Laserfiche WebLink
JAN./BOA MINUTES <br /> PAGE 2 <br /> 411°` 1). Structure shall be removed at the owner's expense if future road improvement <br /> requires additional right-of-way. <br /> Finding of fact: <br /> 1). Applicant obtained zoning permit ZP 99-3386, for garage, based upon site plan <br /> showing required centerline setback being met. <br /> 2). Entire existing structure is within required setbacks. <br /> 3). Proposed highway expansion is slated to be on opposite side of highway. <br /> 4). Original commercial structure built in the 1930's while residence added in 1950's. <br /> Conclusion: <br /> 1). Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without injustice to <br /> applicant. <br /> 2). Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest. <br /> Motion carried—5-0. <br /> #3079. Appeal by Jim Hanson for a variance from required setback from road and <br /> platted"Alley," and minimum sideyard as provided by Sections 10.17(4) and 10.16(5)to <br /> permit roof and dormer replacement for existing residence at 103 Maple Street being Lot <br /> #32, Block 8,Edgerton Beach Park- Section 25, Town of Albion. <br /> IN FAVOR: C. Kransberger OPPOSED: --- COMMUNICATION: --- <br /> SAYLES/LONG to grant variances, with condition, from required setback to Maple <br /> Street of 1.5 feet also variance of 1.9 feet from required setback to "alley" along East <br /> property line to allow 2nd story addition over existing structure. <br /> Condition: <br /> 1). Subject to recording a document which will have the effect of combining Lots 31 and <br /> 32 to remove necessity of needing a sideyard variance between the 2 lots. <br /> Finding of fact: <br /> 1). Existing upper level presently is a partial dormer, which doesn't afford full headroom <br /> and, will be removed. <br /> 2). Proposal is for a fu112nd story with roof being raised 4-6 feet additional. <br /> 3). Applicant owns 2 1/2 lots and with lots combined has sufficient sideyard (West). <br /> 4). East sideyard is to platted"alley" which vehicular traffic is not practical, however <br /> variance is requested. <br /> 5). Property is in an area of many nonconforming structures to which numerous <br /> variances have been granted. <br /> Conclusion: <br /> 1). Variance preserves the zoning ordinance as much as possible without injustice to <br /> applicant. <br /> 2). Variance is not contrary to rights of others or to the public interest. <br /> Motion carried—5-0. <br /> APPEALS FROM PREVIOUS HEARINGS: <br /> #3054. Karem, Inc. —Medina— 11/18/99 P.H. <br /> #3072. Karem, Inc. —Medina— 12/16/99 P.H. <br /> to <br />