Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout002-1040-80-000 (2) V ORDINANCE DECISION TREND ANALYSIS Data Collection/Analysis Would Include: Initial Data Screen Property I.D. # © dot - 30 Owner's Name ~ y ~ ~ a-<j S i pct; ~d C/~~' f • . Property Address - `12(0 Zoning District A2 AG AR RES COM IND Overlay District NONE SHORELAND WETLAND FLOODPLAIN RIVERWAY Location Section, Town, Range, Lot ZL Nz« r`'~ ue, Acres o~y Request Date Denied / Approved Withdrawn Date k" 5 Rezoning Screen Past Zoning A2 AG AR RES COM IND Variance Screen Type of Request C~'r., «G.~.,- r~ xt r~~ erg ~~C✓r-~ ,,;va=.~ Ordinance Citation l7 ` 15 } :z Supporting Evidence Description Hardship YES NO Conditioner 3r 5~ ii 7 fS~ 9 /d, /9 cg,K ~Jctz rrCiiQLi/°;,? i~ ¢v ~Zl~ w1Ee - /Ia ~fAy.~ Objections YES NO Special Exception Screen Type of Request Ordinance Citation Supporting Evidence Description Linked to Rezoning YES NO Conditions Objections YES NO ST. CROIX COUNTY WISCONSIN `L ZONING OFFICE a N ST. CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1101 Carmichael Road Hudson, WI 54016-7710 (715) 386-4680 October 19, 1995 File Ref: 74-95 Thomas R. Schumacher Bakke Norman, S.C. 900 Main Street Baldwin, Wisconsin 54002 RE: Board of Adjustment Decision Dear Mr. Schumacher: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has reviewed the application for Kusileks and Miklas for a driveway separation on a Class B road and has approved the application with conditions. The enclosed document is the formal decision regarding the application. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate in contacting me. Sincerely, Thomas C. Nelson Zoning Administrator mz Enclosure cc: Kenneth Klanderman, Baldwin Town Clerk Route 1, 2309 County Road E Baldwin, Wisconsin 54002 Gerald and Veronica Kusilek James and Christine Mikla 2176 County Road E Baldwin, Wisconsin 54002 it S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, DECISION AND ORDER OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case: 74-95 Complete Application Received: 9/1/95 Hearing Date: 9/28/95 Dates of Publication: Weeks of 9/11/95 and 9/18/95 FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard all the testimony, considered the entire record herein, and conducted an on-site inspection, the Board finds the following facts: 1. The applicant is Thomas R. Schumacher, Bakke Norman, S.C., whose address is 900 Main Street, Baldwin, Wisconsin 54002, and owners, Gerald and Veronica Kusilek and James and Christine Mikla, whose address is 2176 County Road E, Baldwin, Wisconsin 54002. Set . --7. Z 1.i b- 10~ 2. The applicant on September 1, 1995 filed with the Zoning Office an application for a driveway separation variance on a Class B road. 3. Gerald and Veronica Kusilek/James and Christine Mikla are the owners of the property which is the subject of the ap lication which is located in the Sk of the NW; of Section 19 T29N- R16W, Town of Baldwin, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 4. The subject property is presently used for agricultural purposes. 5. The property is zoned Agricultural under the current Zoning Code of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 6. The Town of Baldwin supports the application. 7. Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator, indicated this is a request for a driveway separation variance on a Class B Road. Nelson reminded the Board the applicants were before them last month requesting a third residence on the property, which the Board did not approve. Since that time the property has gore through a rezonement which opens up the possibility for a , second residence on this farm and there is still the issue of , the driveway not meeting the 500' separation. There was a field access, but what the Kusileks want to do is take the nonconforming access and put a use on it which would increase the usage of that access. Introduced as Exhibit #1, a copy of a plat map showing the location of where the property is located; Exhibit #2, a site plan of the property drawn by Tom Schumacher; Exhibit #3, a letter from Kevin Klanderman, Baldwin Town Clerk, stating they are in support of the applicants' request for a variance for a driveway in Section 18. Nelson stated he was at the rezonement hearing at which i 0 time the Town recommended approval and the Planning and Development Committee approved the rezonement before the County Board. 8. Tom Schumacher, Attorney, being duly sworn, stated he is representing the Kusileks. He stated they were denied the special exception use request last month. The Kusilek farm already has two residences on it and Exclusive Ag. only allows for two sites on a parcel. The Kusileks have requested a rezonement from Exclusive Ag. to Ag.-Residential of the building site of the property located in Section 7, one mile north of where they are asking for a riveway variance. ` They are asking for the building site to be rezoned to Ag. II which then gives them the possibility of having a second building site on the Kusilek farm in Exclusive Ag. zoning in Section 18. Schumacher stated he spoke with Dick Wendt who is with the Wisconsin DOT in Eau Claire, and he has seen this site. Wendt had some concerns on how the driveway would hit Highway 63. He indicated he would like to see an easement from the Hops and the driveway go back straight from Highway 63 so that when you actually enter Highway 63 it would be a straight shot instead of entering at an angle. Kusilek spoke with Hops and they agreed to provide him with an easement that would be 20' wide and 115' from the centerline of Highway 63 and about 82 1/2' from the right-of-way line. The driveway would then come straight back from the existing field driveway, and then it would curve over onto the Kusilek property, back along the fence line and back to the building site. Schumacher presented Exhibit #4, the easement from Hops and the layout of the driveway. The easement from the Hops states it would go east five rods from the right-of-way, which is 33' from the centerline. 9. Supervisor Mehls questioned the effect on the culvert, which was also a concern of the property owner to the north. Schumacher stated the runoff that is there now will not change because the culvert is to the north of where the driveway will be located. Schumacher also stated that DOT has no problem with the driveway location subject to the granting of the variance from the Board and the easement from the Hops. The only concern the DOT has is the access. 10. Jule Melby, being duly sworn, stated his concern is the driveway running on the south side of the culvert going through Hops' pine trees. Melby stated he doesn't oppose Kusilek building the driveway, he is opposing the runoff of the dirty water during construction. 11. Nelson suggested a stabilization plan that may include riprapping, seeding and mulching, depending on the time of year the driveway is installed. 12. Schumacher agreed that Melby's concern was a legitimate concern and they would like to make sure that this sort of thing doesn't happen. 13. Gerald Kusilek, being duly sworn, stated the field in which the culvert is located is in CRP. He also said they are only building a narrow driveway of 14 feet and the field slopes to the west and north and there would be no water flow to the driveway. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Board concludes that: 1. The Board of Adjustment has authority under Section 17.70 (5) (c) 3 to approve or deny an application for a variance. 2. Section 17.64(5)(a)2 requires a minimum distance of 500 foot spacing of highway frontage between access driveways for separate land uses. 3. A literal enforcement of the terms of the Zoning code would result in unnecessary hardship to the applicant. 4. A variance would not be contrary to the public interest and would be in accord with the spirit of the Zoning Code. 5. The variance is requested due to limiting physical characteristics of the property. DECISION On the basis of the above Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and the record herein, the Board approves the applicant's request for a driveway separation variance on a Class B road on the following vote: Chairman Bradley Yes T. Filipiak No A. Jensen Yes J. Neumann Yes C. Mehls Yes with the following conditions: 1. This decision expires on September 28, 1996. No construction may begin or continue after this date unless an extension is granted in writing by the Board of Adjustment prior to the expiration date. 2. The applicants must complete this project according to the plans submitted. Minor changes in the project must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Zoning Office before the project starts or continues. Major changes must be brought back to the Board of Adjustment for review and approval. 3. The applicants are responsible for obtaining any permit or approval required for the project by municipal, town or county zoning ordinances before starting the project. 4. The applicants must provide confirmation that they have completed the permit process with all other regulatory agencies. 5. The applicants must allow free and unlimited access to the project site at any reasonable time to any Zoning Office employee who is overseeing the project's construction, operation, or maintenance. 6. The Board of Adjustment may change or revoke this decision if the project becomes detrimental to the public interest. 7. This decision has been issued with the understanding that any construction equipment used is the right size to do the job and can be brought to and removed from the project site without unreasonable harm to vegetative cover and/or wildlife habitat. The removal of vegetative cover and exposure of bare ground shall be restricted to the minimum amount necessary for construction. Areas where soil is exposed must be protected from erosion by seeding and mulching, sodding, diversion of surface runoff, installation of straw bales or silt screens, construction of settling basins, or similar methods as soon as possible after removal of the original ground cover. 8. No portion of the bank or upland which is altered, disturbed, and/or unstable may remain unprotected for greater than ten (10) hours. 9. The applicant must keep a copy of this decision at the project site at all times until the project has been completed. 10. Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator, shall be notified prior to beginning the project. Call him at 715/386-4680 so that compliance inspections can be made. 11. Waterways are to be protected from erosion. 12. A 36 inch culvert is to be used. 13. Seeding and mulching is to be done upon completion of said driveway. 14. Accepting this decision and beginning the project means that the applicant has read, understands, and agrees to follow all conditions of this decision. APPEAL RIGHTS This decision may be appealed by any person aggrieved by filing an action in certiorari in the circuit court of this County within 30 days after the date of filing shown below. The County assumes no liability for and makes no warranty as to the legality of any construction commenced prior to the expiration of this 30-day period or the identity of any person who may claim to be aggrieved by this decision. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT L Signed Chairperson Dated: 10/19/95 Filed: 10/19/95 Q, o a~ O M ti Q ~ d C i 4 O ti C! O g N N N y L _ N N oO .1 o N a~ CL O N (D y N Q C O N m - O y m y d T m cc I C 2 C 3 O 0 z y x o w In M O lC! 7 f0 C O O N LL c -o a o ~o a) v a ot° w I 3 ~ o I u o i z € Z N d 01 IL m O H I O z C d 2 v c' N v~ f- E v rn ~ d m - N CL 7 O N to N 0 0 0 • d a o L m m N I C C O O O Z F- Z p z N z N C ~ N _ N y N m m d L O CD U) U) E F- E F- a 0 0 0 •N ~aac. CL ° LO L 3 O N O 01 W N J V m rn rn } ~l co m N 0 co O N N ~i 7 N ~2 L m C a z U) i+ O O N C CO IM Q m o d m c c a rn °o o c'! E C, c c m N n N W C' - N N N 7 ,d Ci (D ICI N N E Y_ O w Z' Z' C L LO •O o m N 0 z N (q a o a 3 L: CL t A tia~ 0 V)