Laserfiche WebLink
BOA MINUTES/November 18, 1993 <br /> Page 2 <br /> CONDITION: <br /> 1) . The handicap entryways shall be removed at the owner's <br /> expense is future road improvement requires additional right-of- <br /> way. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Applicant has option of bringing grade up to level of decking <br /> to removing need for variance. <br /> 2) . Dane County Highway Department not opposed provided <br /> "condition" is included. <br /> 3) . Minimal entry variance (12 sq. ft. ) granted to adjoining <br /> structure for similar setback to existing building. <br /> 4) . Handicapped accesses are most likely mandated by the State. <br /> 5) . Raised decking serves as seating area for dining patrons. <br /> 6) . Applicant was purchased additional property and similar <br /> structure could be located in complying location. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Handicap Access: Variance is necessary to provide right <br /> enjoyed by others. <br /> 2) . Deck: Unnecessary hardship was not proven. <br /> Motion carried. 5-0 . <br /> #2461 Appeal by Alm-Mac Building & Remodeling Contractors, <br /> agent for Janet Kuhl for a variance from required setback <br /> from road as provided by Sec. 10 . 16 (5) (b) to permit wood <br /> deck as constructed at 825 Pleasant View Drive, being Lot <br /> #34 , Pleasant Hill Heights, Section 7 , Town of Dunkirk. <br /> IN FAVOR: D. McKichan OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION: <br /> LYNCH/GASKILL to deny requested variance from required setback to <br /> right-of-way of Milwaukee Street to permit deck/screen porch as <br /> constructed. <br /> FINDING OF FACT: <br /> 1) . Applicant claims to have utilized original builders site pain <br /> as being accurate representation. <br /> 2) . Milwaukee Street is presently unimproved, however appears <br /> logical location for future development. <br /> 3) . Property is corner lot and receives reduced setback <br /> requirement of 21 . 3 feet. <br /> 4) . Decking and screened porch are extremely large and slight plan <br /> modification could have accommodated setback. <br /> 5) . Property is in an area of modest sized, 20± year old homes, to <br /> which no similar variances have previously granted. <br /> CONCLUSION: <br /> 1) . Unnecessary hardship was not proven. <br /> Motion carried - 3-1 , (Klopp, no) and (Dreps, abstain) . <br />