|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1979
DaneCounty-Planning
>
Zoning
>
BOA
>
BOA Minutes
>
1979
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2016 9:36:03 AM
Creation date
5/6/2016 9:35:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - Minutes <br /> P.H. May 24, 1979 <br /> Page 6 <br /> tie FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1. Proposed addition will be farther from road than the existing <br /> building. <br /> 2. No addition to building could be constructed without a variance. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> b. Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. <br /> c. Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public <br /> interest. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #775. Motion by Schwahn second by Purcell to grant the Special Exception <br /> Permit. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1. Fill is minimal, only a few inches deep with maximum 1 foot depth <br /> in some spots. <br /> 2. Fill will not cause erosion, siltation problem if seeded or sodded <br /> SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: <br /> 1. Fill shall be seeded with fast growing grasses or sodded to pre <br /> vent siltation or erosion. <br /> 2. Inspection by the Dane County Zoning Department shall be re- <br /> quested when fill project has been completed. <br /> I Motion carried. <br /> #776. Motion by Kruschke second by Voges to grant a variance of 6 feet <br /> 5 inches from the required setback from C.T.H. P and 18 feet 10 inches <br /> from the required setback from Mineral Point Road. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1. Existing house is non-conforming as to setback from both roads. <br /> 2. No addition could be built without a variance. <br /> 3. Proposed addition will be farther from both roads than the existin; <br /> residence. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> b. Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. <br /> c. Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public <br /> interest. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #777. Motion by Schwahn second by Voges to deny. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1. Construction of tunnel would provide a convenience and not a <br /> necessity, to the appellant. <br /> (Pe <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.