Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment 09-25-03 f - AGF.NDA ST. CROIX COUNTY NOTICE OF COMMITTEE MEETING TO: Clarence Malick, Chairman St. Croix County Board FROM: Julie Speer, Chairman COMMITTEE TITLE: St. Croix County Board of Adjustment DATE: Thursday, September 25, 2003 TIME: 8:30 a.m. LOCATION: Government Center, Hudson, Wisconsin CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: ADOPTION OF AGENDA: ACTION ON PREVIOUS MINUTES: DATE OF NEXT MEETING: Discuss meeting dates for November and December, 2003 UNFINISHED BUSINESS: OTHER BUSINESS: Update on legal cases OLD BUSINESS: NEW BUSINESS: See attached ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: POSSIBLE AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING: ADJOURNMENT: (agenda not necessarily presented in this order) SUBMITTED BY: St. Croix County Zoning Office DATE: September 18, 2003 COPIES TO: County Board Office County Clerk Committee Members News Media/Notice Board * CANCELLATIONS /CHANGE S /ADDITIONS PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, September 25, 2003 at 8:30 a.m. at the Government Center, 1101 Carmichael Road, Hudson, Wisconsin, to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The Board will view each site in question, after which the Board will deliberate and vote on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for filling and grading of more than 2,000 square feet on slopes of less than 12% in a Shoreland District pursuant to Section 17.29(2)(c)3. The request is for a special exception permit to allow the property owner to construct a new home on the property located on the Apple River. APELLANT: Brian J. Rafferty LOCATION: The SE 1 /4 -NE 1 /4, Section 29, T31N -R18W, Town of Star Prairie ADDRESS: Lot 3 of Certified Survey Map,Vol. 15, page 4206, Doc.No.661981, Somerset, WI 2. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit to construct a mechanical lift and stairway on the property to allow access to the St. Croix River pursuant to Section 17.36(6)(a)4. APELLANT: Stanley E. Pond, Jr., owner/ Sharon O'Flannigan, agent LOCATION: Part of Government Lot "1" of Section 34, T30N -R20W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: 1282 Highway 35, Hudson, WI 54016 3. ARTICLE: Request for an amendment to the original Special Exception permit dated Mayl, 2000 to allow additional horses on the property. APELLANT: Mark Sylla LOCATION: Part of the SW 1 /4 of the NW /4, the SE 1 /4 of the NW '/4, the NE '/4 of the SW '/4 and the NW 1 /4 of the SE 1 /4 all in Section 21, T28N- "RI 9W, Town of Troy ADDRESS: 526 Rolling Meadow Drive, River Falls, WI 54022 4. ARTICLE: 1) Variance request to the Class "C" Highway requirements pursuant to Section 17.64(1)(c)2. The request is for a 58 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback to County Road E and a 75 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback from County Road I to allow an existing pole building to remain in its current location. 2) Variance request for a 180 -foot variance to the 500 -foot setback requirements from any pre- existing neighboring residence for a major home occupation pursuant to Section 17.155(6)(d)2. 3) Special Exception request for a major home occupation pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(s) and Section 17.155. Request is to operate an automotive repair business out of an accessory structure on the property. APELLANT: Ryan and Rachel Flattum LOCATION: The NE 1 /4 - NW 1 /4, Section 3, T29N -R19W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: 119964 th Street, Hudson, WI 54016 All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and be heard. Additional information may be obtained from the office of the St. Croix County Zoning Director, Hudson, Wisconsin at (715) 386 -4680. Julie Speer, Chairperson St. Croix County Board of Adjustment OFFICIAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING AND HEARING MINUTES September 25, 2003 The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Julie Speer at 8:30 a.m. A roll call was made. Julie Speer, Nick Golz , Rich Peterson and Richard (Buzz) Marzolf were present. Stan Krueger was absent and excused. Staff included: Steve Fisher, Zoning Director, Rod Eslinger, Zoning Specialist, Deb Zimmermann, Administrative Assistant, Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel. Chairperson Speer believes this to be a properly noticed meeting. Motion was made by Golz, seconded by Marzolf to adopt the agenda. Motion carried. The Board set the next meeting date as October 23, 2003 and will be held in the County Board Room, at the Government Center. The starting time will be 8:30 a.m. The Board set the following dates for upcomin§ meetings: November 20 and December 18 th . These dates are changed from the 4 Thursday of the month, due to the holidays. MINUTES Motion by Peterson, seconded by Speer to adopt the minutes from the August 28, 2003. Motion carried. CORPORATION COUNSEL REPORT/ UPDATE ON VIOLATIONS AND LITIGATION Town of Warren/ Phantom Fireworks: The Board was given a copy of the Court's decision in the Phantom Fireworks case in the Town of Warren. Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel, went over the Court's decision with the Board and explained his position on this decision. The Circuit Court affirmed the Board's decision in this matter, stating that the Board acted properly in determining that the Town of Warren had granted approval for the Phantom Fireworks request. The Court then remanded the case back to the Board for further findings to clarify if the Board considered the concept approval from the Town of Warren to be the final approval. Gary Bakke, being duly sworn, is the attorney representing the Town of Warren in this matter. He explained that the Town of Warren had given concept approval of this request, with the idea that the applicant would come back before the town to obtain final approval based on certain conditions. The Board then granted the special exception permit to Phantom Fireworks, and the Town of Warren filed a Writ of Certiorari with the Circuit Court. Bakke would like to see the Town and County work together on this, and would like to present the concept approval from the Town. Tom Jacobson, being duly sworn, is the attorney representing Phantom Fireworks. He gave the Board background on this request, stating that his client had received approval from the town and went forward to the Board of Adjustments. The County then noticed the Town of the first hearing that was held, where the Board tabled the decision. The Town was then notified of the second hearing. The Town failed to show up for either hearing, nor did they send any further correspondence stating an objection. The Board's decision listed 20 conditions in their approval of the Phantom Fireworks request, and all of the conditions listed by the Town of Warren are incorporated in the Board's decision. His client bought the property for this business based on the approval of the Board and were ready to proceed. Phantom Fireworks then went back to the Town for final approval, on what they thought was approval for grading, and the town raised new objections. Jacobson stated that the issue today is to clear up a technical issue, not to re- decide the issue. The question is how did the Board interpret the town's concept approval. Timmerman told the Board that they did everything properly in this proceeding and the Court upheld their decision. Timmerman recommends that the Board affirm their decision that the town's approval was final approval for the request. Motion by Speer, seconded by Golz to stand by their original decision that the concept approval given by the Town of Warren was considered the final approval. The following vote was taken to uphold the original decision as stated above: Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Speer, yes. Motion carried. Marzolf excused himself from the vote, as he was not on the Board of Adjustment at the time of the original decision. Karl Neumeier Case: Timmerman discussed this legal case with the Board. The Board denied the Neumeier variance request as the Board cannot grant a variance in the St. Croix Riverway District over the objection of the DNR. Neumeier appealed the decision to Circuit Court, and the court ruled that, in fact, the Board cannot grant a variance over the objection of the DNR, and that the "no reasonable use" standard applies when making decisions on variances. Timmerman went onto explain that the Supreme Court is going to be hearing a case on variance standards, the Ziervogal case, and this may change the criteria for granting variances in Wisconsin. As for now, the Board must grant variances based on the "no reasonable use" standards, and cannot grant approval for a variance in the St. Croix Riverway District over the objection of the DNR. Mike Waterman, attorney for Neumeier, was sworn in. He explained that no action will be taken by his client until a decision is made in the Supreme Court case now pending. He further added that the Department of Natural Resource's NR 118 is being re- written, and they are waiting to see what changes will be made. Timmerman added that he agrees no further action should be taken, as the Supreme Court decision may affect the way that the DNR would have to look at different criteria for granting variances. Voicestream Cell Tower Case: Fisher informed the Board that the Seventh Circuit Supreme Court of Wisconsin has upheld the decision in this case, in favor of the County, denying the cell tower application visible from the St. Croix River. The Board recessed from 9:15 a.m. to 9:25 a.m. NEW BUSINESS Chairperson Speer welcomed everyone in attendance and gave a brief overview of how the Board of Adjustment meeting is conducted. Chairperson Speer stated that the public hearing notice was published correctly and was read into the record as follows: 2 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, September 25, 2003 at 8:30 a.m. at the Government Center, 1101 Carmichael Road, Hudson, Wisconsin, to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The Board will view each site in question, after which the Board will deliberate and vote on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for filling and grading of more than 2,000 square feet on slopes of less than 12% in a Shoreland District pursuant to Section 17.29(2)(c)3. The request is for a special exception permit to allow the property owner to construct a new home on the property located on the Apple River. APELLANT: Brian J. Rafferty LOCATION: The SE ' /4, Section 29, T31N -R18W, Town of Star Prairie ADDRESS: Lot 3 of Certified Survey Map,Vol. 15, page 4206, Doc.No.661981, Somerset, WI 2. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit to construct a mechanical lift and stairway on the property to allow access to the St. Croix River pursuant to Section 17.36(6)(a)4. APELLANT: Stanley E. Pond, Jr., owner/ Sharon O'Flannigan, agent LOCATION: Part of Government Lot "1" of Section 34, T30N -R20W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: 1282 Highway 35, Hudson, WI 54016 3. ARTICLE: Request for an amendment to the original Special Exception permit dated Mayl, 2000 to allow additional horses on the property. APELLANT: Mark Sylla LOCATION: Part of the SW 1 /4 of the NW' /4, the SE '/4 of the NW 1 /4, the NE 1 /4 of the SW 1 /4 and the NW 1 /4 of the SE 1 /4 all in Section 21, T28N- "R19W, Town of Troy ADDRESS: 526 Rolling Meadow Drive, River Falls, WI 54022 4. ARTICLE: 1) Variance request to the Class "C" Highway requirements pursuant to Section 17.64(1)(c)2. The request is for a 58 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback to County Road E and a 75 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback from County Road I to allow an existing pole building to remain in its current location. 2) Variance request for a 180 -foot variance to the 500 -foot setback requirements from any pre- existing neighboring residence for a major home occupation pursuant to Section 17.155(6)(d)2. 3) Special Exception request for a major home occupation pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(s) and Section 17.155. Request is to operate an automotive repair business out of an accessory structure on the property. APELLANT: Ryan and Rachel Flattum LOCATION: The NE 1 /4 - NW I /4, Section 3, T29N -R19W, Town of St. Joseph 3 ADDRESS: 1199 64 Street, Hudson, Wl 54016 All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and be heard. Additional information may be obtained from the office of the St. Croix County Zoning Director, Hudson, Wisconsin at (715) 386 -4680. Julie Speer, Chairperson St. Croix County Board of Adjustment Article One: Brian Rafferty Eslinger explained that this request is for a permit for filling and grading in the shoreland area of the Apple River to construct a residence and a driveway The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application Exhibit 3: Location map Exhibit 4: LWCD letter dated September 17, 2003 Eslinger went over the staff report with the Board, stating that the slopes are 12% or less. The applicant has hired JEO Consulting to design the plans for the grading and erosion control measures. The Land and Water Conservation Department has reviewed the plans, and Eslinger read the letter dated September 17, 2003 (Exhibit 4) into the record. There were no comments received from DNR. JEO is currently working with the DNR to see if a Chapter 30 permit is needed. The Town of Star Prairie supports the request, and Eslinger read the letter from the Town into the record. Jill Zalar, being duly sworn, is with JEO Consulting and representing Rafferty. She went over the plans for the project. She went over the plans for the project, pointing out that there is only about one acre to build on, due to the floodplain area. She reiterated that they are working with the DNR and believe they have addressed the comments made by the LWCD. There were no objections to the request. The Board will view the site. Article Two: Stanley Pond Eslinger introduced this request for a permit to construct a mechanical lift and stairway in the St. Croix Riverway District. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application with narrative Exhibit 3: Photos Eslinger went over the staff report with the Board. The LWCD has reviewed the request and stated no objections in a letter dated September 17, 2003. There is no detailed erosion control plan needed, as the disturbance of land will be very minimal. The Town of St. Joseph has recommended approval of the request. The DNR was sent a copy of the request on August 27 and as of today, the staff has not received a response. 4 Stanley Pond, being duly sworn, is the owner of the property. He explained that the tram will be about 360 -feet long, and the stairway will be built to access the river from the lift. The stairway will be approximately 25 -feet in length. Pond stated that they plan to take down just one tree in order to construct the lift and stairway. There were no objections to the request. The Board will view the site. Article Three: Mark Sylla Eslinger explained that this request is for an amendment to an original special exception permit dated May 1, 2000, specifically Condition number one. The permit was granted for a riding and boarding stable. Eslinger went over the information given to the Board, telling the Board that the applicant is requesting to amend condition number one to allow up to 50 horses on the property, rather than be limited to 20, as the condition now states. The applicant has sufficient acreage available for the animal waste. The LWCD has reviewed and approved of the request, confirming that there is plenty of acreage to accommodate the increase to 50 horses. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff Report Exhibit 2: Application Exhibit 3: BOA Decision dated May 1, 2000 Exhibit 4: Location Map Eslinger further explained that the applicant plans to add on an 80 -foot by 80 -foot addition to the existing stable to house the horses. It was noted that the drawings for this addition need to be scaled back 6 -feet to meet the 100 -foot setback requirement from property lines for buildings housing livestock. Matt Hieb, being duly sworn, is with ACA Engineering and representing the applicant. He told the Board that the plans have already been revised to meet the 100 -foot setback requirement, as the Town of Troy requires a 150 -foot setback. He handed out a copy of the revised plans. Hieb told the Board that the Town of Troy has recommended approval of the request, and a letter will be sent to the County stating this. There were not objections to the request. The Board will view the site. Article Four: Ryan and Rachel Flattum Eslinger presented this request to the Board, stating that there are three setback variances and one special exception request for a major home occupation. In going over the staff report, Eslinger pointed out that the structure was built after receiving a building permit from the Town of St. Joseph. This property is unique, as it is located where two county roads intersect, and therefore, needs to meet the 100 -foot setback from each road. The applicant is requesting a 58 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback from County Road E and a 75 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback from County Road I to allow the existing pole shed to remain in its current location. Eslinger further added that the applicant is also requesting a 180 -foot variance to the 500 - foot setback requirement from any pre- existing neighboring residence for a major home occupation. The fourth request is for a special exception permit for major home 5 occupation for an automotive repair business to be operated from the structure on the property. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application for variance Eslinger went over the site plan with the Board, pointing out the setbacks. The Highway Department has reviewed the plans and had no concerns with the request. The Town of St. Joseph was sent a copy of the application on August 27, 2003, and has not responded. Eslinger stated that the St. Croix County Emergency Government should be notified of any hazardous or flammable materials stored on site. Mike Waterman, being previously sworn, is the attorney for Flattums. Ryan Flattum was sworn in. Waterman went over the survey map with the Board, pointing out that the location of the shed is in the low spot on the land. If the shop had to be moved, it would be located on a hill and trees would have to be removed. Before Flattum built the pole shed, the Town of St. Joseph building inspector came out to view the property before issuing the building permit, and the applicant walked the property with the inspector, as well as having the property flagged where the proposed building was to be placed. The building inspector then issued the building permit to the applicant. Waterman stated that it is impossible to meet the 500 -foot setback to the neighboring property line from anywhere on the property. Due to the topography and the trees, the shed cannot be seen from any neighboring houses. Waterman stated that the applicant received approval from the Town of St. Joseph Planning Commission last night, and they will be going to the Town Board at their next meeting in October. Ryan Flattum addressed the Board, reiterating that the Town building inspector came out and walked the property with the applicant. The applicant had put stakes in the ground and roped off the area for the pole shed, even showing the exact size that the shed would be. When the building was being constructed, the applicant had not intended to house a business, but "fell into a business deal ", and decided to start the automotive business. This is an appointment only business, no advertising, just "word of mouth ". The business is not full time, as Flattum will be home taking care of their children while his wife works outside of the home. The hours of operation would be a few days a week from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 or 4:00 p.m. The Town agreed to allow two cars outside of the shed for up to 72 hours at a time. This business is only for minor motor repair, no body work is involved. Waterman added that he believes that the applicant meets the no reasonable use standard, as there is no where on the property that this structure can meet the 500 -foot setback. The Dahlberg property is the only neighboring residence, and they have given their support in this matter. If the Board chooses to deny this request, Waterman would like the request reconsidered after the decision on the upcoming Supreme Court case . There were no objections to the request. The Board will view the site. DECISIONS: Brian Rafferty 6 Motion by Golz, seconded by Speer to approve the request for a permit for filling and grading in the shoreland area of the Apple River to construct a driveway and a residence based on the following findings: 1. The plans have been designed by a professionally licensed engineer. 2. The plans for the project are very complete, well done, and taking measures to reduce impacts to the Apple River. 3. The Land and Water Conservation Department comments have been addressed. 4. The Town of Star Prairie supports the request. 5. There were no objections to the request. 6. The Board finds that the request is not contrary to the public interest. 7. The Board finds that the spirit and intent of the ordinance would be met by granting this request With the following conditions: 1. This permit allows the applicant to disturb more than 2,000 square feet on slopes on less than 12% in the shoreland area of the Apple River to construct a driveway and house. Project shall be completed pursuant to plans approved by the Board. 2. A financial guarantee equal to 120% of approved construction estimates must be submitted in favor of St. Croix County, to be held by the Zoning Office for the erosion control and grading activities (to ensure proper construction). The initial financial guarantee period may be for a minimum of one year and shall automatically renew until the county releases any or all of the financial guarantee. • Written estimates must be submitted to the Zoning office for review and approval. • No construction, including earth moving, shall take place prior to approval of the financial guarantees • The applicant shall have the engineer submit proof that the plans were installed as approved. This document can be submitted in the form of an as -built or other document that county staff can review to ensure the plans were installed in accordance with the original design. • Upon substantial completion of all required improvements, the applicant shall notify the County Zoning Administrator of the completion of the improvements in writing. The County Zoning Administrator, in consultation with appropriate experts, shall inspect the improvements. • The County may retain a portion of the guarantee, for a period not to exceed two years after final acceptance of an improvement to ensure the project has been stabilized, this amount is not to exceed 15% of the cost of the improvement (erosion control and grading activities). 3. The applicant must record a storm water management plan and a drainage easement for the permanent storm water control structures against the deed for the property. The applicant is responsible to provide a recorded copy to the Zoning Office within 60 days of the completion of the project. The intent is to make the current and future owners aware of the responsibilities associated with the storm water management plan as well as the limitations (filling, grading, etc.) the landowner incurs as a result of the plan. 4. Prior to beginning any work, the applicant must schedule an on -site pre - construction meeting that includes the landowner, contractor, engineer, architect, and St. Croix County Zoning and LWCD staff members. Items to be discussed 7 include but are not limited to coordinating installation of BMP's, construction timelines, roles and responsibilities of owner, engineer, architect, contractor, etc. 5. The applicant shall provide the Zoning Office with the name and phone number of the person responsible for installing and maintaining the erosion control plan. 6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 7. The applicant must secure a township building permit before commencing construction. 8. The Zoning office is to be notified at the start and the finish of the project. 9. Any minor change or addition to the project, including but not limited to design of the project, shall require review and approval by the Zoning Administrator and the Land and Water Conservation Department prior to making the change or addition. Any major change or addition to the originally approved plan will have to go through the special exception approval process. 10. The applicant shall have one (1) year from the issuance of the special exception permit to commence construction. Failure to do so shall result in revocation of the special exception permit. If the special exception permit expires before construction commences, the applicant will be required to secure a new special exception permit before starting or completing construction on the project. 11. These conditions may be amended or additional conditions may be added if unanticipated conditions arise that would affect the health and/or safety of citizens or degrade the natural resources of St. Croix County. Conditions will not be amended or added without notice to the applicant and an opportunity for a hearing. 12. Accepting this decision means that the applicant has read, understands, and agrees to all conditions of this decision. The following vote was taken to approve: Marzolf, yes; Golz, yes; Peterson, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Article Two: Stanley Pond Motion by Peterson, seconded by Golz to approve the request for a special exception permit for a mechanical lift and stairway in the St. Croix Riverway District based on the following findings: 1. The Town of St. Joseph has recommended approval of the request. 2. There was no opposition to the request. 3. The plans for the project have been designed by a professional company and will be professionally installed. 4. The Land and Water Conservation Department has approved of the request. 5. The Board finds that this is a common use on the St. Croix River and is needed to access the river on the property. 6. The Board finds that the request is not contrary to the public interest. 7. The Board finds that the spirit and intent of the ordinance would be met by granting this request With the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall install the lift and stairway as designed by the licensed engineer. 8 • 2. The applicant shall have the engineer submit proof that the plans were installed as approved. This document can be submitted in the form of an as -built or other document that county staff can review to ensure the plans were installed in accordance with the original design. 3. The applicant shall submit photos of the lift and stairway upon the completion of the project to the Zoning Office. 4. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of 17.36 (5)(i) lifts and 17.36 (5) 0)• 5. No reflective glass to be on the lift. 6. The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan (plan to be approved by the zoning office) before commencing construction. 7. The applicant shall submit a planting plan depicting how the site will be re- established with vegetation. 8. Applicant to have the lift installed by professional contractors familiar with this type of installation. Applicant to submit as -built certification demonstrating that the lift was constructed as proposed. 9. The applicant is to submit a construction schedule to the Zoning Office 3 days prior to commencing this project. 10. Comply with all DNR requirements and obtain any permits necessary. 11. The applicant shall have one (1) year from the issuance of the Special Exception permit to commence construction. If the Special Exception permit expires, the applicant will be required to secure a new Special Exception permit before the mechanical lift can be constructed. 12. Any minor change (or addition) in expansion of the project, shall require review and approval by the Zoning Director. Any major change and/or addition to the originally approved plan will go through the special exception approval process, where applicable, as stated in the ordinance. 13. These conditions may be amended or additional conditions may be added if unanticipated conditions arise that would affect the health and/or safety of citizens or degrade the natural resources of St. Croix County. Conditions will not be amended or added without notice to the applicant and an opportunity for a hearing. 14. Accepting this decision means that the applicant has read, understands, and agrees to all conditions of this decision. The following vote was taken to approve: Marzolf, yes; Golz, yes; Peterson, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Article Three: Mark Sylla Motion by Speer, seconded by Golz to approve the request to amend Condition number one of the special exception permit dated May 1, 2000. The approval now allows the applicant to have up to 50 horses on the property. The following vote was taken to approve: Peterson, yes; Marzolf, yes; Golz, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Article Four: Ryan and Rachel Flattum Motion by Golz, seconded by Peterson to approve the request for a 58 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback to County Road E and a 75 -foot variance from the 100 -foot road right -of -way setback from County Road I to allow an existing pole shed to 9 remain in its current location in the Ag/Residential District based on the following findings: 1. The Board finds that the applicant acted in good faith by constructing the pole shed. The building inspector for the town viewed the property and location of the building prior to the building permit being issued by the Town of St. Joseph. The applicant believed he was in compliance with the rules before construction began. 2. The layout of the property is unique, due to the intersection of two county roads on this property. The Board believes that the shed has been placed in a good location, as it is surrounded by mature trees and steep slopes, screening it from neighboring properties and roads. 3. The Town of St. Joseph Planning Commission has approved of the request. 4. There was no opposition to the request. 5. The St. Croix County Highway Department reviewed the plans and the site, and had no concerns with the request. 6. The Board finds that the request is not contrary to the public interest. 7. The Board finds that the spirit and intent of the ordinance would be met by granting this request The following vote was taken to approve: Marzolf, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Motion by Speer, seconded by Peterson to table the request for a 180 -foot variance to the 500 -foot setback requirements from any pre- existing neighboring residence for a major home occupation and for a special exception permit to operate a major home occupation for an automotive repair business. The applicant is to obtain a recommendation from the St. Joseph Town Board on these two requests. The Board will make a decision after that recommendation is received. The following vote was taken to table the request: Golz, yes; Marzolf, yes; Peterson, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. The hearing was declared adjourned at 2:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted: Richard Peterson, Secretary Debbie Zi erma , Recording Secretary 10