1973 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE DANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING OF March 16, 1973 The Dane County Board of Admustment met on March 16, 1973 with the following members present: Erickson, Holte, Dahlk Also: Enger, Fleck Meeting was called to order by Chairman Erickson at 7:30 P.M. in Room 226 to conduct a public hearing as published in the notice. Motion by Holte to approve the minutes of February 23 and March 10, 1973, second by Dahlk, carried . The notice was read and the public hearing was opened. #211 Appeal by Milo Hanson from denial of a permit to build an addition to a residence located on the South of Lot 34 and the North 56' of Lot 33 in the I. M. Julseth Addition, Township of Dunkirk. Permit denied because side yard is less than required by the Dane County Zoning Ordinance. IN FAVOR: Milo Hanson; addition will provide needed space, cannot be feasibly located on any other part of house. OTHERS IN FAVOR: Carl Popanz, Building Inspector, Town of Dunkirk. Letter from E. A. Maurer, neighbor to the South, stating no objection if 6' distance from lot line was maintained. OPPOSED: None TOWN BOARD: Oscar Holte, Chairman in favor. #212 Appeal by David Dewar from denial of a permit to make alterations to a non-conforming building located on the South 45' of Lot 6, Crescent Park, Township of Dunn. Permit denied because setback from .water (rear yard) is less than required by the Dane County Zoning Ordinance. IN FAVOR: David Dewar; plans are to remodel interior to meet the requirements of family, no addition to length ox width of residence will be made. OTHERS IN FAVOR: Larry Lynch, builder. OPPOSED: None TOWN BOARD: Not present. The public hearing was closed. #211 Motion by Holte to grant 3 ' variance or side yard as per finding of fact: 1. The variance is necessary to secure for the applicant, a right that is enjoyed by other property owners in the area. 2. The variance is not contrary to public interest or damaging to the rights of other persons or to property values. Second by Dahlk, carried. #212 Motion by Dahlk to grant a )o' variance from shoreline as per finding of fact: 1. To compel the applicant to conform to the ordinance would cause unecessary hardship. 2. The variance is not contrary to public interest or damaging to rights of other persons or to property values. 3. The variance is necessary to secure for the applicant, a