Laserfiche WebLink
-2- <br /> Minutes of Board Adjustment 5/16/75 <br /> IN FAVOR: Mr. & Mrs. Roedell, Addition is needed for storage of bikes, <br /> yard equipment, etc., would like to make use of concrete slab in front <br /> of garage. Proposed addition would not make the garage any closer to <br /> the road than the neighbors garage or several others on the street. <br /> Question by Dahlk what would the left side yard be of the proposed <br /> addition? Mr. Roedell; not certain, approximately 2' . <br /> OTtiERS IN FAVOR: None. OPPOSED: None TOWN BOARD: Not present. <br /> #351. Appeal by Walter H. Kleemann for a special Deception Permit to <br /> fill on a parcel of land located in part of outlot "B", Plat of V cheeta, <br /> Section 5, Township of Dunn. <br /> IN FAVOR: Tr .lter Kleemann; fill is to prevent water from standing on lot. <br /> Neighbor to the South has filled his lot causing run-off problem on my <br /> lot which is higher towards the lake. Depth of fill, as determined by <br /> sewer elevation, will be about 2' to comply to flood plain requirements. <br /> The fill will be sloped towaras road and neighbor to the North, to pre- <br /> vent water problems. <br /> OTHERS IN FAVOR: None OPPOSED: None TOWN BOARD: Not present. <br /> The public hearing was closed. <br /> #347. Motion by Voges second by Dahlk to grant variance of 11' from <br /> required setback as per finding of fact: <br /> 1. .Slope of lot causes snow and ice problems in winter <br /> 2. Neighbor has been granted a variance to have garage closer to <br /> road and on the level. <br /> 3. No vision problem to road. <br /> Conclusion: <br /> A. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> B. Variance necessary to provide rights enjoyed by others. <br /> C. Not contrary to public interest or rights of others. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #348. Motion by Dahlk, second by Voges to grant variance of 17=x' from <br /> required setback from road and 14' from shoreland requirements as per <br /> finding of fact. <br /> 1. Barber Drive is non-existant road shown only on plat map. <br /> 2. Lot would not be buildable without variance from shoreland. <br /> 3. Neighbors to either side are as close to the lake. <br /> Conclusion: <br /> A. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> B. Variance necessary to provide rights enjoyed by others <br /> C. Not contrary to public interest or rights of others. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> x349. Motion by Voges, second by Dahlk to grant variance of 13' from <br /> rear yard requirements as per finding of fact., <br /> 1. Existing residence is non-conforming <br /> 2. Addition will not project beyond rear of existing building. <br /> Conclusion: <br /> A. Proven unnecessary hardship. <br /> B. Variance necessary to provide rights enjoyed by others <br /> C. Not contrary to public interest or rights of others. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> U <br />