Print Minutes Return
 Village of Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES

 February 1, 2018


 
 
Meeting called to order at 4:59 pm. 
Present:
Chairperson Thomas Richter; Member Kathleen Bucher; Member Earl Petermann; Member Curt Kolell; Member Roger Klein; 1st Alternate David Lehman
Absent:
2nd Alternate David Levy
Staff Present:
Code Compliance and Zoning Specialist Michelle Luedtke; Management Analyst Kevin Ausman; Management Assistant Ryan Hansel
             
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
             
Approval of minutes from the January 4, 2018 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting.
  Motion by Member Curt Kolell, second by 1st Alternate David Lehman to approve the minutes of the January 4th, 2018 meeting
  Vote: 4 - 0 Motion Carried
             
APPEARANCES
             
A variance request of JESSE AND MICHELLE CRAMER from the requirements of 122-669(2) dealing with the required street yard setback for a 6 foot fence in the PRD Planned Residential District as follows: A variance to allow a 6 foot fence to be located on the Main St. S.T.H. "74" street property line, rather than the 37.5 feet required; a variance of 37.5 feet for the property located at W184N8569 Lawrence Ave, Tax Key Number 0034.264.
  Present:
Brent Crubaugh A-1 Fence, 11040 N Buntrock, Mequon WI, 53092
Jesse and Michelle Cramer, W184N8569 Lawrence Ave.


Public hearing closed at 5:10 PM.
  Motion by Member Curt Kolell, second by Member Earl Petermann to grant the requested variances.
 
 
RESOLUTION
 
WHEREAS, on February 1st, 2018, a hearing was held on the petition of JESSE AND MICHELLE CRAMER;
 
WHEREAS, the petition requests: A variance of 37.5 feet to allow for a 6 foot fence to be located on the Main St. S.T.H. "74" street property line rather than the 37.5 feet as required;
 
WHEREAS, the matter having been given due and deliberate consideration by the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals;
 
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the petition of JESSE AND MICHELLE CRAMER is GRANTED as follows: A variance of 37.5 feet to allow for a 6 foot fence to be located on the Main St. S.T.H. "74" street property line rather than the 37.5 feet as required;
 
The Zoning Board hereby makes the following findings under Village Ordinance Section 122-669(2) based upon the evidence presented on the petition:
 
 
  1. Will a literal enforcement of the zoning regulations involved in this matter result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship?  
     
    Yes due to slope and location of main st. The difficulty or hardship is not self-created.
     
     
  2. Is the difficulty or hardship due to unique property limitations?  
     
     Yes the slope and double street frontage.
     
     
  3. Would the variance be in harmony with the public interest?  
Yes, due to safety with the retention pond.
 


The privileges granted by this decision shall expire within six (6) months of today’s date unless substantial work has commenced pursuant to such grant.
  Vote: 4 - 1 Motion Carried
 
Nay: Member Kathleen Bucher
             
A variance request of CHRIS AND LESLIE HAASE from the requirements of 122-669(2) dealing with the required street yard setback for a 6 foot fence in the R-3 Single Family Residential District as follows: A variance to allow a 6 foot fence to be located on the Silver Spring Rd street property line, rather than the 60 feet required; a variance of 60 feet for the property located at N56W18383 Evergreen Ln, Tax Key Number 0111.091.
  Present:
Chris Haase, N56W18383 Evergreen Ln



Public hearing closed at  5:22 PM.
  Motion by Member Earl Petermann, second by Member Roger Klein to grant the requested variances.
 
 
RESOLUTION
 
WHEREAS, on FEBRUARY 1st, 2018, a hearing was held on the petition of CHRIS AND LESLIE HAASE;
 
WHEREAS, the petition requests: A variance of 60 feet to allow for a 6 foot fence to be located on the Silver Spring Road property line rather than the 60 feet as required;
 
WHEREAS, the matter having been given due and deliberate consideration by the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals;
 
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the petition of CHRIS AND LESLIE HAASE is GRANTED as follows: A variance of 60 feet to allow for a 6 foot fence to be located on the Silver Spring Road property line rather than the 60 feet as required;
 
The Zoning Board hereby makes the following findings under Village Ordinance Section Section 122-669(2) based upon the evidence presented on the petition:
 
 
  1. Will a literal enforcement of the zoning regulations involved in this matter result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship?  
    Yes-all neighbors have six foot fence due to four lane highway.
     
     
     
  2. Is the difficulty or hardship due to unique property limitations?  
     Yes there is a four lane highway on both sides.
     
     
     
  3. Would the variance be in harmony with the public interest?  
     Yes as there were safety concerns due to the four lane highway on each side.
     
     
     
The privileges granted by this decision shall expire within six (6) months of today’s date unless substantial work has commenced pursuant to such grant.
  Vote: 5 - 0 Motion Carried
             
A variance request of CRIAG RADDATZ on behalf of FRED-JADE, LLC from the requirements of Village Ordinance 692-O-17 and 122-238 dealing with the required setbacks for the Jade at North Hills Planned Infill Development as follows: A variance to allow the following:
  • The building located at N72W12801 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the west lot line instead of the minimum 16 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 80 feet from the east lot line instead of the minimum 87 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the street lot line instead of the minimum 30 feet required by Section 122-238 of the Municipal Code.
Identified by Tax Key Number: 0093.975.001
  Motion by Member Curt Kolell, second by Member Roger Klein to grant the requested variances.
 
 
RESOLUTION
 
WHEREAS, on February 1st, 2018, a hearing was held on the petition of CRAIG RADDATZ on behalf of FRED-JADE LLC;
 
WHEREAS, the petition requests: : A variance to allow the following:
  • The building located at N72W12801 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the west lot line instead of the minimum 16 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 80 feet from the east lot line instead of the minimum 87 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the street lot line instead of the minimum 30 feet required by Section 122-238 of the Municipal Code;
 
WHEREAS, the matter having been given due and deliberate consideration by the members of the Zoning Board of Appeals;
 
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the petition of CRAIG RADDATZ on behalf of FRED-JADE LLC is GRANTED as follows: A variance to allow the following:
  • The building located at N72W12801 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the west lot line instead of the minimum 16 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 80 feet from the east lot line instead of the minimum 87 feet required under the Planned Infill Development; AND
  • The building located at N72W12759 GOOD HOPE RD to be 15 feet from the street lot line instead of the minimum 30 feet required by Section 122-238 of the Municipal Code;
 
The Zoning Board hereby makes the following findings under Village Ordinance Section 122-166 based upon the evidence presented on the petition:
 
 
  1. Will a literal enforcement of the zoning regulations involved in this matter result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship?  
     
     Yes-nothing has changed with original plans and without granting of variance all plans would need to be modified.
     
     
  2. Is the difficulty or hardship due to unique property limitations?  

     Yes the property is surrounded by roads and requires working with the Department of Transportation.
     
     
  3. Would the variance be in harmony with the public interest?  
     
     Yes the plan is the same as originally approved and the variances requested will not have a negative impact on the public interest.
     
     
     
The privileges granted by this decision shall expire within six (6) months of today’s date unless substantial work has commenced pursuant to such grant.
 
  Vote: 5 - 0 Motion Carried
  Kathy Bucher Recused herself and left the meeting at 5:25 PM

Present:
Steve Bercell, FRED-Inc
Craig Raddatz




Public hearing closed at 5:37 PM
             
ADJOURNMENT
  Motion by 1st Alternate David Lehman, second by Member Earl Petermann to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 5:40  PM
  Vote: 4 - 0 Motion Carried
Any person or persons aggrieved by any decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals may present to the court of record a petition duly verified setting forth that such decision is illegal and specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be presented to the court within 30 days after the filing of the decision in the office of the Zoning Board of Appeals.


Submitted by Michelle Luedtke, Code Compliance & Zoning Officer
Minutes transcribed by Kevin Ausman, Management Analyst
Minutes approved on June 7, 2018


 

    

Level double AA conformance,
                W3C WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0

AgendaQuick ©2005 - 2020 Destiny Software Inc. All Rights Reserved.