2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOA 3/21/02 PAGE 3 tv 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. #3181. Appeal by Joel Bahr for a variance from required setback from normal highwater mark, repair/alteration to a non-conforming structure as provided by Section 11.03(2) and 10.23(2) and (4)to permit addition/alteration of existing residence at 4509 Fox Bluff Lane being Lot#10, Assessor's Plat of Fox Bluff Section 5 So., Town of Westport. IN FAVOR: L. Bahr, J. Ishakawa OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION: Land Conservation Commission, Department of Natural Resources KAY/SAYLES to deny requested setback of 34.33 feet to normal high watermark to allow additions to and alteration of existing residence. Motion carried 5-0. KAY/LONG to deny requested variance to 10.23, Dane County Code of Ordinances to permit addition/alteration in excess of 50% value of non-conforming structure also removal in excess of 50% of original structure. Motion carried 5-0. Finding of fact: 1). Applicant proposes to remove, down to foundation, existing residence, add substantial addition and construct 2 stories atop existing foundation. 2). Original structure built in 1957 as a boathouse/guesthouse. 3). Residence atop original boathouse built In 1972 under Variance#134 (9/71) for setback to normal high watermark. 4). Applicant's property has 240 feet of frontage on Lake Mendota and runs 880 feet to Fox Bluff Lane. 5). Property elevation increases at required setback from normal high watermark an drops 25 feet to water level from existing structure. 6). Section 10.23 Dane County Code of Ordinances allows non-conforming structures to be added to or alteration not exceeding 50% of assessed value at the time they became non-conforming (50% of 1970 assessed value is approximately $10,000.). 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.