Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oneida County board denies variance for White Elk Lane deck roof; vote 4–1
Summary
The Oneida County Board of Adjustment on June 18 denied Thomas and Barbara Grala’s request to add a roof over a deck at 13345 White Elk Lane, finding the proposed addition would extend closer to the ordinary high water mark than the existing eave in violation of county ordinance.
The Oneida County Board of Adjustment voted 4–1 on June 18 to deny a variance request by Thomas and Barbara Grala to add a roof over an existing deck at 13345 White Elk Lane in the Town of Minocqua.
The hearing followed an on-site inspection at the property earlier that day. Secretary Jeff Viegut reported the measured distance from the house to the ordinary high water mark was about 80 feet and that the proposed roof addition would bring the structure to roughly 63 feet from the water. The appeal challenges the denial of zoning permit #2600150; the appeal is recorded as Appeal No. 2600365.
Chair Guy Hansen told speakers the burden of proof for a variance rests with the appellant and outlined the three statutory criteria the board must find: a unique physical condition, no harm to public interests, and unnecessary hardship. Thomas and Barbara Grala testified they want a covered deck because Barbara Grala has an eye condition and the roof would provide shaded waterfront access; Thomas Grala said neighbors he consulted had no objections and that the request was for about a 10-foot extension toward the water.
County planning staff Assistant Director Todd Troskey explained the department’s denial: under the county ordinance, the closest point of the existing principal structure to the ordinary high water mark is the eave, and any expansion that would be closer to the water than that eave point conflicts with the ordinance. Troskey also said the permit application was not submitted as an ADA accommodation and suggested a retractable awning as an alternative.
After deliberation on the statutory variance criteria, Member Dan Chronister moved and Member Jeff Verdoorn seconded to deny the variance. The board voted as follows: Jeff Verdoorn yes; Jeff Viegut yes; Dan Chronister yes; Mike Pazdernik no; Guy Hansen yes. The motion carried and Chair Hansen adjourned the meeting at 1:25 p.m.
The board earlier in the meeting approved routine agenda items and minutes and heard staff updates on zoning statute changes and on the general process for Petition for Writ of Certiorari filings that can be used to appeal Board of Adjustment decisions.
