Loading...
Zoning Board of Appeals 28-1996CITY OF MUSKEGO BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES OF BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 24, 1996 PRESENT: Chairman Terry O'Neil, Michael Brandt, Dan Schepp, Ed Herda, and .lames Ross. ABSENT: Heather Schuster and Henry Schneiker MINUTES: Chairman O'Neil made a motion to defer the minutes of September 26, 1996, meeting till the December 12, 1996 meeting. Brandt seconded. Upon voice vote the minutes of September 26, 1996, meeting were deferred unanimously. Decision letters from the September 26, 1996, meeting were signed. OLD BUSINESS: Appeal # 27-96 Dennis G. Cindric, S70 W19099 Wentland Drive, Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets, said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 4.3 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a zero (0) foot offset variance to build a detached garage on the eastern property line. Mr. Cindric was deferred from the September meeting and was advised to submit a new survey to determine the exact distance from the eastern property line. The new survey showed a 0.7 foot offset to the east. Mr. Cindric stated he remodeled his home with the understanding from the previous Director of the Building Department that he would be able to replace a then existing nonconforming detached garage; a correspondence letter addressing the issue was provided by Mr. Cindric's, then, realtor. Alterations to the home now would not accommodate an attached garage. NEW BUSINESS Appeal # 28-96 Donald M. Peil, W194 57057 Hillendale Drive, Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets, said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 15 feet from the northern property line; 2. Chapter 17--Zoning_ Ordinance: Sections 5.03 (1) Height: Maximum Height Restricted. Petitioner seeks a nine (9) foot offset variance to permit an accessory structure six (6) feet from the northern property line and restricts the height of any accessory structure to 15 feet. Petitioner seeks a two (2) foot height variance to permit an accessory structure with a 17 foot height. Mr. Peil was removed from the agenda due to the Plan Commission denying the request for an accessory structures; therefore, the Board may not hear this appeal at this time. BOA 10/24/96 Page 2 Appeal # 29-96 James and Shirley Bartsch, S73 W16453 Vine Street Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks, said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 32 feet from the road right-of-way. Petitioner seeks a 16 foot setback variance to construct an attached garage 16 feet from the road right-of-way. 2. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets, said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 13.4 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a 7.4 foot offset variance to construct an attached garage six (6) feet from the eastern property line. Mr. Trejo explained the RS-2 zoning, 20,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District and how the existing homes west of the subject parcel were setback roughly 35 feet or more, rather than the required 40 foot setback. Mr. Schepp administered an oath to Mrs. Bartsch. Mrs. Bartsch questioned the distance from her existing home to the center of the road. She presented an aerial photograph showing the neighbors setback and the subject residence. Mr. Trejo produced the neighbor's and owner's plats of survey. Discussion ensued over a discrepancy between the surveys and the aerial photo. Mrs. Bartsch was requested to provide a new survey, but advised to use a different surveyor, as where the present surveys were both done by the same individual. Mr. Brandt made a motion to defer Appeal #29-96 with a 90 day option to return to the Board of Appeals. A new survey was requested showing the subject property and the location of the neighboring residences. Mr. Schepp seconded. Upon roll call vote, the motion to defer was passed unanimously. Appeal # 30-96 Robert J. Winiarski, W180 56865 Muskego Drive, Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 9.04 (7) E.1 OLS Lake Shore District: Lake Shore Offset, said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 50 feet from the shore line. Petitioner seeks a 3 foot offset variance to permit an attached deck 47 feet from the lake shore. Mr. Trejo explained the RS-3/OLS zoning, 10,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District in a Lake Shore Overlay and noted that the deck had not been built as stated in the notice. Mr. Schepp administered an oath to Mr. Winiarski. Mr. Winiarski stated he measured the distance from the post holes to the shoreline and determined he was in conformance. The building inspector, when doing a footing inspection, discovered deck was too close to the shoreline. Mr. Winiarski stated he wants a deck upstairs to enjoy the view of the lake, just like his neighbor's have. He also noted they are closer to the lake than he is preparing to build. The deck is to be built over the patio and BOA 10/24/96 Page 3 there is not any alternate location to place the post holes, would be in conformance with his neighbor's and would not adversely affect the character to the neighborhood. Appeal # 31-96 and #34-96 David and Mary Stawski, W198 S6776 Adrian Drive, Muskego, WI, 53150 and Peter J. Dargiewicz, W124 S7193 Skylark Lane, Muskego, WI, 53150. Mr. Trejo asked the Board, that if the petitioners consent, if both appeals could be addressed together since they deal with the same matter. Both petitioners agreed. The petitioners are requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 16--Plumbing Code: Sections 16.20 Discharge of Clear Water Sump Pumps, said regulation requires all sump pumps installed for the purpose of discharging clear water from foundation drains and ground infiltration to connect to the City storm sewer via underground drain pipe. Both petitioners seek not to install a drain pipe and connect to the storm sewer. Mr. Trejo explained the RS-1 zoning for the Stawski parcel and the RS-2 zoning of the Dargiewics lot. Both were newly created lots that are conforming and both contain new residential structures that are conforming. Mr. Schepp swore in Mr. and Mrs. Stawski, Mrs. Dargiewicz (Appellant #34-96) and Ms. Mary Lytle. Mr. Trejo explained City Ordinance #756, 08-11-92. Both developments are required to install storm drainage infrastructure. Appeals to this ordinance were taken before the Public Works Director and Public Works Committee. In both cases, they were deferred to the Board of Appeals. Mr. Trejo read a letter received from Public Works Director John Loughney. Mr. Loughney cautioned the Board of Appeals to deal with these two variances separately. Mr. Stawski stated his hardship is that fact the pipes are already installed on his property and the site has been graded. According to Mr. Stawski, Mr. Loughney was at the site at the time of the installation of the pipes, and supported the idea of the contractor that there would be no problem with surface discharge. Mr. Stawski stated to install new pipes now would ruin nine trees on his lot and accrue additional costs. Mr. Stawski stated there has been no water in his sump crock. Ms. Mary Lytle, the neighbor north of the Stawski parcel, is concerned with such a large roof and the addition of the sump crock discharge, that the run off would be considerable. She further stated that every spring her lot is wet and since more trees have been cut down the wetness will be increased. Mrs. Dargiewicz stated the drainage detention pond is at the rear of her lot and the sump crock discharge would be directed to the storm sewer in front of her lot and then redirected to the creek 130A 10/24/96 Page 4 behind her lot. There makes no sense to direct it out front if it is just going to be redirect behind her lot. Appeal # 32-96 Craig M. and Peggy Demski, S67 W21153 Tans Drive, Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets, said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 40 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a 20 foot offset variance to construct an accessory structure 20 feet from the eastern property line. 2. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 4.05 (1) A. Accessory Uses and Structures: General, said regulation restricts the total floor area of all outbuildings combined to 1% of the lot area (1,665 S.F.). Petitioner seeks a 831 S.F. variance to reconstruct and modify an accessory structure which would yield 2,496 S.F. of total floor area of all outbuildings combined. Mr. Trejo explained the RCE zoning. 120,000 S.F. Country Estate District, and stated the property is a conforming lot. Currently, there are a total of 2,368 square feet of total outbuildings, with only 1,165 square feet allowed. This property received a variance in 1992 for an outbuilding to permit the excess size. Mr. Schepp administered an oath. Mr. Demski stated the Plan Commission approved the 32' x 32' building subject to a variance for 831 additional square feet. The additional square footage would accommodated additional needed storage and would not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Demski stated that the hardship for the 20 foot offset is so he could utilize his yard better. The current garage needs to be moved to accommodate the pipes for the new mound system. He intends to build a 3 car garage. Appeal # 33-96 Shirley R. Strehlow, W203 511064 Denoon Point Road Muskego, WI, 53150. The petitioner is requesting under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks, said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 55 feet from the center line of the western road. Petitioner seeks a 26.5 foot setback variance to construct a detached garage 28.5 feet from the center line of the western road. 2. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks, said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 55 feet from the center line of the northern road. Petitioner seeks a 18.5 foot setback variance to construct a detached garage 36.5 feet from the center line of the northern road. Mr. Trejo explained the RS-2/OLS zoning. 13,400 S.F. Suburban Residence District in a Lake Shore Overlay and the character of the city right-of-way. Mr. Trejo also stated he contacted the Public Works Department in regards to winter maintenance. Only the main artery of the road is plowed, the L-shape portion on the east end is not maintained. BOA 10/24/96 Page 5 Mr. Schepp administered an oath to Mr. and Mrs. Strehlow. Mrs. Strehlow explained there is not a road on the north lot line, there are trees growing there, furthermore, there is no way there could every be a 60' wide road on the west side of the property, there are homes to close to the road as it exists. The existing garage is falling down and is to close to the southern property line. The new garage will be in conformance in terms of size and offset. A five minute recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 8:45 P.M. ā¯‘ELIBERATION: The Board of Appeals had a voice vote to discuss Appeal #33-96 first. APPEAL #33-96 Mr. Brandt made a motion to approve the appeal as requested due to the irregular shape of the lot, the non conforming status of the road and its right-of-way, that the structure will remain consistent with the surrounding existing structures due to the 25' right-of-way, and that the proposed structure will not jeopardize public safety. The new garage will not be any closer to the road -right of way than any other property on this street and will bring the location into conformance with the offset. There is not any other location for this garage due to the location of the existing dwelling and the irregular shape of the lot. Mr. Brandt seconded. Upon roll call vote the motion to approved was unanimous. APPEAL *27-96 Mr. Herda made a motion to approve the variance with only a 0.7' offset. The hardship being the safety of passage to the rear of the lot (due to difference in height elevations), location of existing legal nonconforming structure. A condition of approval is that eves and water drains within the owners property and drainage is not to be allowed to drain into the property to the east. Said variance would not jeopardize public safety nor alter the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Schepp seconded. Upon a roll call vote, the motion to approve passed 4 to 1, Chairman O'Neil voting no. APPEAL #28-96 Appeal was taken off the agenda. APPEAL #29-96 Motion to defer was made during the meeting. APPEAL #30-96 Mr. Schepp made a motion to approve as submitted. Hardship being the location of the home on the lot, the irregular shape of the lot, and the safety of the deck due to narrow size that would be required per code. This structure would be within the character of the adjacent homes and the overall neighborhood and would not adversely effect the safety of the public. Mr. Ross seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote, the motion to approve was unanimous. BOA 10/24/96 Page 6 APPEAL #31--96 Mr. Schepp made a motion to deny the appeal as submitted due to a lack of a hardship. The hardship presented by the petitioner, saving of the trees, the grading of the lot, and the perceived consent of the Public Works Director, did not substantiate a valid hardship. The Public Works Director has no authorative power in granting variances to the ordinance and avoiding the elimination of trees and regrading of the lot only represent a financial burden. Mr. Herda seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote, the motion to deny was approved unanimously. APPEAL #34-96 Mr. Schepp made a motion to deny the appeal as submitted due to a lack of a hardship. The hardship presented by the petitioner, the drainage being routed to the front of the lot and then transferred back to the rear of the lot did not substantiate a valid hardship. Said ordinance was in effect when the subdivision was under review and approved and the developer made no effort to exempt the lot from said regulations. Mr. Herda seconded. Upon roll call vote, motion to deny passed unanimously. APPEAL #32-96 Mr. Schepp made a motion to approve the request for excess square footage but to deny appeal #1, the offset request. The denial to appeal #1 was due to lack of a reasonable hardship, stating there was sufficient room to move the structure closer to the existing drive. The hardship for the approval of the excess square footage is due to a lack of storage, Plan Commission approval, and that the structure would be in conformance with similar outbuildings permitted along Tans Drive. Mr. Shepp amended his motion to include 831 square foot to include the storage shed and a condition to be placed that the current garage be raze within 90 days of final inspection on the new 3 car garage. Mr. Brandt seconded. Upon roll call vote, motion passed 4 to 1, Mr. Herda voting no. Miscellaneous Business None Adjournment: Mr. Schepp made a motion seconded. With no further business to meeting was adjourned at 11.00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Susan J. Schroeder Recording Secretary to adjourn. Mr. Brandt come before this board, the AGENDA CITY OF MUSKEGO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute 62.23 (7) (e) 6, that a Public Hearing will be held in the Wisconsin Room at the Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue, at 7:00 P.M., Thursday, October 24, 1996, to consider the following petitions for appeals to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Muskego: 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 26, 1996 MEETING 5. OLD BUSINESS Appeal # 27-96 Dennis G. Cindric S70 W19099 Wentland Drive Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets. Said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 4.3 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a zero (0) foot offset variance to build a detached garage on the eastern property line. Zoned: RS-3/OED, 11,250 S.F. Suburban Residence District in and Existing Development. Signing of decision letters from the September 26, 1996 meeting. 6. NEW BUSINESS Appeal # 28-96 Donald M. Peil W194 S7057 Hillendale Drive Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks two (2) variances: BOA 10/24/96 Page 2 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets. Said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 15 feet from the northern property line. Petitioner seeks a nine (9) foot offset variance to permit an accessory structure six (6) feet from the northern property line. 2. Chapter 17--ZoningOrdinance: Sections 5.03 (1) Height: Maximum Height Restricted. Said regulation restricts the height of any accessory structure to 15 feet. Petitioner seeks a two (2) foot height variance to permit an accessory structure with a 17 foot height. Zoned: RS-2, 20,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District. Appeal # 29-96 James and Shirley Bartsch S73 W16453 Vine Street Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks. Said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 32 feet from the road right-of-way. Petitioner seeks a 16 foot setback variance to construct an attached garage 16 feet from the road right-of-way. 2. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets. Said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 13.4 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a 7.4 foot offset variance to construct an attached garage six (6) feet from the eastern property line. Zoned: RS-2, 20,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District. Appeal # 30-96 Robert J. Winiarski W180 S6865 Muskego Drive Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance_: Sections 9.04 (7) E.1 OLS Lake Shore District: Lake Shore Offset. Said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 50 feet from the shore line. Petitioner seeks a 3 foot offset variance to permit an existing attached deck to stay 47 feet from the shore of Little Muskego Lake BOA 10/24/96 Page 3 Zoned: RS-3/OLS, 10,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District in a Lake Shore Overlay. Appeal # 31-96 David and Mary Stawski W198 S6776 Adrian Drive Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 16--Plumbing Code: Sections 16.20 Discharge of Clear Water Sump Pumps. Said regulation requires all sump pumps installed for the purpose of discharging clear water from foundation drains and ground infiltration to connect to the City storm sewer via underground drain pipe. Petitioner seeks not to install drain pipe and connect to storm sewer. Zoned: RS-1, 30,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District. Appeal # 32-96 Craig M. and Peggy Demski S67 W21153 Tans Drive Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (3) Building Location: Offsets. Said regulation restricts the offset of any structure 40 feet from the eastern property line. Petitioner seeks a 20 foot offset variance to construct an accessory structure 20 feet from the eastern property line. 2. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 4.05 (1) A. Accessory Uses and Structures: General. Said regulation restricts the total floor area of all outbuildings combined to 1% of the lot area (1,665 S.F.). Petitioner seeks a 831 S.F. variance to reconstruct and modify an accessory structure which would yield 2,496 S.F. of total floor area of all outbuildings combined. Zoned: RCE, 120,000 S.F. Country Estate District. Appeal # 33-96 Shirley R. Strehlow W203 S11064 Denoon Point Road Muskego, WI 53150 BOA 10/24/96 Page 4 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks two (2) variances: 1. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks. Said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 55 feet from the center line of the western road. Petitioner seeks a 26.5 foot setback variance to construct a detached garage 28.5 feet from the center line of the western road. 2. Chapter 17--Zoning Ordinance: Sections 5.02 (1) Building Location: Setbacks. Said regulation restricts the setback of any structure 55 feet from the center line of the northern road. Petitioner seeks a 18.5 foot setback variance to construct a detached garage 36.5 feet from the center line of the northern road. Zoned: RS-2/OLS, 13,400 S.F. Suburban Residence District in a Lake Shore Overlay. Appeal # 34-96 Peter J. Dargiewicz W124 S7193 Skylark Lane Muskego, WI 53150 REQUESTING: Under the direction of Section 3.08 (1) Appeal Provisions, Petitioner seeks one (1) variance: 1. Chapter 16--Plumbing Code: Sections 16.20 Discharge of Clear Water Sump Pumps. Said regulation requires all sump pumps installed for the purpose of discharging clear water from foundation drains and ground infiltration to connect to the City storm sewer via underground drain pipe. Petitioner seeks not to install drain pipe and connect to storm sewer. Zoned: RS-2, 20,000 S.F. Suburban Residence District. 7. Miscellaneous Business. None 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. BOA 10/24/96 Page 5 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 Terry O'Neil, Chairman Dated this 11th day of October, 1996 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 cr to request this service, contact Jean K. Marenda, City Clerk, at Muskego City Hall, 679-5625. Also, Board of Appeals members may conduct site visits for informational purposes.