Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment 11-20-1990BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARINGS Nov. 20, 1990 This meeting was recorded by a court reporter OpPic A� The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kinney at 9:00 A.M. Kinney explained the proceedures of the hearing requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names and addresses on the sheet in the back of the room. Supervisors Bradley, Stephens, Menter, Sinclear and Kinney were all in attendance. Staff included Zoning Administrator Tom Nelson and Corporation Counsel Greg Timmerman.. Motion by Bradley , seconded by Menter to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. Motion by Stephens seconded by Bradley to approve the minutes with corrections stated. OLD BUSINESS ED & KAREN BOHL Ed & Karen presented additional information for a duplex proposal. Information included insulation, energy audit, windows and the fire codes, smoke detectors, the septic system and storage to be provided by a garage. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Bradley to grant the duplex with the condition a 1100 sq. ft. garage be built within one year from the date of the approval. Motion carried. ST. CROIX ROWING CLUB Nelson explained that the DNR was in the process of challenging the approval granted in October. The decision is contrary to the language and intent of NR 118. DNR is requesting that the board reverse its decision. Susan Hipp representing the St. Croix Rowing Club thanked the board for their approval. Motion by Menter, Seconded by Stephens to postpone the decision until representation from the DNR can be in attendance. Roll call vote: Bradley, No; Sinclear, yes; Menter, yes; Stephens, yes; Kinney, yes. Motion carried. NON METALLIC MINING ORDINANCE(NMMO) Kinney stated that there was a need to amend the NMM ordinance so as to include barrow pits for private gain and secondary uses of materials. NEW BUSINESS Hearing was called to order at 9:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice 1 as published. The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Tuesday, November 20, 1990 at 9:30 A.M. in the Board Room of the St. Croix County Courthouse, Hudson, Wisconsin to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix Co. 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 reconvened into open session for the purpose of voting on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: 17.18(1)(r) Truck repair & transfer point APPELLANT: John Bettendorf LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 19, T28N-R18W, Town of Kinnickinnic 2. ARTICLE: 17.18(1)(5) Truck Terminal APPELLANT: N & M Transfer Co., Inc. LOCATION: Gov't lot 4, Sec. 28, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 3. ARTICLE: 17.64(D)2 Setback, Class D highway APPELLANT: Phillip Barron LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 6, T31N-R19W, Town of Somerset 4. ARTICLE: 17.15(1)(a) Second residence APPELLANT: Delina Kiesow , LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 9, T31N-R17W, Town of Somerset 5. ARTICLE: 17.64(5)2 Driveway separation, Class B Hwy. APPELLANT: John Currell LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 19, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 6. ARTICLE: 15.03(3) Solid waste disposal 17.15(6)(i) Demolition materials APPELLANT: Wm. Liddle - Tri County Disposal LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 13, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren JOHN BETTENDORF Nelson explained that this application was being presented requesting a truck repair and transfer point site. The project had been initiated in 1985 with the rezonement of the land but without a special exception use permit. Since that time the facility had begun an expansion without valid building or sanitary permits and again without a special exception use permit. Vernon Kelly and Richard Peterson, members of the 1985 Zoning Committee were asked to identify where they thought the 2 boundaries had begun. Mark Gherity, attorney for Bettendorf, apologized for the lack of proper permits and explained the intent of the use of the facility is for 9 tractor trailers to deliver and transfer goods from about (;)) A.M. to 6:00 P.M. The expansion is for cold storage. Ed Vlack, attorney representing the Township of Kinnickinnic, expressed the Townships concerns of expansion of the site and additional truck traffic. They feel this is an expansion beyond what was already there. Steve Goff,. attorney for Dan and Ann Krumwiede, neighbors to Bettendorf, expressed their concerns of the expansion. One of their concerns is the rumor of a merger with Madison Trucking. M & N TRANSFER CO. INC. Terry Perius presented a preliminary concept of a transfer station on property currently zoned commercial in Warren Township. The facility would be used mostly for cross loading. Craig Smith a neighbor to the property expressed his concerns for such a facility. Town Chairman Ken Herrink stated they had not reviewed the application for recommendation as of yet. Bradley made a motion to postpone a decision until the township has had adequate chance to review for a recommendation. Seconded by Sinclear. Motion carried. PHILLIP BARRON John Bonneprese presented the request to build 70 feet from the center of the road for a horse barn. A drainage area prevents them from building at 144 feet from the center of the road. DELINA KIESOW Nelson explained their request to allow two houses on a three acre parcel. Their plans are to create a three acre parcel from the original 80 acres. Two houses on 80 acres is permitted when occupied by family members. It becomes a non conforming use when the parcel size is less than three acres. The Kiesow son is handicapped and they would like to retain two dwellings so as to provide care for him. Hank VanDuyke, attorney representing Kiesows' confirmed their needs. The Township supports the request providing it be limited only to. the current family member. JOHN CURRELL Al Nyhagen presented a request for a joint access for lots 290A, 293C and 290B so as to accommodate access for 290A. When 290B 3 was qranted a variance in 1988, it was to be reconsidered when an additional access was needed. At this time the 500 foot driveway spacing cannot be met. WILLIAM LIDDLE Nelson stated that the Hammond Newspaper had incorrectly published the hearing date for the 30th of November. Timmerman suggested we hold a special hearing on the date the paper published. Respectfully submitted: Robert Stephens, secretary TCN:cj Decisions attached 4 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 112-90 Filing Date: 10-30-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of Nov. 5 & 12, 1990 Hearing Date: 11-20-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Phillip Barron 292 230th 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 SE 1/4 of Sec. 06, Town of Somerset, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently used for: Residential 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Requests a setback variance of 70 feet from the center of the road because the legal setback distance is subject to flooding. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under section 17.64(0)2 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: The legal setback is in a natural drainage area. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Based on the above finding of face the Board concludes that: 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. 1 B. The hardship is due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant. C. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance. 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. Applicant cannot sue county or town if the road is ever widened. Vote: Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Sinclear, yes; Kinney, yes. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Menter. 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 " -- Chairpersoff , Date: ��-4�?' cc: Town Clerk and file Filed:_12-13-90 2 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 114-90 Filing Date: 10-31-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of Nov. 5 & 12, 1990 Hearing Date: 11-20-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: John Currell 7582 Currell Boulevard Woodbury, MN 55125 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 NE 1/4 of Sec. 19, Town of Warren, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently used for: Vacant lot 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: To access this parcel jointly with parcel 293C, west of this parcel, 290C. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under section 17.64(5)2 6. The features of the proposed construction and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: This pre-existing parcel cannot meet the 500 foot separation onto STH 12 as required by the ordinance. The topography of the property also limits safe access. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW VARIANCE: The variance must meet all three of the following tests: A: Unnecessary hardship is present in that a literal enforcement of the terms of the zoning ordinance would deny the applicant all reasonable use of the property because there is not access to the property. 1 B: The hardship is due to physical limitations of the property rather than the circumstances of the appellant because the width of the parcel is less than 500 feet and adjacent driveways are currently in place. C: The variance will not be contrary to the public interest as expressed by the objectives of the ordinance because a common access can be provided. 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 drive be shared with lot 293C and easement agreement be obtained from the owner of 290A. Vote: Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Sinclear, yes; Kinney, yes. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Bradley. 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 , r Chairperson LY Date: Filed: _ 12-13-90 v cc: Town Clerk and file N DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 113-90 Filing Date: 10-30-90 Notice Dates: Weeks of Nov. 5 & 12, 1990 Hearing Date: 11-20-90 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Board find the following facts: 1. The applicant or appellant is: Delina Kiesow Box 2269 44th St. 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 NW 1/4 of Sec. 09, Town of Somerset, St. Croix County. 3. The property is presently used for: Residence 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Create a parcel which would make the two residences on a three acre parcel a nonconforming use. She requests a variance to be allowed to maintain two residences. 5. The applicant or appellant requests a variance under section 17.15(1))a) 6. The features of the proposed construction -and property which relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are: A handicapped son lived in the second residence and needs special care. 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 until the current 1 residents terminate their occupancy of the structures. Vote: Bradley, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Sinclear,'yes; Kinney, yes. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Bradley. 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 Chairperson Date: Zr2 oz 6 Filed : _12-13-90 cc: Town Clerk and file 00