1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOA 6/24/93 Minutes Page 7 • #2407 . Appeal by Richard and Sandra Hall for a variance from required sideyards as provided by Section 10.16(5) (a) to permit structural alteration of existing residence at 2793 Willow Court being Lots 5 and 6, Block #1 , Greenridge Park - Section 9, Town of Dunn. IN FAVOR: R. & S Hall OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION : Town Board, neighbors, (The Mueller's) Dreps/Gaskill to grant, with condition, variance of 6.4 feet from required left sideyard to permit structural alteration of existing residence. CONDITION: I ). That suitable document (deed restriction) be recorded that link the 2 subject lots together for zoning purposes. FINDING OF FACT: I ). Alteration is changing pitch of existing roof line over existing structure. 2). No further encroachment towards normal high watermark or sideyard then al ready exists. 3). Town Board and neighbors are in favor. CONCLUSION: I ). Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without injustice to applicant. 2). Variance is necessary to provide right enjoyed by others. Motion carried - 5-0. #2408. Appeal by Paul and Angela Wipperfurth for a variance from required setback from road and sideyard or as provided by Section 10.17(3) and 10.07(7) to permit proposed additions to existing single family residence at 7194 St. Norbert's Street in the SW 1/4 SW 1/4 - Section 16, Town of Roxbury. IN FAVOR: P. Wipperfurth OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION: --- Dreps/Lynch to grant variance of 15,39 feet from required setack to centerline of St. Norbert's Street. Also, to grant 3.5 foot variance from required right sideyard to permit residential addition as proposed. FINDING OF FACT: I ). St. Norbert's Street is classified as a Class C Highway thusly requiring setback minimum of 63 feet from centerline. 2). St. Norbert's Street is only 20 feet in width - right-of-way to right-of-way. 3). Addition is intended to convert single to double car garage and add living space. 4) . St. Norbert's Street is a dead-end and serves only those few residences on it. 5). Applicant has 19 feet more or less on opposite side from project to allow emergency vehicle access to rearyard. CONCLUSION: 1 ). Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest. 2) . Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without injustice to applicant.