1974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-2- MINUTES OF THE DANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTHEi'T MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 197 The addition will be to this non-conforming building and will be set-back even farther than the existing building. OTHERS IN FAVOR: None OPPOSED: None TOWN BOARD: Not present The Public Hearing was closed. #321. Motion by Voges, second by Dahlk to grant a Special Exception Permi' for a pond as per proposed plans and subject to SCS recommendations. #322, Motion by Dahik, second by Voges to grant a 3 foot variance from each side yard as per finding of fact: . 1. The lot division which caused the problem was effected before the pre- sent owner had title to it. 2. The proposed residence will conform to all other setback requirements. 3. Because of the narrow lots, several other residences are also non- conforming. CONCLUSION: A, The variance preserves the zoning ordinance without modification as far as possible without injustice to the individual, B. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. C, The variance is necessary in order to secure for the applicant a right or rights that are enjoyed by other property owners in the same area or district. D. The granting of the variance is not contrary to the public interest or damaging to the rights of other persons, or to the property values in the neighborhood, Motion carried. #323. Motion by Voges, second by Dahik to grant a variance of 20 feet from setback required from Highway 19, as per finding of fact: 10 The existing residence is non-conforming as to setback, 2. The addition will not increase the non-conformity. 3. Other yard requirements of the ordinance will be complied with. CONCLUSION: A, The variance preserves the zoning ordinance without modification as far as possible without injustice to the individual. B. Proven case of unnecessary hardship, C. The variance is necessary in order to secure for the applicant a right or rights that are enjoyed by other property owners in the same area or district, D. The granting of the variance is not contrary to the public interest or damaging to the rights of other_persons, or to the property values in the neighborhood, #324 Notion by Dahlk, second by Voges to grant a variance of 518" from setback required from the service road as per finding of fact: 10 Taking of property for service road caused the existing building to be non-conforming. 20 Proposed addition will be setback 816" farther from road then the existing building. CONCLUSION: A, The variance preserves the zoning ordinance without modification as far as possible without injustice to the individual.