Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board grants variance for 5909 Clearwood Court, citing narrow lot and drainage measures
Summary
The Middleton Zoning Board of Appeals approved a variance allowing reduced side-fill area for a new home at 5909 Clearwood Court, finding the lot’s narrow width creates a hardship and that proposed grading and drainage measures address runoff concerns; the motion passed 5-0.
The Middleton Zoning Board of Appeals on Wednesday approved a variance that will allow a new home at 5909 Clearwood Court to use a 5.6-foot side setback instead of the 15-foot fill area normally required in the flood-fringe district.
City staff read the applicant’s request and cited Section 24 0 5 3 a 1 of the city ordinance, which requires residential structures in the flood fringe to have an elevation on fill extending at least 15 feet beyond the limits of the structure. The applicant, identified in the hearing materials as contractor Michelle Nell and who later spoke identifying herself as Michelle Acre, told the board the lot’s narrow width would make it impractical to both meet the 15-foot fill requirement and maintain a functional house layout and two-car garage.
Board members discussed site specifics, including a proposal to raise the entire lot about 6 inches to meet the required 1-foot elevation above the regional flood elevation at the slab level. Staff noted a neighboring property at 5901 had previously received a similar variance that reduced the 15-foot fill requirement to roughly 8 feet. The applicant said she mailed notices to about 30 nearby properties within roughly 300 feet, posted a yellow sign on the lot, met with immediate neighbors, and planned to use on-site swales and the inlet shown on the plans to manage stormwater.
Members also flagged a circular exterior stair that appears to encroach near the lot line; staff advised that accessory structures have limited encroachment allowances under the new ordinance and that stair placement could be corrected in the project narrative or plan review. Several board members expressed concern about creating runoff onto adjacent properties; the applicant said grading and swales would be contained on the site and that the proposed elevations would align the new home with neighboring slab levels rather than push water onto others.
After discussing hardship and drainage, board member Justin made a motion to approve the variance, citing the narrow lot and the benefit of elevating the lot to match adjacent properties; the motion was seconded by Dave. City staff read a motion that granted the variance to allow the side-yard setback shown on the plan (approximately 5.6 feet) because the fill requirement impedes the buildable area on the narrow lot and bringing the lot up 1 foot above the base floodplain elevation will align the home and not impede water flow. The board approved the variance by voice vote, 5 to 0.
The board and staff noted a few follow-ups: confirm final plan details for the stair encroachment and ensure the stormwater handling shown on the plans (including a proposed inlet and swales) is clearly documented in the permit set. The board closed the public hearing and adjourned; a separate non-zoning concern about silt on a nearby bike path was referred to Public Works.
What happens next: The city will issue formal correspondence to the applicant with the decision and any conditions or plan corrections required during the building-permit review.
