Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
002-1061-95-000
DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-23 Filing Date: 4-26-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of May 7 and 14, 1990 copy Hearing Date: 5-24-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Dennis & Gerilyn Larson 706 270th St. Woodville, WI 54028 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4, Sec. 25, Town of Baldwin, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently in use for Ag-Residential and has been so used continuously since Ordinance adoption. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Requests a variance closer to town road, 96' to centerline. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under Section 17.64(1)(c)2 of the ordinance. 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: The applicant is requesting construction on the same location of existing house. However, a new house can be built meeting the setback requirements. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VARIANCE - The variance must meet all three of the following tests: 1 A. Unnecessary hardship is not present in that a literal enforcement of the terms of the zoning ordinance would not deny the applicant all reasonable use of the property because the new construction could meet the setback requirements. Convenience is not a hardship. B. The hardship is not due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant. C. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of face, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE - The requested variance is denied because no hardship exists. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed Chairperson Date: (D-LI_~Q Filed: cc: Town Clerk and file 2 a o C> o o : 0 M ~ C r} a is Cb N C E co O > CL > > r-0 ~LO~M Q ~O uu)N oo n ~ O 't ill ~ s c c (a cc, a 0 a c cn O fn -0 0 L C (n 7 0 o m C z co lf' d_ L 3 (6 0) 7: LL cc OO q N 0 N O o U o c E Q N ED .6 • I (0 co a V N co w 0 N U) 0 LL L z Q) c\l a m I 0 z m z z tq F- r N E ~J c H C> o O © 0 2 Z Z Ca Z O N "30 y w y L 0 aa) co 0 G d w E ~ H FN- H d = • M = a a a E Lo u) N J U! O o0 co N p~ Uv rn rn ~ O O E 0) 0) 0) N = w m LL ~y co N Q 1 _ r. O O O U) V) p Q C (D O E O O o Q 0 d N O M CD c m ur C - N 40. (0 -5 cN rn 3 0 (MO era CD o Z C N N E2 cD N E r • a~ O N M J (OD O = H U) CC d 16 a k EL 0 co 75 u C C A u a m o in 00