1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOA 7/25/96 MINUTES PAGE 7 FINDING OF FACT: 1) . 12' x 12' storage shed erected on property without benefit of required permits . 2) . Lot, due to small size, would not be buildable without variance, as setback from normal high watermark and setback from road overlap. 3) . Accessory building abutts similar accessory building on adjoining lot and is somewhat shielded by trees from view. 4) . Shed is needed for storage of lawn and garden accessories . 5) . Application is re-submittal of previous approval #2487 to which zoning permit not obtained. 6) . New property owner, Wayne Whitemarsh, was unaware of previous variance or permit requirements . CONCLUSION: 1) . Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without injustice to applicant . 2) . Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest . Motion carried - 5-0. Cre #2740. Statz - Burke - 6/27/96 P.H. No appearances . GASKILL/SAYLES to hold request in abeyance, until October Hearing to allow pending Ordinance Amendment #19 which would remove need for variance. Motion carried - 5-0. #2739. Burner - Westport - 5/23/96 P.H. IN FAVOR: R. Burner, J. Pregler SAYLES/KAY to deny requested variance from required setback to normal high waterline of Lake Mendota to permit addition to existing residence. FINDING OF FACT: 1) . Applicant has residence located mostly within required setback to normal high watermark and proposes screen porch and deck. 2) . Applicant utilized average of adjoining properties to reduce required setback from 75 feet down to 60 feet. 3) . Design and location alternatives could allow desired additions without need for variance . CONCLUSION: 1) . Unnecessary hardship was not proven. Roll Call Vote: Sayles - aye, Klopp - aye, Kay - aye, Gaskill - no, Quackenbush - No. Motion to deny carried - 3-2 .