Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning 05-24-07 REVISED NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE THURSDAY, MAY 24, 2007 7:00 P.M. * ST CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, COMMUNITY ROOM 1101 CARMICHAEL ROAD, HUDSON, WI CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL ADOPTION OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING DATE OF NEXT MEETING OLD AND NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing 1) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 14, Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance: Comments and questions from the public will be heard and addressed. The proposed amendments to the County's Nonmetallic Mining ordinance, Chapter 14, are to bring it into compliance with changes to Chapter NR 135, Wisconsin Administrative Code, adopted in December 2006 by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2) Proposed amendments to Chapter 17, Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.65 Sign Regulations and related changes regarding signs in Sections 17.155, 17.20, 17.30, 17.33, 17.35, 17.36, 17.70 and 17.84: Comments and questions from the public will be heard and addressed. The proposed amendments to the County's sign regulations are to address identified inadequacies in the existing sign regulations regarding standards, approval process and sign needs of county businesses. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING: ADJOURNMENT (Agenda not necessarily presented in this order) SUBMITTED BY: St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Department DATE: May 22, 2007 COPIES TO: County Board Office Committee Members County Clerk News Media/Notice Board *CANCELLATIONS/ CHANGES /ADDITIONS MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE ST. CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, HUDSON WI May 24, 2007 Present: Committee: Supervisors Lois Burri, Wally Habhegger, Gene Ruetz, Ron Troyer, Stan Krueger Staff: Dave Fodroczi, Jennifer Shillcox, Steve Olson, Bob Heise, Kevin Grabau, Ellen Denzer, Judy Olson Guests: Brian Hurtgen, Benny Stenner, Candy Anderson, Joe Gillen, Jeremy Gillen, David Brummel, Ray Knapp, Nina Boonacker, Dick Marino, Linda Luckey, Kera Morelock, Larry Rauch, Tim Ramberg, Gerald Peterson, John Bettendorf, Tim Foster, Ed Schachtner, Pat Bergin, Walter Nechville, Mike Rodewald, Keith Relyea, Karen Schmit, Nick Schmit, David Wachter, Roger Rebholz, Jim Zeller, Rick Whitmire Call to Order: Chair Habhegger called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Approval of Previous Minutes: none Date of Next Meeting: Tuesday, June 12, 8:30 a.m. Old and New Business: Public Hearing 1) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 14, Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance Fodroczi welcomed attendees, introduced staff members in attendance and listed the order of business. He encouraged attendees to submit comment cards. Comments are due by June 1. He reviewed the timeframe for adoption of these amendments. Shillcox explained Wisconsin statutory authority for regulating nonmetallic mining and Wisconsin Administrative Code for Nonmetallic Mining Reclamation, chapter NR 135. Shillcox reviewed the concerns received from the previous public information meetings. She noted that support has been received from town officials. All comments were taken into consideration in doing the current draft. She recapped the changes required by Administrative Code NR 135 and reviewed additional proposed amendments and asked for questions. Chair Habhegger declared the public hearing open. Benny Stenner, representing the Kraemer Company, stated that the prohibition on mining below groundwater may as well have been left in the ordinance, because the studies required would get varying opinions from the experts. You could not find three experts who agree. He stated that groundwater is important for everyone. His company currently has pits in groundwater. He read portions of a letter from Bruce Brown, senior geologist with Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey responding to the last public information meeting with recommendations for changes to the ordinance. Candy Anderson, Mathy Construction, submitted written comments regarding the five -foot separation condition stating that the condition is not necessary since no contaminants or additives are in the water. There already are many regulations on wash ponds. Walter Nechville, of Nechville Excavating, stated concern regarding the five -foot separation requirement. The sewage industry only requires a three -foot separation. With no more comments, Chair Habhegger declared the public hearing closed. 2) Proposed amendments to Chapter 17, Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.65 Sign Regulations and related changes regarding signs in Sections 17.155, 17.20, 17.30, 17.33, 17.35, 17.36, 17.70 and 17.$4. Ellen Denzer gave an overview of the proposed regulations and reviewed comments received from the previous information meetings. She emphasized the reasons for having sign regulations, noting that the process for obtaining permits will be much easier than with the current ordinance. She listed and explained the proposed types of permanent and temporary signs for commercial/industrial signage. She showed examples of permanent and temporary residential signs. The section on nonconforming signs matches what is allowed under state law, as well as that for election signage. Denzer noted that the proposed ordinance has received extensive legal review. She then invited questions from attendees. In response to Nick Schmidt, Town of St. Joseph resident, inquiring about jurisdiction, Denzer explained that the ordinance applies to all but three towns in the County. Town of Hudson has its own zoning, and the Towns of Cady and Forest have no zoning. Rick Whitmire inquired about the cost of a permit. Denzer stated that currently a land use permit is $330, and a special exception permit is $1100. Ray Knapp, Chair, Town of Troy asked for descriptions of any purpose on- premise non - residential signs and what would be the purpose of a 20 -foot high sign abutting a residential area? Denzer explained there are special exception uses that are very light commercial, i.e. a home office or bed and breakfast that needs more signage than the residential sign allowances. Very few of these signs currently exist. A 20 foot high sign could be a residential development monument type sign. Keith Relyea, Town of St. Joseph resident, inquired about enforcement of two ordinances since the Town of St. Joseph has a sign ordinance. Denzer was not sure how the Town is enforcing such. Nick Schmit asked which ordinance would apply if the Town ordinance is more restrictive. Denzer stated that she was not sure how we enforce that. Schmit stated that he understands that new billboards are not allowed in these regulations. Denzer stated that is true and off - premise signs are allowed but not as large. Jim Zeller asked for an explanation of the rationale for eliminating electronic signs. Denzer stated that was based on comments received and reminded him that the County only regulates signs in rural areas. Tim Foster, Supervisor, Town of Hudson, asked why directional signs are limited to two per property. Denzer stated that most businesses have only one or two entrances. Additional signs are permitted on the property not visible from the highway. David Brummel, business owner, Town of Troy, asked how the rules apply to existing signs. Denzer replied that the majority of existing signs would not become nonconforming. If a sign does become nonconforming, it will be allowed to be maintained. Ed Schachtner, Chair, Town of Somerset, asked if all temporary signs must be out of the right of way. Denzer stated that is correct. Mike Rodewald, St. Paul, asked if semi trailers and murals on barns are considered signs. Denzer answered 2 that semi trailers are signs if they are not moving on site. Semi trailers left in one place are considered signs. If moving, they are moving vehicles. Murals are generally not considered signs. David Brummel asked what the total number of signs that are being managed in the County. Denzer did not have this figure but stated that approximately one half dozen permits were issued each year until last year when over 40 permits were issued. Walter Nechville asked for a definition of on- premise directional signs. Denzer replied that it would be a sign at the entrance or exit with one or more driveways and are allowed in any district. Nick Schmit stated that the prohibition on changeable electronic motion type signs is adequately spelled out, but asked that the language be stronger. Denzer replied that legal counsel has reviewed the definition. The list of prohibited signs is on page 5. The section on illumination is a little less regulatory. Denzer stated that static illuminated signs, those lighted from within, are allowed. With no more questions, Chair Habhegger declared the public hearing open. Ray Knapp stated support of these regulations by the Town of Troy. He was glad to see increased allowance of signage for agricultural purposes. He stated concern with on- premise signs potentially 20 feet high in residential areas. There is consensus in Troy to allow no electronic signs. Nick Schmit suggested wording to prohibit changing message signs, revolving signs, internally lit background signs, and LED signs. He also asked that in the future, if any part of the ordinance is illegal, only that part of the ordinance be removed, not the entire ordinance. Rick Whitmire stated that with St. Croix County being the fastest growing county in the state, prohibiting electronic signs is a step backwards. Jim Zeller suggested looking at electronic signs for special uses, such as for special events to encourage people to stay in the County. Cedar Lake Speedway uses such as sign. He asked that use of electronic signs be allowed to promote special attractions. Walter Nechville voiced concern about directional signs, and necessary signage in his gravel pit. David Wachter asked how the two River's Edge signs were approved. Denzer replied that those are on- premise signs. Ed Schachtner commended the County for its work. Electronic signs are a matter of opinion. Some of them are beautiful and some are awful. Such signage would be hard to regulate. Nick Schmit said no signs improve the landscape. Whitmire replied that there are some in New York City. Jim Zeller distributed pictures of signs used to promote geographic areas as businesses on Highway 35 in Minnesota. Wisconsin Dells highway signage is very nice. He would like a balance in using signs to promote businesses in the area. He stated his disapproval of the moratorium. He feels that there is misuse of the word billboard. He would like to talk to staff about these issues and asked that the County consider approving electronic signs for special attractions. Keith Relyea travels Highway 35 often and hopes that signage like that does not happen in St. Croix County. The viewshed has value and signage should be controlled. Special exceptions can become open books for some people. 3 Tim Foster stated that he is glad that the Town of Hudson signs are not controlled by this ordinance. Larry Rauch, Town of Somerset Plan Commission Chair, supports the sign ordinance and stated his objection to lighted signs particularly at night. They interfere with night vision. Nina Boonacker, Town of St. Joseph, supports smaller signs and does not want electronic signs. Signs clutter the landscape. With no more comments, Chair Habhegger declared the public hearing closed and thanked everybody in attendance for their participation. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted: J4x o udy OlsdW, Recording Secretary Stan Krueger, Secret 05 -24 -07 4 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Committee will hold a public hearing on Thursday, May 24, 2007 at 7 p.m. in the Community Room of the St. Croix County Government Center, 1101 Carmichael Road, Hudson, Wisconsin to consider the following: 1) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 14, Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance: Comments and questions from the public will be heard and addressed. The proposed amendments to the County's Nonmetallic Mining ordinance, Chapter 14, are to bring it into compliance with changes to Chapter NR 135, Wisconsin Administrative Code, adopted in December 2006 by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2) Proposed amendments to Chapter 17, Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.65 Sign Regulations and related changes regarding signs in Sections 17.155, 17.20, 17.30, 17.33, 17.35, 17.36, 17.70 and 17.84: Comments and questions from the public will be heard and addressed. The proposed amendments to the County's sign regulations are to address identified inadequacies in the existing sign regulations regarding standards, approval process and sign needs of county businesses. The proposed amendments will be available on the County's website, www.co.saint- croix.wi.us For more information on these proposed amendments contact either Jenny Shillcox at 715- 386 -4680 or jennifers ,co.saint- croix.wi.us Ellen Denzer at 715 -386- 4673 or ellendgco.saint- croix.wi.us Written comments will be accepted through 5 p.m., Friday, June 1 at the Planning and Zoning Department, and may be submitted in person, by mail, fax or email at: Planning and Zoning Department Government Center 1101 Carmichael Road Hudson, WI 54016 (715) 386 -4686 — fax pz@co.saint- croix.wi.us — email Wallace Habhegger, Chair Planning and Zoning Committee