Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - Minutes <br /> November 20, 1980 <br /> Page 3 <br /> 2. Owner has had heart suryergy and Dr. suggested swimming as therapy. <br /> The pool was constructed to meet this need. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a. Construction of pool was based on a reasonable need, not just <br /> for pleasure. <br /> b. Proven case of unnecessary hardship. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #952. Motion by Voges, second by Schwahn to grant the special exception <br /> permit as proposed with the following conditions: <br /> 1. Project shall be subject to Department of Natural Resources review. <br /> 2. Project shall be coordinated with filling on adjacent lots so that <br /> major differences in lot elevations will not occur. <br /> 3. Project shall be planned and supervised so as to prevent siltation/ <br /> erosion into lake. <br /> 4. Fill area shall be sodded or seeded with fast growing grasses. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1. The project as planned along with the conditions specified <br /> should prevent any siltation, erosion, impairment of fish or <br /> aquatic life and should provide for maintenance of safe and <br /> healthful conditions. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #953. Motion by Purcell, second by Voges to grant the Special Exception <br /> Permit, as proposed, with the following conditions: <br /> I. Project shall be subject to Department of Natural Resources review. <br /> 2. Project shall be coordinated with filling on adjacent lots so that <br /> major differences in lot elevations will not occur. <br /> 3. Project shall be planned and supervised so as to prevent silta- <br /> tion/erosion Into lake. <br /> 4. Fill area shall be sodded or seeded with fast growing grasses. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1. The project as planned along with the conditions specified <br /> prevent any siltation, erosion, impairment of fish or aquatic <br /> life and should provide for maintenance of safe and healthful <br /> conditions. <br /> Motion carried. <br /> #922. Motion by Voges, second by Purcell to reconsider variance; Motion <br /> carried. <br /> Motion by Purcell , second by Kruschke to grant a variance of 40.3 feet <br /> from the required setback from U.S.H . 51. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1. Abuse of scale by truck drivers requires that the scale be in a <br /> location where surveillance can be continuous. The proposed loca- <br /> tion area is the only one where this can be done. <br /> 2. High ground water and unstable fill area of property make other <br /> locations for scale unsuitable. Water can cause malfunction ar.d <br /> scale must be on a stable base without setting problems. <br /> C <br />