Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment 06-28-1990BOAD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARINGS June 28, 1990 This meeting was recorded by a court reporter The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kinney at 9:00 A.M. Chairman Kinney explained the procedures of the hearing, requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names and addresses on the sheet in the front of the room. Supervisors, Bradley, Stephens, Menter ,Sinclear and Kinney were all in attendance. Staff included Zoning Administrator Nelson and Corp. Counsel Greg Timmerman. Stephens made a motion to approve the agenda. Bradley seconded the motion. Motion carried. Motion by Bradley and seconded by Stephens to approve the minutes as corrected. Motion carried. Dan Koich from the DNR indicated there would be training session for counties and municipalities on Aug. 28, 1990. Hearing was called to order at 9:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice of the hearings: 1. ARTICLE: 17.65(3)(C) Off premise sign APPELLANT: Camp Clear -Waters LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 24, T30N- R19W, Town of Somerset 2. ARTICLE: 17.29(2)(b) Filling & Grading, Shoreland APPELLANT: Robert O'Brian LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 24, T30N- R20W, Town of Somerset 3. ARTICLE: 15.03(3)(3)3 Holding tank, new construc- tion APPELLANT: Town of Springfield LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 22, T29N- R15W, Town of Springfield 4. ARTICLE: 17.64(d)(2) Highway setback, Town road APPELLANT: Neal & Joyce Melby LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 30, T31N- R17W, Town of Stanton 5. ARTICLE: 17.35(3)(i) Boathouse APPELLANT: Kent & Marlene Rebeck LOCATION; Part of Gov't Lot 3, Sec. 2, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 1 6. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(i) Salvage operation APPELLANT: Virgil & Julia Cernohous LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 8, and the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 5, T28N- R19W, Town of Troy 7. ARTICLE: 17.64(1)(c)2 Highway setback, Town road APPELLANT: Mark Swanson LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, T28N- R19W, Town of Troy. CAMP CLEAR -WATERS: Greg Jones presented a request for five off premise signs at various locations that would direct people to Camp Clear -Waters, a day camp owned by the 4th Baptist Church. The signs would be earthtone and 21x4' in dimension. Sinclear stated the township of Somerset had no objections. ROBERT O'BRIAN: Bob O'Brian explained his request to fill and grade for a proposed road that would be within 300 ft. of a navigable body of water. All disturbed areas will be seeded and in some cases silt fences will be used. Dan Koich, DNR, stated he had no problem with the application. Nelson also supported the project. The township of St. Joseph sent a letter supporting the project. TOWNSHIP OF SPRINGFIELD Bradley requested the approval for a holding tank, new construction, be tabled until the next regular meeting so someone could testify as to the nature of the project. NEAL & JOYCE MELBY: Joyce Melby presented a request to build a machine shed 75' from the town road. Due to the rough topography, the 100' setback cannot be met. Chris Bethke, Town of Stanton Chairman, stated they had no problem with the request. KENT & MARLENE REBECK: Kent presented a request for a boathouse that would be 20' from the high-water mark of Cedar Lake. The structure would be 201x241, earthtone and have a pitched roof. Koich and Nelson supported the project. VIRGIL CERNOHOUS: Virgil requested a salvage operation on his home property and also on 40 acres north of CTH FF. These are nonconforming sites that have been expanded and now require special exception 2 permits. He would be willing to screen the property with a 6'-8' high fence. Rene Bugne, Tony Nasvik, Douglas Bugni and Shelly Waldera all voiced opposition concerned about environmental and aesthetic issues. The township of Troy did not take a position at their monthly meeting. MARK SWANSON: Mark requested a variance of 61" for a garage to the township road. The proposed site is the only location on the property it could be built due to rough topography. The township and Nelson supported the request. Respectfully submitted, Robert Stephens, secretary TC:cj Decisions attached 3 4 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-31 Filing Date: 6-04-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 18, 1990 O Hearing Date: 6-28-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Hoard find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Camp Clearwaters 300 221st. Ave. Somerset, WI 54025 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8 and the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 9 and the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 10 and the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 15 and the N 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 13, T31N-R19W, Town of Somerset, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently in use for Agriculture and has been since November 15, 1974. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Placement of directory signs. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a conditional use permit under section 17.65(3)(c). 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: Off premises signs in noncommercial districts are permitted by special exception provided they don't excess 32 sq. ft. and direct attention to properties not visible from the road. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CONDITIONAL USE The application for conditional use permit does qualify under the criteria of Section 17.65(3)(c) of the 1 ordinance because: The signs being requested are less than 32 sq. ft. and direct attention to property not visible from the, road. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: CONDITIONAL USE The requested conditional use is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Signs are installed as proposed. 2. Maintained in an neat and orderly fashion. Motion to approve by Bradley, seconded by Stephens. Motion carried. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed Chairperson Date: cc: Town Clerk and file Filed: F DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-28 Filing Date: 5-22-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June it and 18, 1990 Hearing Date: 6-28-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Robert O'Brien 1125 Third St. Hudson, WI 54016 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4, Sec. 24, Town of St. Joseph, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently in use for Agricultural and has been so used continuously since Ordinance adoption. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Development of the property for residential use. This development will require filling and grading within 300' of navigable water. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a conditional use permit under Section 17,29(2)(b) of the ordinance. 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: The applicant has submitted plans which address the site stabilization after grading and been completed. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CONDITIONAL USE The application for a conditional use permit does qualify under the criteria of Section 17.29)2)(b) of the ordinance because: 1 r Stabilization of exposed soils will provide the protection needed to ensure surface water and wetlands will be protected. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE - The requested conditional use is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. Follow plan outlined. 2. Re-establish vegetation prior to Sept. 15, 1990 on any area disturbed this year. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Menter. Motion carried. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -Lz� • Signed �5� , _1'Y_"W'WZ'LW Chairperso r Date: `7-/6"91 Filed: cc: Town Clerk and file K DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-25 Filing Date: 5-11-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 19, 1990 Hearing Date: 7-26-90 FINDINGS OF FACT C(Oply Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Township of Springfield Gloria Walz, Clerk 308 100th Ave. Glenwood City, WI 54013 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4, Sec. 22 & 29, Town of Springfield, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently used for Agriculture. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Build a Township Hall on property that is only suitable for a holding tank. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under section 15.03(3)3 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: The ordinance does not allow holding tanks on new construction. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VARIANCE: The variance must meet all three of the following tests. A. Unnecessary hardship is not present in that a literal enforcement of the terms of the zoning ordinance would not deny 1 the applicant all reasonabl use of property because: The property is currently being farmed. B. The hardship is not due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant because: Other site are suitable for conventional systems elsewhere in the township. C. The variance will be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance because: Property no suitable for conventional systems is not considered buildable property. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: VARIANCE: The requested variance is denied. Motion to approve by Bradley, seconded by Stephens. Motion carried. The zoning administrator is directed to issue a zoning permit incorporating these conditions. Any privilege granted by this decision must be exercised within 12 months of the date of this decision by obtaining the necessary building, zoning and other permits for the proposed construction. This period will be extended if this decision is stayed by the order of any court or operation of law. This order may be revoked by the Board after notice and opportunity to be heard for violation of any of the conditions imposed. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed Chairperstrid 9 V. Date: (-^/� -67U Filed:-8 cc: Town Clerk and file 2 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-32 Filing Date: 6-05-90 O [� Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 18, 1990 Hearing Date: 6-28-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Neal & Joyce Melby 645 E. 2nd St. New Richmond, WI 54017 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4, Sec. 30, Town of Stanton, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently in use for Agriculture and has been since November 15, 1974. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Place pole building 105' from center of road. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under Section 17.64(d)(2) of the ordinance. 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: Site location requested controlled by difficult topography. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VARIANCE The variance must meet all three of the following tests: A. Unnecessary hardship is not present in that a literal enforcement of the terms of the zoning ordinance would not deny the applicant all reasonable use of the property because: The property currently has buildings to house farming operation. 1 i B. The hardship is due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant because: Difficult topography of site. C. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance because: Compatible to the surrounding uses. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: VARIANCE - The requested variance is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. To be constructed within one year. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Bradley. Motion carried. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Date: / il9- 0Q Filed: cc: Town Clerk and file N 0 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-27 Filing Date: 5-21-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 18, 1990 Hearing Date: 6-28-90 C(0[py FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Kent C. & Marlene K. Rebeck 3192 Hafner Ct. Shoreview, MN 55126 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: Gov't Lot 3, Section 2, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie, St. Croix County. Rt. 2, 1222, New Richmond, WI 54017 3. The property is presently in use for Residential and has been since constructed. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Construction of a boat house for storage of boating equipment. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a conditional use permit under section 17.35(3)(i). 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: Structure proposed would be earth tone and setback 20 ft. from high water mark. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CONDITIONAL, USE The application for conditional use permit does qualify under the criteria of Section 17.35(3)(i) of the ordinance because: The structure would be set back 20 ft. and be earth tone. E ORDER OF DETERMINATION a The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: CONDITIONAL USE The requested conditional use to the following conditions: 1. A 20 ft. setback from high water mark. 2. Earthtone structure. 3. Boat storage only permitted use. Motion to approve by Bradley, seconded by carried. is granted subject Stephens. Motion This derision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed &�I_MVA yz_� �] Chairperson 8t Date: lu cc: Town Clerk and file Filed: r, DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-29 Filing Date: 5-22-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 18, 1990 Hearing Date: 6-28-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: I. The applicant or appellant is: Virgil Cernohous Rt.3, Box 175 Hudson, WI 54016 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4, Sec. 8 and the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 5, Town of Troy, St. Croix County known as Cernohous Repair. 3. The property is presently in use for Salvage operation and has been so used continuously since 1963. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Expansion of this nonconforming use. Various methods of screening to be used. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a conditional use permit under Section 17.15(6)(i) of the ordinance. 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: This nonconforming use, which has been expanded, increasing the nonconformity is in violation of the ordinance 17.70(4)(c). The request is a special exception permit allowing the expansion of his salvage/junkyard operation as defined by 17.09 of the ordinance and allowed by special exception 17.15(6)(i). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CONDITIONAL USE The application for a conditional use permit does 1 not qualify under the criteria of Section 17.15(6)(i) of they' ordinance because: With the development of the applicants property and other surrounding properties into residential uses, this salvage/junkyard application has come into conflict as has been seen by testimony. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: CONDITIONAL USE - The requested conditional use for the property located in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec.8, T28N-R19W is granted in part subject to the following conditions: 1. Eight ft. fence be constructed screening area proposed. 2. No more than 6 nonconforming vehicles be on location at one time that are not within a building. 3. All hazardous materials be identified and disposed of properly. 4. Adhere to all state licensing requirements. 5. Miscellaneous materials be stored in a neat and orderly fashion. ' 6. The yellow van body be moved to within the boundaries of the fence. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Bradley. Motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE The requested conditional use for the property located at the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec.5, T28N-R19W is denied with the following requirements: 1.All salvage/junk be removed within a one year period of this decision. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Sinclear. Motion carried. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Date: %- 17- 0U^ Filed: cc: Town Clerk and file 2 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 90-30 Filing Date: 5-21-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of June 11 and 18, 1990 Hearing Date: 6-28-90 FINDINGS OF FACT COPY Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Hoard find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Mark Swanson Rt.3, 208 Glenmont Rd. River Falls, WI 54022 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal: SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Town of Troy, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently in use for Residential. 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: To build a garage that would be 61 ft. from the township road. Size will be 24' wide by 601 in length. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under section 17.64(d)2. 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: The lot of the request is being made of is extremely rough topographicly. The proposed site is the only level site on the property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VARIANCEThe variance must meet all of the following tests: A. Unnecessary hardship is not present in that a literal enforcement of the terms of the zoning ordinance would not deny 1 the applicant all reasonable use of the property because: The property can be used for residential purposes. S. The hardship is due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant because: Of the rough topography. C. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance because: It is not in conflict with the surrounding properties. ORDER OF DETERMINATION The basis of the above finding of facts, conclusions of law and the record in this matter of the board orders: VARIANCE The requested variance is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The structure be of earth tone color. 2. Upon completion the Zoning Office should be contacted for a comliancy check. Motion to approve by Bradley, seconded by Stephens. Motion carried. The zoning administrator is directed to issue a zoning permit incorporating these conditions. Any privilege granted by this decision must be exercised within 12 months of the date of this decision by obtaining the. necessary building, zoning and other permits for the proposed construction. This period will be extended if this decision is stayed by the order of any court or operation of law. This order may be revoked by the Board after notice and opportunity to be heard for violation of any of the conditions imposed. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day period. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Chairpers-6h/ Date: 0J cc: Town Clerk and file Filed: 7 d 4 6 6