Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals (mintues) - 06/22/1994 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 22, 1994 PRESENT: Fred Dahl, Randy Husman, Don Krueger, Reinhard Roehlig, John Schorse STAFF: Bruce A. Roskom, Principal Planner; Patricia Wendorf, Recording Secretary Chairman pro tem Krueger called the meeting to order. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. Motion by Schorse for approval of the May 18, 1994 minutes as distributed; Seconded by Husman. Motion carried 5 -0. Chairman pro tem Krueger stated that 4 affirmative votes are required to approve a variance; if 3 affirmative votes, the item will be laid over; less than 3 affirmative votes, the item is denied. He also explained the process for obtaining building permits, if the variance is approved, or the appeal process, if the variance is denied. I: 141 NORTH SAWYER STREET - Gary R. Yakes and Joseph N. Bauer, owners /applicants The owners /applicants are requesting a variance to construct a ground sign with a 5 ft. front yard setback; whereas Section 30 -22(B) Standards of the C -2 Light Commercial District requires a 25 ft. minimum front yard setback for the placement of ground signs. Attorney Joseph N. Bauer, 141 N. Sawyer Street, gave a brief history of the property in question and reiterated the variance request. He stated the terrace is approximately 20 ft. wide so he did not feel there would be any site problems relative to the sign. The sign would be 62 ft. from Faust Street looking from the south - even if traffic stopped before the sidewalk line, the sign does not impede vision. There are many similar signs along Sawyer Street that are within the setback line (Blum Dental, WACU, M &I Bank, the shopping center, etc.), so it would be in conformity of what is in the immediate area at present. We have received complaints from clients that are unfamiliar with the area, that they cannot find our building with the sign against the building as it is now, particularly at night. The proposed sign will be 4 ft. x 21/2 ft. with a base that will be internally lit. Chairman pro tem Krueger inquired in relation to the other signs that are in the immediate area, would this sign be about the same distance (setback). Mr. Roskom stated it may be further away - the adjacent gas station sign is closer - so this sign would have a lesser intrusion in the setback area. Chairman pro tem Krueger inquired if the lettering on the sign was proposed to be lit. Mr. Bauer stated it is his understanding the light is in the inside of the sign and the background is painted black - so that just the lettering appears lit. MINUTES PAGE -2- JUNE 22, 1994 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Mr. Roskom stated that a condition of approval could be applied requiring that the sign be internally lit. Motion by Roehlig for approval of a variance to construct a ground sign with a 5 ft. front yard setback contingent upon the condition that the sign be internally lit. Seconded by Husman. Motion carried 5 -0. As to the Findings of Fact, Mr. Roehlig stated that the sign would not create any adverse effect on the neighborhood and it is consistent with the existing signage along the street. Mr. Schorse added that the square footage is within minimal limits and there is no other potential location for the sign. II: 1430 MENOMINEE DRIVE - Steve & Michele Williams, owners /applicants The applicants are requesting a variance to construct an addition to an existing attached garage with a 51/2 ft. side yard setback; whereas Section 30 -15(B) Standards of the R -1 Single Family Residence district requires a 7 ft. minimum side yard setback for attached garages. Michele Williams gave a brief history of the property in question and reiterated the variance request. Chairman pro tem Krueger inquired as to the size of their lot and Mrs. Williams stated it is 85 ft. x 175 ft. Steve Williams presented the Board with a Certified Survey Map of the lot (said CSM being made a part of these minutes). He stated the garage next door would align with the proposed garage - it would not be aligning up with the neighbor's living room or bedroom. Chairman pro tem Krueger inquired if they were requesting the minimum width of the garage as 21 ft. is not really that wide and Mr. Williams stated that was correct. Mr. Dahl inquired if the owners investigated any other alternatives, such as a detached garage. Mr. Williams stated they did not investigate it too thoroughly because of the footings present and the cost to extend the driveway. Mr. Roskom stated that there didn't appear to be any detached garages in the neighborhood and this request is consistent with what currently exists in the neighborhood. Motion by Schorse for approval of a variance to construct an addition to an existing attached garage with a 51/2 ft. side yard setback. Seconded by Dahl. Motion carried 5 -0.