Laserfiche WebLink
Area Board of Zoning Appeals -April 7, 2010 <br />problems right now and Mr. Matthews I believes owns the property and has allowed these zoning violations. <br />The density of non blood related tenants. There are currently nine tenants, and this is not the only time 1 <br />have read this, in this structure for which they are only allowed four. The maximum lot coverage by <br />structure is 50%. This structure violates that as it stands now. The off street parking, it should have I6, if <br />were to do the new parcel, it would need 16 parking spaces on a hard covered lot, a hard surface lot. So I <br />wonder if that's possible. I have not heard anything about that. The off street parking area must be on the <br />same lot as the building and there would be three lots if we allowed this today and I wonder whether if the <br />parking far all three lots would be azre parking area that savers all three, parts of all three lots ar not. And I <br />don't personally know if that's legal or nat. And that's all from that. I just want to mention that the history <br />with this owner as what to understand from neighbors and more than several of them has been too many <br />students irx the duplex, nine or ten of therm. The students were talked to and they said they had ten but they <br />said it was grandfathered. But it isn't grandfathered at all. The fact that they're using parking on dirt when <br />they must know that it's required that it be hard surfaced. Adding another house to it and it would probably <br />be occupied non-related students just adds the possibility for mare violations. And the history is not very <br />goad. So I'm against the... <br />MR. URBANSKI: 1 just have a question Ann, maybe I just read this wrong and help, that the duplex in the <br />back isn't that grandfathered, they can have mare than two unrelated? <br />MRS. PUZZELLO: No it's grandfathered to be a duplex, that's all. <br />MR. URBANSKI: Just a duplex? <br />MRS. PUZZELLO: Yeah and they can have two students on each side of the duplex. Thank you. <br />MRS, CHRIS OLEKSAK: My husband Jim live next door at 1035 N. St. Peter. First I want to say I'm sorry <br />he spent all that money, but he never talked to any of us. I don't know who he's talking about that he was sa <br />happy that he moved in. We wanted that tarn down when Demitris owned it. We tried to have that happen <br />but we could never win that battle when it was condemned. But just let me tell you what's going on and I <br />also have the neighbors that are furious about this. They signed this petition to not let this happen. <br />MR. URBANSKI: Yau understand oar's is just a recommendation? <br />MRS. OLEKSAK: Okay, this is the start my husband told me so this is where I'm starting. My husband Tim <br />and I have lived at 1035 N. St. Peter Street far the past 35 yeas. We raised five children in this neighborhood <br />and by the way that lot they're talking about could possibly have had a house on it. That was part of our iot <br />and Timmy Carter, back there (pointing to someone in the audience) was born and raised in that <br />neighborhood, he'll tell you that thing used to be a laundry, a dog kennel, a store front. It used be a lot of <br />things. Jim's back there, (painting to someone in the audience) he doesn't want to talk though. I'rn a RN <br />working a local hospital here. Jim couldn't be here because he's out of town on business and I just want to <br />use this, we got together and wrote this, sa we'll present it to you. Our lot is next door to 1021 N. St. Peter <br />St. The history of St. Peter Street and the surrounding neighborhood has been a constant struggle between <br />absentee landlords and families who own single family homes. The struggle on St. Peter Street has revolved <br />74 <br />