Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board of Adjustment approves variance to retain modified roof on Helvetia cabin

Waupaca County Board of Adjustment · March 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Waupaca County Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing a roof-pitch modification at N9050 Moon Lake Retreat Road after finding hardship and unique nonconforming conditions; the vote was 4–1.

The Waupaca County Board of Adjustment approved a variance Sept. 28 to allow a roof-pitch modification on a Helvetia cabin that was completed without permits.

Chair A. Richardson opened the hearing for Steven M. Durbin Jr., who told the board he raised the roof pitch years earlier to stop persistent leaks and that he did not change the building footprint. Durbin said the roof had been at a negative pitch and that the work made the dwelling habitable; he estimated the height increase at about three feet.

Neighbors Kenneth R. Prell and Robert Nelson testified in support, saying Durbin had improved the property and neighborhood. Planning staff, represented by Candace Bauer, recommended denial, arguing the applicant had not met the three statutory variance criteria: the board should not grant a variance for ordinary economic hardship, the parcel was not uniquely constrained compared with surrounding lots, and granting the variance could undermine setback standards in the zoning ordinance.

The Department of Natural Resources, via an email read into the record by clerk Becky Landre, said it had "no comments since no specific shoreland provisions [are] being considered in these cases."

During deliberations the board found the structure was not habitable without the roof corrections (unnecessary hardship) and that the building was a pre-existing nonconforming structure that limited options for full compliance (unique physical condition). The board also concluded the modification, as built, did not harm the public interest. G. Marx moved and Vice-Chair D. Johnson seconded a motion to approve the variance; the motion passed 4–1, with M. Strebe voting no.

The board closed the hearing and moved on to the next agenda item.