fill on this property. Szymalak stated that those have no bearing on the north side. He
added that there is a legal requirement within the floodplain that an applicant should
seek the minimum relief that is necessary, which would be three feet, not a full waiver
of that side of the house.
Szymalak asked if there was discussion about asking for the minimum relief versus
the whole thing, and asked if that would be a legal outcome. Keyes stated that they
have considered options, significant money has been put in to bring it in to this level of
compliance and they still need to add more fill. Keyes stated that they took into
account the neighboring fence, and this seemed like a reasonable way to meet as
many requirements as possible. Szymalak reiterated that the legal requirement is to
only ask for minimum amount of relief, but the appeal is for the maximum amount; he
asked if any legal reviews been made to allow them to ask for the maximum amount of
relief. Keyes stated that they met with their inspector from Community Risk
Management (CRM), and they had talked through options.
Farmer asked for the aerial view of the property. Farmer confirmed that the grey house
is the current property, and the white house is the one to the north. Farmer confirmed
that there is 3 feet from the grey house to the property line. Farmer confirmed that the
owners of the white house are in favor of the appeal. Farmer asked where the runoff
goes. Keyes responded that they are before the Board so they can put erosion
measures in place and not dump water on the neighbor. Farmer asked how they are
doing the erosion measures; Keyes stated that they don't have an answer for that right
now. Farmer stated that rules are in effect, so they don't create waterflow conditions
that cause water in basements. Keyes stated they may also have to remove the
sidewalk and re-work it to add the fill, and that is partially the reason why she doesn't
have an answer for how they plan to deal with runoff; she added that they've filled the
basement already and need the variance in order to move to the next steps.
Szymalak asked why a variance wasn't sought before any of the work was undertaken.
Jonah Denson, representing the City Planning Department, was sworn in to speak.
Denson stated that the City bought property and at that time the Parks department
was in managing the parcel and asked the Planning Department to bring it into
compliance and sell the property as they have done in the past. Denson stated they
realize they were out of compliance with the DNR and City ordinance after they had
completed filling the basement in order to comply with FEMA regulations. Szymalak
asked if they had considered a French drain; Denson responded that they'd have to
work with CRM on their options. Denson stated that the neighbor has chain link fence
so that may be a challenge; Denson stated that they would likely add a berm and run
the water toward the alley; they know they have to manage water.
Farmer stated a French drain may not work with a spring melt. Farmer asked if they
have an opinion on referring the appeal until they have plans on how they will be dealing
with the water. Denson responded that they wouldn't be opposed in waiting one month,
they're not trying to avoid their responsibilities, they're just trying to be fair. David
Reinhart, representing the Community Risk Management Department, was sworn in to
speak. Reinhart added that the way the roof on this house is, it slants toward the east
and west (toward street and alley), so all the water would go east and west from the
downspouts; the probability of water going north is virtually zero. Farmer clarified that
he is worried about the water coming off the parcel itself in the spring with the snow in
the yard melting in a short amount of time. Cherf asked what the end game of the
property is because, as it is proposed, a LOM-R (Letter of Map Revision) may not be
granted; even if 3 feet of fill is placed. Reinhart stated that Cherf is correct; the fill is
needed to bring the property into floodplain compliance; removing the lot from
floodplain by a LOM-A (Letter of Map Amendment) or LOM-R is not the end game.
Wayne Roble, 2712 Onalaska Ave, was sworn in to speak. Mr. Roble stated that the
prior owner did some fill and there was a swale close to where the fence is, and they
still have quite a bit of water in their yard. He added that they've gotten more water in
their yard, which is like mush in the spring. Mr. Roble asked why they can't just get a
variance to have no fill there. He added there are different levels of floodplain; and
again asked why they have to put fill in.