The La Crosse Board of Zoning Appeals on June 17 deferred action on an appeal to reduce the required 25-foot front-yard setback at 2546 Seventh Street South after hearing testimony from the applicant and neighbors.

Building and Inspections staff told the board that the municipal code requires a 25-foot front yard in the residence district and that this property would need a 14.5-foot variance to proceed as proposed. Staff recommended denying the variance, saying the property can continue to be used as a single-family dwelling without the proposed addition and that the application did not show "unnecessary hardship" or unique property limitations.

The applicant and neighbors testified that existing homes on the block are often set closer to the curb, that the riverside orientation of many lots makes backyard space more valuable, and that the owner needs additional enclosed storage and living space. The applicant said the proposed work would include windows and a finished seating area and that moving the addition back would force removal of a tree and block the river view.

Board members debated the hardship standard and neighborhood context. One member noted that many houses in the area sit closer to the curb and said those circumstances weigh toward a variance; another member said the lot is not uniquely constrained and argued the board must apply the ordinance as written.

A motion to defer the matter until a full five-member board could hear the appeal carried. The recorded vote on the deferral was in the affirmative and the item was tabled for a later meeting when the board has a full complement of members.

Next steps: Staff will work with the applicant to clarify the requested setback (there had been confusion in plan revisions over whether the applicant sought a 14.5-foot or a 10.5-foot variance) and the board will revisit the item when it is fully staffed.

Why it matters: The case illustrates how neighborhood context, ordinance language and board composition can affect property owners seeking modest additions. The board did not reach a final determination of the merits; the record will be reopened once a full panel is available to vote.