Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment Minutes 10-29-1992BOARD Ur AI3JUSTPiENT ISnnjLING AND HEARING (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter) October 29, 1992 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 9:00 A.ri. He explained the procedures of the hearing requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names in the front of the room. Supervisors, Kinney, Menter, Stephens, Neuman and Bradley were all in attendance. Staff included Zoning Administrator Tom Nelson and Corporation Counsel Greg Timmerman who was on call should legal assistance be needed. Stephens made a motion that the agenda be approved as published. Seconded by Bradley. Motion carried. Stephens made a motion that the September minutes be approved with minor corrections. Seconded by Neuman. Motion carried. Dates for the November hearing will be the 23rd of November and the meeting in December will be the 29th. OLD BUSINESS FRANK BACH�iAi'+I Steve Dunlap, attorney representing the Bachmann, presented a revised plan where the additions would be constructed away from the river. The hardship is that the kitchen is too small for their needs. They are being denied the right to use their property as they want to. Kinney stated that the DNR was properly informed and yet failed to respond. Dave Hense from the town of Troy Board stated that the town supports the proposal. Stephens stated that when the property is viewed he would like to take the opportunity to see the existing kitchen. MENSING & BATES Tom Mensing presented a new drawing showing the proposed deck located in the footprint of the original deck. Stephens made a motion to approve the plan as presented. Seconded by Menter. Roll call vote: Neuman, yes; Menter, yes, Stephens, yes, Kinney, yes; Bradley, no. 4:1. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS The nearing was called to order at 9:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice of the hearing as published: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, October 29, 1992 at 9%30 A.M. in the County Board Room of the St. Croix County Courthouse, Hudson, Wisconsin to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. An on site investigation will be made of each site in question, after which the board contemplates adjournment into closed session for the purpose of deliberating on the appeals, pursuant to Sec. 19.85(1)(a), Wisconsin Statutes, and will reconvene into open session for the purpose of voting on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: 17.3b(5)(c)1 Setback from highwater mark APPELLANT: Richard Chilson LOCATION: Gov't Lot 1, Section 13, T28N-R20W, Town of Troy 2. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(a) Duplex APPELLANT: Robert Jolicoeur LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 5, T28N-R18W, Town of Kinnickinnic 3. ARTICLE: 17.64(1)(d) Setback from town road APPELLANT: Charles and Jody Enloe LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 5, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy 4. ARTICLE: 17.65(4)(c)(d) APPELLANT: Donald Rodahl 5. ARTICLE: Gff remise sign NW 1/4 of Sec. 22, T28N-R19W, 17.14(6)(h) Exceed 6. ARTICLE: 17.36(5)(c)1 APPELLANT: Richard Fitzgerald LOCATION. Gov't Lot 1, Sec. 36, 7. ARTICLE: 17.64(1)(d) Setback T28N-R19W from of Sec. 31, T31N-R18W, RICHrjRD CHILSOAi Richard provided a plan showing an addition onto a summer residence. Their plans are to retire and make this their primary residence. Discussion on reasonable use and hardship. Dave Hense from the Troy town board stated that this could not be viewed from the river and therefor the town board supported it. No recommendation had been received from the DNR. ROBERT JOLICOEUR Nelson stated that this request for a special exception (duplex) was for an existing duplex that was identified during a water and septic inspection and is in violation of the ordinance. Robert stated that he was aware he needed the permit when he constructed the structure. Discussion. DOPI RODAHL Nelson stated that this was a special exception use request for directional signs for his townhouse development. Don presented a plan showing the location of the proposed signs. The township of Troy supports the proposal. GARY DUCLOS Nelson stated that this was a special exception use permit request to have more than one (1) animal unit per acre density on his farm of approximately one hundred ninety-five (195) acres (one hundred forty-five (145) tillable). They are currently in violation with seventeen hundred (1700) hogs. Two hogs equals an animal unit. Gary presented his request explaining the management of the operation. Charles Webster, Greg Smith, Cyril Cernohouse and Brad Smith all residents in the surrounding farm community supported the proposal feeling the waste generated could be disposed of. Ed Lunny and Ken Shoettle were opposed to the operation because of ground water concerns. Dave Hense stated that the request at the town the town board never had a chance to hear RICHARD FITZGERALD Attorney Robert Mudge presented a request for variance setbacks on a summer cabin along the St. Croix River. The existing building does not have adequate sleeping quarters and kitchen facilities for the size of their family. They would like to add an addition onto the structure. There would also be remodeling of the deck. Nelson stated that he had met with Mudge and the Fitzgeralds on a previous occasion and discovered there were a number of recent violations on the property including illegal decks, living quarters in a garage and others. These violations were done by the previous owner Garit Ye. Discussion. ROGER & REPIEE MILLER Nelson stated that the proposed variance request was for a garage that had already been started and was too close to the town road. Roger Miller stated that he knew he was too close to the town road but when he obtained the building permit from the township he was told not to worry about the setback. Ralph Mondor, township of Star Prairie, stated that township had supported the request. At the conclusion of the public hearing the Board of Adjustment made an onsite investigation of each site in question, after which they returned and went into closed session for deliberating on the appeals. The following decisions were rendered. FRAiIK BACHME'�iN Motion by Stephens, seconded request. 1. There currently is Hardship could not be reason for a hardship. by Neuman to deny the variance a reasonable use for the property. demonstrated since lifestyle is not Roll call vote: Neuman, yes; rienter, no; Stephens, yes; Bradley, yesI Kinney, yes. Motion carried 4:1. RICHARD CHILSOP7 Motion by Stephens seconded by Bradley to deny the variance request. There currently is a reasonable use for the property. Hardship could not be demonstrated. The request was for lifestyle. Kinney, yes; Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes. Motion carried. ROBERT JOLICOEUR Motion by Stephens, seconded by Neuman to deny the special exception use request for a duplex. All exits are within three (3) feet of each other posing a various health and safety concern. Roll call vote: Stephens, yes; Menter, no; Neuman, yes; Kinney, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried 4:1. CHARLES AND JODY EIdLOE Mot0 on by Bradley, seconded by Stephens to approve the variance request as presented. Hardship exists since there is no other direction in which to build. Neuman, yes; Menter, yes; Stephens, yes; Bradley, yes, Kinney, yes. Motion carried. DOi3ALD RODAH1, Motion by Bradley, seconded by Neuman to approve all directional signs and one advertising sign. Signs #1 and #4 from the application to be eliminated. Roll call vote: Kinney, no; Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes. Motion carried 491. RICHARD r I T GGEIRALD Motion by Stephens, seconded by Bradley to deny the variance -request. There is currently a reasonable use for the property. Hardship could not be demonstrated. The request was for convenience of lifestyle. Neuman, yes; Menter, yes; Stephens, yes; Bradley, yes; Kinney, yes. Motion carried. ROGER HILLER Motion by Stephens, seconded by Bradley to deny the requested variance. There are other alternatives on the property for the construction of a garage. No hardship was demonstrated. Roll call vote: Kinney, yes; Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, no, Neuman, abstained. Motion carried 3:1. Respectfuly submitted: George Menter, se r tary TCN:cj