Laserfiche WebLink
B.O.A./Minutes/10/24/85 <br /> Page 3 <br /> FINDING, O2 FACT: <br /> 1) . Board determined that reposition of garage would eliminate necessity <br /> for variance. There is adequate area to do so. <br /> 2) . Utilization of existing blacktop or esthetics is not considered <br /> hardship. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a) . Unncessary hardship was not proven. <br /> Motion carried. 5-0. <br /> #1406. Kramer - Cottage Grove. <br /> Schwahn/Kruschke to grant 2.5 feet more or less, variance from setback from <br /> road. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Structure will extend no closer towards road than was existing. <br /> 2) . Town Board is in favor. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a) . Variance preserves the Zoning Ordinance as much as possible without <br /> injustice to applicant. <br /> b) . Hardship is caused by the Ordinance and is not self-imposed. <br /> Motion carried. 5-0. <br /> #1407. Jesberger - Bristol. <br /> Kruschke/Miller to grant 27.5 feet more or less, from rquired rear yard. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Lot is restricted by roads on 2 sides. <br /> 2) . The area has other similar structures in nonconforming locations. <br /> 3) . An unattached garage could not be permitted without variance. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a) . Variances preserves the Zoning Ordinance as much as possible without <br /> injustice to applicant. <br /> b) . Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. <br /> Motion carried. 5-0. <br /> #1408. Gilding - Westport. <br /> Miller/Schwahn to deny variance from maximum average height of accessory <br /> building. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . A redesign of structure would allow desired door height without need <br /> for variance. <br /> 2) . Town Board and Plan Commission recommend consideration of <br /> alternatives. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> a) . Unnecessary hardship was not proven. <br /> Motion carried. 5-0. <br />