Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Winfield Township homeowner seeks variance for 20x10 shed citing lot constraints and septic field
Summary
A Winfield Township resident requested two variances — placing a prefabricated 20x10 shed in front of the front wall and reducing the interior side yard from 10 feet to about 3 feet — citing lot configuration, existing septic and mature trees; the hearing officer indicated intent to recommend approval and noted neighbor support.
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Winfield Township homeowner requested two variances on May 20 to install a prefabricated 20-by-10-foot shed: permission to place the detached accessory building in front of the front wall of the existing home and to reduce the required interior side yard from 10 feet to approximately 3 feet. The parcel is approximately 0.7 acres, and the hearing officer said the petition was published in the Daily Herald on May 20 and that no objections were received from notified authorities.
The petitioner, Mr. Faywell, described a narrow rear area, a septic tank and field located at the back northwest corner of the lot, and large oak trees he did not want to disturb. He said, "We wanna add a prefabricated 20 by 10 shed," and explained the house sits close to the rear of the lot, leaving only about 5 feet from the back wall to the fence. He said the only practical location for storage was next to the driveway close to the garage; placing the shed elsewhere would require removing additional vegetation or conflict with the septic system.
Mr. Faywell told the hearing officer that both adjacent neighbors and the homeowner behind the property submitted signed letters of support. The hearing officer said he found the unique configuration, existing vegetation and septic location supported the practical difficulty standard for a variance and that he had sufficient information to make a decision; he previewed an intention to recommend approval. He noted any approval would apply only to the proposed new shed and would not retroactively authorize replacement or modification of an existing older shed without separate relief.
The hearing officer said the recommendation will be considered at the June 18 meeting and then forwarded to the county development committee and county board; no formal decision was made at the May 20 hearing.

