Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment 08-23-01 AMENDED AGENDA ST. CROIX COUNTY NOTICE OF COMMITTEE MEETING TO: Thomas Dorsey, Chairman St. Croix County Board FROM: Julie Speer, Chairman COMMITTEE TITLE: St. Croix County Board of Adjustment DATE: Thursday, August 23, 2001 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: UNFINISHED BUSINESS: OTHER BUSINESS: OLD BUSINESS: Request for reconsideration by Brian Parnell, 398 192nd Ave., Somerset, WI 54025. Applicant requests that the Board of Adjustment reconsider a previous decision to deny a setback variance to expand the existing residence located within the required setback of a Class "D" highway (town road). NEW BUSINESS: See Attachment 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: August 17, 2001 COPIES TO: County Board Office County Clerk Committee Members News Media/Notice Board *CANCELLATIONS/CHANGES/ADDITIONS PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, August 23, 2001, 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 a permit for filling and grading in a Shoreland District subject to the provisions of Section 17.29(2). The applicant is proposing to construct a single-family residence on Bass Lake. APELLANT: Pat Collova LOCATION: Located in the NE of the SE '/4 of Section 22 and *Government Lot 7 in Section 23, all in T30N-R19W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: Located off of West Shore Drive on Bass Lake. 2. ARTICLE: Variance request from a Class "D" roadway pursuant to Section 17.64(1)(d)2. Request is for a 33-foot variance from the 100-foot right-of- way setback to construct a freestall barn to house dairy cattle. APPELLANT: David W. Hoffman LOCATION: Located in the SW '/4 of the SE '/a of Section 14, T30N-R15W, Town of Glenwood ADDRESS: 1505 County Road X, Glenwood City, Wisconsin 3. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit for filling and grading on the bank of Carr Creek in the Shoreland District pursuant to Section 17.29(2). The request is to construct a driveway to access Lot 3. APELLANT: Vieregge Contruction Co. Inc. LOCATION: Located in the NE% of the NE'/4 , Section 29, T30N-R16W, Town of Emerald ADDRESS: Off of 140' Avenue in the Town of Emerald 4. ARTICLE: Variance request from the sideyard setback requirements pursuant to Section 17.15(4), subject to the provisions of 17.13(4). Request is for a 6.59-foot variance to allow a house and attached garage to remain at its location. APPELLANT: Robert Gandee, owner/ Kernon Bast, agent LOCATION: Located in Lot 31 of the Plat of Country Wood, Section 3, T19N-R28W, Town of Troy. ADDRESS: Lot 31, Country Wood Subdivision, Hudson, Wisconsin 5. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a Telecommunications Tower in the Ag/Residenital District pursuant to Section 17.85(2). Request is by Sprint PCS to construct a 250-foot Wireless Communication Facility. APPELLANT: Carl and Sue Warren, Owner/Carlson & Harrington,Agent on behalf of Sprint PCS LOCATION: Located in the NE '/4 of the NW '/4, Section 26, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy ADDRESS: 188 Radio Road, River Falls, Wisconsin 6. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a Telecommunications Tower in the Ag/Residenital District pursuant to Section 17.85(2). Request is by Sprint PCS to construct a 250-foot Wireless Communication Facility. APPELLANT: Jennie-0 Turkey Store, Owner/Carlson & Harrington,Agent on behalf of Sprint PCS LOCATION: Located in the NE '/4 of the SE '/4, Section 9, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond ADDRESS: RR 4, County Road A, New Richmond, Wisconsin 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 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING AND HEARING MINUTES August 23, 2001 (This meeting was recorded by Northwestern Court Reporters) The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Julie Speer at 8:30 a.m. A role call was made. Julie Speer, Tom Rose, Rich Peterson, Nick Golz and Dick King were present. Staff included: Steve Fisher, Zoning Director, Rod Eslinger, Zoning Specialist, Deb Zimmermann, Administrative Assistant, and Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel. Chairperson Speer believes this to be a properly noticed meeting. Motion was made by Rose, second by King to adopt the agenda. Motion carried. The Board set the next meeting date as September 27, 2001. The starting time will be 8:30 a.m. The meeting will be held at the Government Center. Motion by King, second by Golz to approve minutes from the July 26, 2001 meeting. All in favor. Motion carried. CORPORATION COUNSEL REPORT/ UPDATE ON VIOLATIONS AND LITIGATION Corporation Counsel will be attending the meeting today. OLD BUSINESS Eslinger told the Board that a request has been submitted by Brian Parnell to reconsider the denial decision by the Board for a variance to a Class D Road. Fisher informed the Board that there has been a new ruling by the State Supreme Court on variances, and the Board may want to look at this request again, taking into consideration the new ruling. Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel, will speak with the Board on this subject later today. Motion by Rose, second by Peterson to reconsider the decision in the Parnell variance denial. All in favor. Motion carried. This item will be placed under New Business on the September 27th agenda. 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: PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, August 23, 2001, 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 voteon the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit for filling and grading in a Shoreland District subject to the provisions of Section 17.29(2). The applicant is proposing to construct a single-family residence on Bass Lake. APELLANT: Pat Collova LOCATION: Located in the NE'/4 of the SE % of Section 22 and *Government Lot 7 in Section 23, all in T30N•R19W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: Located off of West Shore Drive on Bass Lake. 2. ARTICLE: Variance request from a Class "D" roadway pursuant to Section 17.64(1)(d)2. Request is for a 33-foot variance from the 100-foot right-of-way setback to construct a freestall barn to house dairy cattle. APPELLANT: David W. Hoffman LOCATION: Located in the SW'/4 of the SE'/4of Section 14, T30N-R15W, Town of Glenwood ADDRESS: 1505 County Road X, Glenwood City, Wisconsin 3. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit for filling and grading on the bank of Carr Creek in the Shoreland District pursuant to Section 17.29(2). The request is to construct a driveway to access Lot 3. APELLANT: Vieregge Construction Co. Inc. LOCATION: Located in the NE% of the NE'/4 , Section 29, T30N-R16W, Town of Emerald ADDRESS: Off of 14dh Avenue in the Town of Emerald 4. ARTICLE: Variance request from the sideyard setback requirements pursuant to Section 17.15(4), subject to the provisions of 17.13(4). Request is for a 6.59-foot variance to allow a house and attached garage to remain at its location. APPELLANT: Robert Gandee, owner/ Kernon Bast, agent LOCATION: Located in Lot 31 of the Plat of Country Wood, Section 3, T19N- R28W, Town of Troy. ADDRESS: Lot 31, Country Wood Subdivision, Hudson, Wisconsin 5. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a Telecommunications Tower in the Ag/Residential District pursuant to Section 17.85(2). Request is by Sprint PCS to construct a 250-foot Wireless Communication Facility. APPELLANT: Carl and Sue Warren, Owner/Carlson & Harrington, Agent on behalf of Sprint PCS LOCATION: Located in the NE '/4 of the NW '/4, Section 26, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy ADDRESS: 188 Radio Road, River Falls, Wisconsin 6. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a Telecommunications Tower in the Ag/Residential District pursuant to Section 17.85(2). Request is by Sprint PCS to construct a 250-foot Wireless Communication Facility. APPELLANT: Jennie-0 Turkey Store, Owner/Carlson & Harrington, Agent on behalf of Sprint PCS LOCATION: Located in the NE '/4 of the SE '/4, Section 9, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond ADDRESS: RR 4, County Road A, New Richmond, Wisconsin 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: Pat Collova Eslinger explained this request is for a special exception permit for filling and grading in a Shoreland District to construct a single-family residence on Bass Lake. The applicant has hired the AC/a Engineering firm to work on this project. The Bass Lake Rehab District, 2 Land and Water Conservation and the DNR have expressed some concerns with the project. The Town has tabled a decision until their town engineerhas a chance to review the plans. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application and narrative Exhibit 3: Topol map with erosion control plan Exhibit 4: Correspondence from the Bass Lake Rehab District Exhibit 5: Copy of Zoning map Exhibit 6: Letter from DNR Exhibit 7: Correspondence from the Land and Water Conservation Dept. Exhibit 8: Correspondence from the Bass Lake Rehab District Eslinger said that the applications for the driveway and home have been applied for. Some filling and grading has been done at or below the Ordinary High Water Mark and was brought to the attention of the Zoning Office by he Land and Water Conservation Dept. and the Bass Lake Rehab District. The applicant is now in the process of trying to remedy the problem. Eslinger said that the main concern right now is to stabilize the soil immediately and comments have been given to Collova on how to do that. It has been suggested to use native seed for the stabilization. No citation was issued, as Mr. Collova has been diligently working with the county to get this problem taken care of. Discussion held. Motion by Rose, second by Golz to table more information and/or clarification regarding the following items is received: 1. The Board requests the that the concerns raised by the following agencies/ municipalities are satisfied prior to making a decision: • Bass Lake Rehabilitation District (BLRD) (see attachments-exhibit 4 and 8) • Land and Water Conservation Department (LWCD) (see attachmentexhibit 7) • Department of Natural Resources (DNR) (see attachment-exhibit 6) 2. The Board requests to review the findings of the Town of St. Joseph before making a decision. 3. The Board requests detailed information regarding the grading activities that occurred along the shoreline of Bass Lake. • Provide pre and post contours elevation of the disturbed area • Provide a revised site plan clearly showing the grading limits in this area • Describe the methods of stabilization • Indicate the type of seed used to re-vegetate • Indicate the Ordinary High Water Mark (888.31') • Provide the amount of grading in square feet The following vote was taken to table: King, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Article Two: David Hoffman Eslinger told the Board that this request is for a variance to locate a free stall dairy barn within the 100-foot right-of-way setback of a Class D roadway, which is 192"d Avenue in the Town of Glenwood. Eslinger went over the staff report, stating that the request would be for a 33-foot variance. The Town of Glenwood has given verbal approval of the request. The Land and Water Conservation Department has a few concerns with the plan, and addressed them in a letter dated August 22, 2001. 3 The following Exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Copy of application with narrative and attachments Exhibit 3: Site map of farmstead Exhibit 4: Land and Water Conservation review David Hoffman, being duly sworn, is the applicant. He gave a brief history of his farm operation, and told the Board that this farm has been in his family for over 100 years. He stated that in order to stay in the farming business, he needs to increase the size of his operation. He would like to add more cows to his herd, but his bank has told him that he needs to update the facility in order to obtain a loan for more animals. He would liketo utilize the existing facility, by making improvements, as well as adding an addition. The existing facility was built in 1980. He went over the site plan with the Board, pointing out the existing facility and proposed addition. The total acreage that I e owns is 520 acres, and he is aware of the animal units per acre criteria. He will work with the Land and Water Conservation Department on any concerns that they have. The Board will view the site. Article Three: Vieregge Construction Company Eslinger told the Board that this request is for a special exception for filling and grading on the banks of Carr Creek in the Town of Emerald. The applicant would like to construct a driveway and will be exceeding the amount of square footage for grading on slopes less than 12%. The applicant has been working with Northland Surveying on plans for the project. The Land and Water Conservation Department and the DNR have responded, stating some concerns with the application. The applicant is scheduled to be on the next town board meeting in September. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application and narrative Exhibit 3: Copy of site plan Exhibit 4: Letter from Zoning to the applicant Exhibit 5: Copy of letters to agencies Exhibit 6: Copy of revised site plan Exhibit 7: E-mail correspondence from the Land and Water Conservation Dept. (read into the record by Eslinger) Exhibit 8: Letter from the DNR (read into the record by Eslinger) Discussion held by the Board. Motion by Speer, second by Rose to table this hearing until more information and/or clarification regarding the following items is received: 1. The Board requests the that the concerns raised by the following agencies/ municipalities are satisfied prior to making a decision: • Land and Water Conservation Department (LWCD) (see attachmentexhibit 7) • Department of Natural Resources (DNR) (see attachmenfexhibit 8) 2. The Board requests to review the findings of the Town of Emerald, before making a decision. The following vote was taken to table: Golz, yes; King, yes; Peterson, yes; Rose, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. 4 Article Four: Robert Gandee/ Kernon Bast Eslinger stated that this is a variance request from the sideyard setback requirements. A home was constructed on a lot in the Country Wood Subdivision in the Town of Troy, and was erroneously placed too close to the lot line. The request is for a 6.59-foot variance to allow the house and attached garage to remain in its present location. The ordinance requires the home to be 10 feet from the property line. The Town of Troy met on August 13th to hear this matter, and in a letter dated August 20, 2001, has stated that they have decided to "take no position on the matter". The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application with narrative Exhibit 3: Site plan showing lot 31 in the Country Wood Subdivision Exhibit 4: Copy of soil test Exhibit 5: Correspondence between adjoining property owners and agents Exhibit 6: Copy of survey map Exhibit 7: Copy of letter from the Town of Troy Exhibit 8: Photos of the home Kernon Bast, being duly sworn, is the agent for the property owner. He said that the home was built in 1995 by a reputable builder, and believes this to be an honest mistake. The lot adjoining the property is vacant. Bast drew a picture of the lot on the Board, showing the lot size and where the home is located. He further stated that the lot is on a corner, and had to meet two road setbacks, as well as allow for a very large mound system on the property. The building inspector for the Town of Troy did not catch the problem at the time of inspection, and neither did the county when the septic system was put in. The homeowner noticed the problem when he was cutting the grass and brought it to Bast's attention. Bast has approached the adjoining property owner about buying a piece of his property to make this home compliant, but has not been able to work anything out with him as of yet. Curtis Kiesow, being duly sworn, is the owner of the adjoining property, and stated that he is not for or against the variance, but believes it to be a serious issue. He is willing to speak with the applicant about selling some property to him, but is not willing to sell 1600 square feet, as was requested by Bast. The Board will view the site. The Board recessed from 9:45 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. Article Five: Carl and Sue Warren/ Sprint PCS Eslinger stated that this request is for a special exception for a 250-foot lattice telecommunications tower in the Town of Troy. Eslinger went over the staff report and added that we have not received a report from our Tower Consultant, Jeff Nelson. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Copy of application Exhibit 3: Copy of zoning map Exhibit 4: Coy of letter from the Town of Troy (read into the record) Exhibit 5: Letter from Jeff Nelson, County Tower Consultant Paul Harrington, being duly sworn, is a broker working on behalf of Sprint PCS. He reiterated that they are asking for a 250-foot lattice tower, stating that it is necessary to 5 cover Highway 35 and other necessary areas in the River Falls area. He went over the facility maps and propagation maps with the Board showing coverage areas with and without the tower. They have looked into co-locating on towers in the area, but have not had any success. The WEVR radio tower would not work, as the grounding is incompatible. This is an A.M. tower, and will not work with cell towers. There is another tower about 2 miles from this location owned by Midwest Relay, and the applicant testified that Sprint attempted to co-locate on the tower but a consensus of terms was unable to be reached. Harrington expressed to the Board that it is important to Sprint to co-locate on existing towers, as is less costly to the company. Zoning will look into the FCC rules regarding co-location, and the obligation for existing owners of towers to all co-location if it is possible. Harrington went over the photo simulations of the tower with the Board, stating that the property is on top of a hill, and mature vegetation surrounds the area. The Warren's own approximately 80 acres. Harrington shared his concerns with the Board on the fact that the County tower consultant did not have a report ready for the Board to review, even though he has had the information for several weeks. The Board shares the same concerns and would like staff to look into this. The Town of Troy is not willing to make a decision until they see Nelson's report. Brandon Mathison, being duly sworn, is an RF engineer working on the project. He addressed questions on coverage area, stating that every situation is different because of topography and vegetation in the area. The coverage area on the proposed site would be approximately a 4-%2 mile radius. On flat property, the coverage area is about 12-miles. Carl Warren, being duly sworn, is the owner of the property. He explained that he has owned the property since 1990, and there is very little residential property in the area. One side borders the U-W River Falls farm, and Kilkarney Golf Course is on the other side. They plan to keep their property and have open land. He believes this to be a very good location for a tower. Carol Hanton, being duly sworn, is the owner and general manager of the WEVR radio station. She stated concerns of interference with their radio station if this tower is allowed in this location, approximately %2 mile from their tower. She believes the FCC has a rule that any such towers should be 2-miles away. Hanton read a letter to the Board on her behalf, and this letter was labeled as Exhibit 6. The Board will view the site. Article Six: Jennie-0 Turkey Store/ Sprint PCS Eslinger told the Board that this is for a 250-foot lattice telecommunications tower in the Town of Richmond. Eslinger went over the staff report, and stated that Jeff Nelson has not responded to this request, as well as the previous one. He added that Gary Dikkers, Airspace Manager with the Department of Transportation, wrote a letter to the County stating his concerns with the proximity of this tower to the New Richmond Airport, and asked the Board to table for further investigation by his department. The following exhibits were introduced: Exhibit 1: Staff report Exhibit 2: Application with attachments and narrative Exhibit 3: Letter from Gary Dikkers dated 8/14/01 (read into record) Exhibit 4: Letter from Gary Dikkers dated 8/10/01 (read into record) 6 . Exhibit 5: Letter from Jeff Nelson dated 8/21/01 (read into record) Exhibit 6 Letter from the Town or Richmond, recommending approval Paul Harrington, being duly sworn, is representing the applicant. He stated that this tower is very similar to the previous tower on the agenda. The proposed site is east and south of New Richmond. Jennie-O owns approximately 300 acres. He stated that their RF engineer has looked at co-location in the area , but will not meet their coverage area, and co-locating on the WIXK radio station tower is not an option. This site would connect with their tower in Roberts, and would cover Highway 65. He went over coverage area maps with the Board. The ordinance allows for towers like this one, and is the preferred tower over a monopole to allow for co-location, which the current ordinance calls for. The industry is held to certain standards when a tower is built for co- location. There was no opposition to the application. The Board will view the site. The public hearing was closed at 11:00 a.m. The Board recessed to visit the sites. Decisions The Board reconvened at 2:30 p.m. to render decisions Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel, spoke to the Board about a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling dealing with variances. In Ihe past, the Board has had to look at unnecessary hardship and determine if there is no reasonable use of the property without the variance. The "no reasonable use of the property" criteria no longer is the standard. The new ruling at the Supreme Court level now allows the Board to look at each variance individually and use more of a common-sense approach. The Board may now look at the reason for regulation and determine if the purpose of the regulation is defeated if the variance is granted. Article One: Pat Collova Tabled during the hearing. Article Two: David Hoffman A motion was made by Golz, second by Speer to approve the applicant's request for a variance to a Class D Highway (150`h Avenue) to allow the applicant to construct freestal barn to house dairy cattle based on the following findings: 1. The Town of Glenwood approves of the request. 2. The absence of a variance in this case would create a hardship. 3. There was no opposition to the request. 4. The applicant is asking for the minimum amount for the variance to accomplish his objective. 5. The Class D road (150`" Avenue) has a low volume of traffic. 6. The integrity of the ordinance will be upheld and the spirit and intent of the ordinance will be met by granting the request. The following vote was taken to approve: Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes; King, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. All in favor. Motion carried. Article Three: Vieregge Construction Co., Inc. Tabled during the hearing 7 Article Four: Robert Gandee/ Kernon Bast Motion by Rose, second by King to table the request for a 6.59-foot variance from a Class D road based on the following finding: • The Board requests that the property owner of lot 31, which is the subject of this variance, work with the adjacent property owner of lot 30 on a comprise. The Board suggested that the two parties resolve the setback issue with a land swap- land purchase - or similar solution and bring the agreement to staff for final approval. The following vote was taken to table: Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes; King, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried. Article Five: Carl and Sue Warren/ Sprint PCS Motion by Rose, second by Golz to table the request for a special exception permit for a telecommunications tower in the Ag/Residential District for the following reasons: 1. Before making a decision, the Board requests to review the findings of the: • County's tower consultant, Jeff Nelson, and; • The town's recommendation 2. The applicant is to provide a written explanation of the evaluation that was conducted on all the possible co-location opportunities in the vicinity. 3. The applicant must address the staff concerns listed in the staff report (listed below). • The applicant is encouraged to re-design the facility (or multiple facilities) in conjunction with the proposed language of the WCSF ordinance. • Applicant to consider stealth technology, and explore other alternatives to lessen visual impact. This application appears to be a standard tower build-out in a very scenic area. In any event monopoles are preferred "standard" towers and must be used unless alternative "standard" towers are adequately justified - see 17.83 (9) • Section 17.80 (3) of the St. Croix County Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance states as one of its purpose statements: "Minimize the adverse visual effects of wireless communication facilities through careful sitinn and design standards" 4. The Board requests that the applicant clearly identifies and label all tower sites and road names and provide a north arrow, and scale on the propagation maps. Board members and staff were confused when the RF engineer reviewed the propagation maps during the public hearing. Using numbers and letters to identify each site created confusion. 5. The applicant is to evaluate the Midwest Relay tower on Chinnock Lane to determine if co-location is an option. 6. The applicant testified at the public hearing that Sprint attempted to colocate on the Midwest Relay tower but a census of terms was unable to be reached. The Board requests that the applicant is to provide a written explanation regarding the FCC requirements for infrastructure sharing (co-locating), if any. 7. The applicant must provide a written respond to the concerns raised by the General Manager of WEVR radio in a letter dated August 23, 2001. 8 The following vote was taken to table: Peterson, yes; King, yes; Rose, yes; Golz, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. All in favor. Motion carried. Article Six: Jennie-0 Turkey Store/ Spring PCS Motion by Speer, second by Peterson to table the request for a telecommunications tower in the Ag/Residential District based for the following reasons: 1. Paul Harrington, Sprint's agent, requested that this matter be tabled until Sprint has had an opportunity to respond to the comments submitted by the Jeff Nelson, St. Croix County's tower consultant. 2. The Board request that the "Presumed Hazard" be removed at this location prior to the Board making a decision. 3. Before making a decision, the Board requests to reviewthe findings of the: • New Richmond's Airport Commission 4. The applicant is to provide at a minimum a written explanation of the evaluation that was conducted on all the possible co-location opportunities in the vicinity. 5. The applicant must address the staff concerns listed in the staff report (listed below). • The applicant is encouraged to re-design the facility (or multiple facilities) in conjunction with the proposed language of the WCSF ordinance. • Applicant to consider stealth technology, and explore other alternatives to lessen visual impact. This application appears to be a standard tower build-out in a very scenic area. In any event monopoles are preferred "standard" towers and must be used unless alternative "standard" towers are adequately justified - see 17.83 (9)• • Section 17.80 (3) of the St. Croix County Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance states as one of its purpose statements: "Minimize the adverse visual effects of wireless communication facilities through careful siting and design standards". 6. The Board requests that the applicant clearly identify and label all tower sites and road names and provide a north arrow, and scale on the propagation maps. Board members and staff were confused when the RF engineer reviewed the propagation maps during the public hearing. Using numbers and letters to identify each site created confusion among the board members and staff. The following vote was taken to table: Peterson, yes; King, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes; Chairperson Speer, yes. All in favor. Motion carried. Chairperson Speer adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted: `Ri h Peterson, Secretary Debbie Zimmer n, Recording Secretary 9