My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019/04/04 - OTHER - (NA) - Correspondence - 17670
Burnett-County
>
Property Files
>
TOWN OF SCOTT
>
17670
>
2019/04/04 - OTHER - (NA) - Correspondence - 17670
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2020 7:49:53 AM
Creation date
4/4/2019 11:03:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Property Files v2
Document Date
4/4/2019
Document Type 1
OTHER
Document Type 2
(NA)
Document Type 3
Correspondence
County Permit Number
17670
Tax ID
17670
Pin Number
07-028-2-40-14-04-5 05-004-030000
Legacy Pin
028410403305
Municipality
TOWN OF SCOTT
Owner Name
THOMAS G COOPER REV TRUST
Property Address
29327 COUNTY RD H
City
DANBURY
State
WI
Zip
54830
Previous Owners
COOPER FAMILY TRUST
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I guess I was naively submitting this documentation thinking it was what you needed to consider <br />approving the sq footage above the 200sq/ft. I am new to this so pardon my ignorance Q. Can <br />you verify in writing that given the current laws and building placement that we would be <br />granted a permit for a project that was held to 200sq/ft? This is less than optimal but it would <br />still be better than nothing. At least I would know for sure what my improvement options would <br />be. I am trying to nail this down so I don't waste contractors time quoting work that might not <br />be feasible. This information will also be forwarded to the appraisers to help them arrive at a <br />property value. Thank You! <br />Regards, <br />Tom <br />317-431-3961 <br />Sent from Toms iPad <br />On Apr 3, 2019, at 9:50 AM, Towne, Jason <'tol wneaburnettcount .00rg> wrote: <br />Hi Tom, <br />If any portion of the cabin is less than 35 ft from the OHWM (Ordinary High Water Mark) <br />of the lake then no lateral (sideways) expansion is allowed, only vertical expansion is <br />allowed. <br />If all of the cabin is at least 35 ft from the OHWM then a lateral expansion of up to 200 <br />sq ft is allowed. It looks like the lateral expansion you are proposing is about 290 sq ft, <br />so it is too large. It appear the cabin is more than 35 ft from the OHWM (I would need <br />to verify prior to issuing a permit), if you could get the addition down to 200 sq ft in size <br />this could likely be issued a permit. <br />A variance is possibly, but I think the chances it would be approved are slim. A variance <br />requires a current survey to be done, $500 non-refundable application fee. So you are <br />looking at about $1,500 - $2,000 and there is no guarantee on what the outcome would <br />be. <br />Or you would need to build a new structure on the vacant lot. This new structure would <br />need to meet all current setbacks, including the 75 ft setback to the OHWM. <br />I think you should talk to some contractors about adding on to the current structure, <br />based on the age/condition of the existing structure it might be more <br />expensive/difficult. <br />Thanks, <br />Jason <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.