Laserfiche WebLink
liOAlt0 (il' AIL1115;'I'MI.;NT <br /> Minutes - Aug_ ust: 2.3, 1984 <br /> Page 4 <br /> 3) . Water run-off concerns will be addressed to satisfaction of the <br /> town on garage properties. <br /> 4) . Modest size residence is prohibitive to larger accessory building <br /> area. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. <br /> 2) . Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest <br /> #1285. Schwahn/Kruschke to grant a variance of 25 animal units from the <br /> maximum number (1 per acre) requirement of the RH Districts, on condition <br /> rezone to RH District is approved. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Town is in opposition of A-2 Zoning that would allow unlimited live- <br /> stock. <br /> 2) . Animal units will fluctuate during breeding periods. <br /> • 3) . To fully utilize facilities (barn, feed lot and loafing shed) varianc <br /> is required. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest <br /> 2) . Hardship is caused by the ordinance and is not self-.imposed. <br /> Motion carried. Voges opposed. <br /> (Itte #1286. Schwahn/Miller to grant a variance of 6 feet more or less from re- <br /> quired sideyard. <br /> FINP1 N(; OP FACT; <br /> 1) . Existing garage is nonconforming as to sideyard. <br /> 2) . Proposed garage will extend no closer to side lot line than existing <br /> garage. <br /> 3) . An area of similar nonconforming structures. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. <br /> 2) . Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without <br /> injustice to applicant. <br /> Unanimously. <br /> #1287. Kruschke/Schwahn to grant a variance from required setback from road. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Victim of June 8, 1984 tornado, building was nonconforming. <br /> 2) . Building will have same setback as other buildings on property built <br /> under variances. <br /> CONCLUSION; <br /> 1) . Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> 2) . Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without <br /> injustice to applicant. <br /> 3) . Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> #1288. Kruschke/Schwahn to grant a variance from required setback from road. <br /> • <br />