Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT <br /> MINUTES <br /> MEETING OF APRIL 28, 1994 <br /> PRESENT: Quackenbush, Gaskill and Klopp. <br /> ALSO: Fleck and Reynolds. <br /> Meeting callled to order by Chairman Quackenbush at 6: 31 P.M. in <br /> Room 2-F to hold public hearing as published by Class II Notice. <br /> MINUTES: GASKILL/KLOPP to defer until May Hearing. Motion carried <br /> 3-0. <br /> #2494 . Appeal by Dennis Kloepping for a variance from required <br /> setback from road as provided by Section 10. 17 (5) to permit <br /> residence as constructed at 5869 Lochinvars Trail being Lot #7, <br /> Skyline Terrace - Section 9, Town of Medina. <br /> IN FAVOR: D. Kloepping, M. Rumpf, C. Motl OPPOSED: --- <br /> COMMUNICATION: Town Board <br /> GASKILL/ - Deny (Motion failed for lack of second) . <br /> KLOPP/OUACKENBUSH to hold appeal until May Hearing. Klopp, aye, <br /> Gaskill and Quackenbush - no. Motion failed. <br /> #2495. Appeal by Caroline Batz for a variance from required <br /> setback from road, setback from normal high watermark, and sideyard <br /> as required by Sections 10. 17 (5) and 11. 03 (2) to permit additions <br /> to existing residence and proposed garage at 4814 Batz Road being <br /> Lot #1, Block #1, Morris Park and additional lands "in the SW ''SW - <br /> Section 3 , Town of Westport. <br /> IN FAVOR: R. Endres OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION: Town Board <br /> * Agent withdraws any variance request relative to construction of <br /> proposed garage. <br /> GASKILL/KLOPP to grant variances of 30 feet more or less from <br /> requited setback to normal high watermark of Lake Mendota to permit <br /> deck also, grant variance of 8 feet more or less from required <br /> setback to right-of-way of Batz Road to permit entry as <br /> constructed. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Both structures replace former structures in need of repair. <br /> 2) . Owner with disability needs greater room to maneuver. <br /> 3) . Road right-of-way deadends at applicant''s property. <br /> 4) . Residence located nearer to normal high watermark than does <br /> deck addition. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible <br /> without injustice to applicant. <br /> 2) . Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public <br /> interest. Motion carried - 3-0. <br />