Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Shoreland topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Waupaca County Board of Adjustment denies Rusch variance to expand dwelling into wetland and shoreland setbacks
Summary
The Waupaca County Board of Adjustment on April 11 denied a variance request from Shane T. and Heidi Rusch to expand a dwelling within wetland and shoreland setbacks on an approximately 41-acre parcel, concluding the owners had sufficient buildable area elsewhere and that hardship was self-created.
The Waupaca County Board of Adjustment denied a variance request from Shane T. and Heidi Rusch to expand a dwelling within wetland and shoreland setbacks on about 41 acres in the Town of Dupont.
The decision followed a public hearing called at 10:18 a.m. on April 11. Applicant Shane T. Rusch testified that without the variance “we would not be allowed to permanently reside on the property” and said the variance was needed because of limitations he described as unique to the site. Rusch was sworn and provided answers addressing the three statutory variance criteria.
Candace Bauer, Land Use/Code Enforcement Specialist for the county’s Planning and Zoning Office, presented the staff report and recommended denial. Bauer told the board the parcel already contains a dwelling and that the remaining acreage offers sufficient space to build a larger, year‑round home in compliance with setback rules. The staff report noted the current owners were informed of potential wetland and navigability issues before purchase and characterized the asserted hardship as stemming from the owners’ desire to convert a hunting cabin to year‑round use rather than from a physical limitation of the land.
Board members considered the three variance tests — unnecessary hardship, unique physical property limitations, and public interest — and concluded the applicants had not met the legal standard. The board found that conformity with the ordinance did not unreasonably prevent the owners from using the property and that plenty of buildable area remained outside restricted setbacks. The board also concluded that granting the variance would undermine the purpose of the county’s Shoreland Protection Ordinance by reducing dimensional standards intended to protect wetlands and navigable waters.
The motion to deny the variance was made by G. Marx and seconded by Secretary J. Fulcher. The vote was unanimous: Chair A. Richardson — yes; Vice‑Chair D. Johnson — yes; Secretary J. Fulcher — yes; P. Leder — yes; G. Marx — yes. Testimony was closed before the board moved to its decision.
