Davison County planning commission does not recommend setback variance for proposed hunting cabin

The Davison County Planning Commission on Oct. 7, 2025 declined to recommend approval of a setback variance for a proposed hunting cabin after a 2–2 roll call split.

Acting Director of Planning & Zoning Karen Wegleitner presented the variance application filed by Scott Suelflow for property described as the SW 1/4, except Mitchell James River Pump Site of Section 1, T 103 N, R 60 W of the 5th P.M., Davison County, South Dakota. The application requests a reduction of roughly 35 feet so the proposed cabin would sit about 40 feet from the north (front) property line where the Agricultural District requires a 75-foot front-yard setback.

Applicant Scott Suelflow told the commission he intends to use the structure as a hunting cabin and cited snow issues and the elevation of his lot as reasons he cannot meet the 75-foot setback. "The cabin will be totally off the grid," Suelflow said, adding he would use "a generator and [a] wood burning stove." He also told commissioners he has no plans to rent the cabin commercially but may allow friends and family to use it.

Suelflow said he had spoken with nearby property owners Jane Goldammer and Nick Pardy and reported that Pardy "doesn't care what he does as long as he stays 10' from the fence." A woman identified only as Darlene spoke at the meeting on behalf of Dennis and Brenda Ellweins, saying the Ellweins could not attend because of medical issues and wished to remain involved in the decision.

Commissioners questioned whether the proposed use would be strictly personal and asked about easement access. Suelflow described his understanding of the easement and the commission discussed whether the setback requirement created a legal hardship sufficient to justify a variance.

A motion by Commissioner Dave Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Steve Thiesse, to recommend approval of the variance permit to the Board of Adjustment failed on a roll call: Bruce Haines — nay; Steve Thiesse — aye; Lewis Bainbridge — nay; Dave Anderson — aye. Three commissioners were absent and the motion was denied. The minutes record the commission did not reach a recommendation in favor of the variance; any final decision would be made or reviewed by the Board of Adjustment per the application route described at the meeting.

Earlier on the agenda the commission approved the meeting agenda (motion by Lewis Bainbridge, seconded by Steve Thiesse) and the Sept. 2, 2025 minutes (motion by Dave Anderson, seconded by Steve Thiesse), each by unanimous vote of members present. The commission set its next meeting for Nov. 4, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. and adjourned at 8:41 p.m.