Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variance for Berg property; board cites topography and lack of alternatives
Summary
The Sawyer County Board of Adjustment approved variance 25-003 for a detached garage on property in the Town of Draper, concluding that lot configuration and topography left no reasonable alternative location. The motion passed 5-0 after applicants and the life-estate holder described storage needs and staff reported on setbacks and inspection.
The Sawyer County Board of Adjustment voted 5-0 to grant variance 25-003, allowing construction of a detached garage on property owned by Candace and Jennifer Berg (life estate held by Thomas Burke) in the Town of Draper. The board found that unique physical limitations and the site topography left no reasonable alternative location for the garage and that the proposal was not contrary to the public interest.
Jay Cathy presented the staff report and on-site inspection dated May 15, describing a proposed detached garage to be set about 200 feet from the ordinary high-water mark and approximately 8.5 percent impervious cover if constructed. The application sought relief from Sawyer County Code of Ordinances (Appendix D) rear lot line setback requirements, requesting a reduced rear-yard setback of 5 feet where 40 feet is required. Cathy noted that moving the garage closer to the house would interfere with an existing well and that other buildable areas were unsuitable for access or would create stormwater and septic issues.
Candace Berg joined the meeting by Zoom and described the family’s need for a usable, year-round garage. Thomas Burke, the life-estate holder, spoke in support and said the garage would allow them to store tools and equipment without frequent travel. The Town of Draper recommended approval and staff noted 12 adjacent property owners were notified; no additional comments were received.
During discussion board members referenced the three-part variance test and concluded the house’s location relative to required setbacks and local topography supported a finding of unnecessary hardship as the property cannot reasonably be used for its permitted purpose without relief. A motion to approve the application without additional conditions was made and seconded; the board recorded findings of fact on the record and approved the variance by a 5-0 vote. Zoning staff will prepare the written decision and advise the applicants on permitting steps.
The board told the applicants the written decision and instructions for next steps would be available from the zoning office.
