Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Cropsey setbacks for new house, denies retaining-wall variance
Summary
The Oconto County Board of Adjustment granted two variances for James and Michelle Cropsey on Feb. 24 to allow a new home closer to the road and ordinary high-water mark, but denied a separate request to replace or build a retaining wall closer to the OHWM; all votes were unanimous.
At a public hearing on Feb. 24, 2026, the Oconto County Board of Adjustment reviewed a continued application from James and Michelle Cropsey for multiple shoreline and road-setback variances on a parcel in Section 15, T33N, R15E in the Town of Townsend.
Applicant James Cropsey presented a revised plan that reduced the overall footprint. He described "proposing 50 feet from the OHWM, 6 feet from the right of way and a new retaining wall, no closer than 36 feet from the OHWM," and noted an existing retaining wall on the site ranging from roughly 25 to 35 feet from the ordinary high-water mark. Cropsey said the proposed home will have a full basement with a walkout because of slopes on the site; he discussed runoff and said final retaining-wall details may be determined during or after construction.
The board considered findings of fact for each requested variance. For a variance from the traveled-centerline setback, the board found unique physical limitations (lot size, layout and slopes), no harm to public interest and unnecessary hardship, and voted to grant a 25.5-foot variance to allow the new home and attached garage to be located 37.5 feet from the centerline of the road. The motion was made by Dave Christianson, seconded by Dave Behrend, and passed unanimously.
On the shoreline setback for the house, the board again found physical limitations and unnecessary hardship; it granted a 25-foot variance so the new home and attached garage may be built 50 feet from the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM). That motion was made by Dave Behrend, seconded by Elmer Ragen, and passed on a unanimous roll-call vote.
On the separate retaining-wall request, the board concluded the application identified an existing wall and that the variance was largely self-created; it found potential harm to the public interest and determined unnecessary hardship was not present. The board denied the requested 45-foot variance that would have allowed a retaining wall 30 feet from the OHWM. The denial motion was made by Carol Heise, seconded by Dave Christianson, and passed unanimously.
The zoning administrator will incorporate the board’s determinations into the required permits; each decision is subject to the statutory appeal period and to any required sanitary or construction permits.
