Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves rear‑setback variance for Berg family to allow small detached garage in Draper
Summary
The Sawyer County Board of Appeals unanimously approved a variance to allow a modest detached garage with a 5‑foot rear property line setback where 40 feet is normally required; the board found physical lot constraints justified the relief.
The Sawyer County Board of Appeals voted 5‑0 to approve a variance allowing a detached garage on property owned by Candace and Jennifer Berg in the town of Draper. The approval permits a rear setback of 5 feet from the rear property line where the county requires 40 feet.
Why it matters: the house on the lot was built prior to current setback rules, and staff told the board the 40‑foot rear setback line effectively bisects the existing principal structure. The applicants said the requested garage is the only practical buildable location that would not unduly burden the property because other locations would conflict with an existing well, a septic field or create access problems for the adjacent lot.
Details and board rationale: staff reported an onsite inspection and that the proposed garage (described in application materials as 19 by 23 feet, noted by staff to be 20 by 24 feet with eaves) would be about 200 feet from the ordinary high‑water mark and would result in approximately 8.5% impervious coverage. The town of Draper reviewed the request and recommended approval, citing proper drainage and visual improvement to the property; 12 adjacent property owners were notified and no additional comments were received.
Candace Berg participated by Zoom and described the property history and constraints; Thomas Berg, the life‑estate holder, spoke in support, saying the family needs storage and easier year‑round access to tools and equipment. Board members reviewed the three statutory variance criteria and concluded that the lot configuration and existing structure location constituted a unique physical limitation and that approving a modest garage would not harm the public interest.
The board approved the variance with no additional conditions and instructed staff to record findings of fact explaining how the three statutory requirements were met. Zoning staff offered to assist the applicants with the permit process.
Ending: the board recorded a unanimous vote (5–0). The decision is subject to the county’s standard appeal procedures.
