the firefighter and then the building when fighting fires. A lot of buildings are being built with truss construction which doesn't enable the firefighters much time to safety fight a fire, as buildings collapse faster. A good fire protection system is important for all buildings whether they be residential or commercial. The Board thanked Chief Dibb and Chief Pickart for their presentation. Page 4, Board of Appeals Minutes 10/26/89 Vice Chairman Berken moved to go 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 aquasidudicial hearing; said cases being the above listed appeals. Chairman Fohr seconded and the motion carried unanimously upon a voice vote. The Board took a break at 8:35 P.M. The Board reconvened into Open Session at 8:45 P.M. APPEAL 26-89 - After a brief discussion Mr. Erno made a motion to grant the appeal as requested. Mrs. Posbrig seconded. The hardship being the way the land slopes to the north of the proposed shed. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. APPEAL 27-89 - After a brief discussion Chairman Fohr made a motion to refund the S35.00 appeal fee the reason being that there was no reason for the appeal. Mr. Berken seconded. Upon a voice vote the motion passed unanimously. APPEAL 28-89 - Mr. Rowinski stated that since he was a member of the Kristin Downs Subdivision Architectural Control Board he would abstain from voting. He wanted to give the Board a little background information. He received a call from Mr. Ellwitz and didn't hear from him again until he received his packet in the mail with the request on the agenda. The Architectural Control Board will have to take up the larger size garage request, as only 2 1/2 car garages are allowed. No sheds are allowed on the lots. They could override the Board of Appeals decision. Mr. Erno stated that we are only concerned with the variance from the road and the city offsets. Mr. O'Neil made a motion to grant the appeal as requested. Mr. Pionek seconded. The hardship being the lack of storage area. Upon a roll call vote the motion passed unanimously. The Board decided to hold their Joint November/December meeting on December 7, 1989 at 7:30 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Fohr moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 P.M. Mr. Berken seconded. Upon a voice vote the motion carried unanimously. Respectfully Submitted ooe Cheryl Schmidt Recording Secretary /cs