Monona zoning board approves variance to rebuild detached garage at 1304 Deposit Trail

The Monona Zoning Board of Appeals approved a variance to allow a detached accessory garage forward of the house at 1304 Deposit Trail, granting homeowners Martha Smekow and Jim Smekaw permission to replace and modestly enlarge an existing nonconforming garage.

At the board meeting, applicants described a need for additional storage and accessibility as they age, and said drainage and lake-level conditions make the proposed footprint necessary. “We truly need this new garage, not just for convenience, but for storage and functionality,” Martha Smekow said during the public-hearing portion; no members of the public spoke for or against the request.

City staff summarized the ordinance interpretation and the narrow basis for the variance. Doug, a city staff member, told the board accessory structures are generally expected to be behind the principal house and that relief is necessary because the proposed detached garage would be forward of the home. He said the other dimensional standards — side yards, height, lot coverage and distance to the dwelling — comply with code.

Applicants said the replacement garage would measure roughly 28 feet by 30 feet to accommodate vehicles, storage trusses and to allow an elevated slab for drainage; they described the existing garage as structurally compromised after recent high-water events. Jim Smekaw said the new slab would be raised about 6 inches and the design includes storage trusses and an open walkway to provide easier access for occupants who may require mobility aids in the future.

Board members discussed the statutory standards for variances, focusing on: (1) whether the lot’s physical limitations create a unique hardship and (2) whether the request improperly expands an existing nonconforming use. One member noted the city ordinances generally prohibit enlarging nonconforming structures except by variance and emphasized the legal distinction between a property owner’s desire for more space and a physical limitation tied to the parcel.

After discussion about alternatives (moving the garage, attaching it to the house, or using a breezeway) and a staff note that connecting structures could change setback calculations, a board member moved to approve the variance, citing the lot’s narrow building envelope, the location of the existing home, and the applicants’ statements that demolition and strict compliance would effectively preclude a garage on the lot. A second reiterated that compliant options would substantially disturb wetlands and the site, creating a public-interest concern. The motion passed on a voice vote with all members saying “aye.”

The public-hearing record shows no in-person comments opposing the request; the applicants said several neighbors submitted written statements of support. The board did not state additional conditions beyond the variance approval during the meeting.

The Zoning Board of Appeals meeting closed and members noted upcoming meeting dates for May 15 and June 19.