Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Calumet County Zoning Board OKs variance for Burgs to build near waterway
Summary
The Zoning Board of Adjustment unanimously approved a variance allowing Brad and Tina Burg to build an accessory structure 36 feet from a navigable waterway on their Brothertown property, citing a stream that bisects the 2-acre parcel and limited buildable area.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Calumet County Zoning Board of Adjustment unanimously approved a variance May 28 permitting Brad and Tina Burg to construct an accessory structure 36 feet from a navigable waterway on their property at N3002 Lakeshore Drive in the Town of Brothertown. The board said the parcel’s physical features create limited buildable areas and warrant relief from the usual setback.
Board member Jannette moved the approval, and Peik seconded. In making the motion, Jannette argued the parcel’s layout was restrictive: "they happen to have a stream running through a 2-acre parcel. It’s limited, it’s unique, they have limited options as to where they can and cannot build on it." The motion carried unanimously.
County planning staff read the public hearing notice and the staff memo into the record and noted a neighbor, Judy Bloom, submitted a letter supporting the project. The Burgs presented the petition and addressed the three variance criteria the board considers: a unique property condition, an unnecessary hardship if the variance is denied, and lack of harm to public interests.
The petition sought permission to place an accessory structure closer than the setback referenced in the hearing notice (the request described construction "within 75 feet" of a navigable waterway); the approved location would be 36 feet from the waterway as described in the board’s action. Board members cited the stream bisecting the parcel and limited alternative building sites in finding both uniqueness and hardship and concluded the variance would not harm public interests.
The board did not attach other conditions to the variance in the motion. Staff indicated there are no other pending petitions filed at this time; the board adjourned at 6:51 p.m.
