Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Shoreland Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board denies lakeside addition request for resident seeking to 'age in place'

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 denied Sandra L. Oftedahl’s request Nov. 11, 2021 to construct a residential addition and patio within the shoreline setback, finding the application did not meet variance criteria and noting alternatives within ordinance limits.

The Waupaca County Board of Adjustment on Nov. 11, 2021 denied a variance sought by Sandra L. Oftedahl to build a residential addition and patio within the shoreline setback at N2262 Cleghorn Road in the Town of Dayton.

Oftedahl testified she was raised in Waupaca and intends to return to the area to retire. She said she was diagnosed with arthritis in high school and seeks a remodel and addition to make the house accessible and to provide a severe-weather area. She told the board that a 200-square-foot expansion available without a variance would be insufficient for her needs and that she requires roughly an additional 40 square feet to relocate a bathroom and allow space for maneuvering and possible live-in help. A physician’s letter from Dr. John T. Schousboe was included with the application to document her condition.

Planning and Zoning staff recommended denial, saying the applicant’s physical limitations constitute personal circumstances and do not establish the unique property limitations required for a variance. Staff also noted many neighboring parcels face similar setback constraints along the shoreline and that alternative building locations exist that comply with the Shoreland Protection Ordinance.

During deliberations the board found the application failed the unnecessary hardship and unique physical property limitation tests and concluded that granting the variance would harm the public interest by weakening shoreline protections. The board voted to deny the request; a roll-call vote was recorded with all members voting yes. The public hearing concluded and the board moved to other business.

The board’s decision means Ms. Oftedahl may pursue a conforming 200-square-foot expansion or explore other design alternatives that do not require a variance.