HomeMy WebLinkAbout030-2067-20-000 (2)
CRONCO
UNIFf
PLANNING . ZONING
March 2, 2012 File Ref: SE87411
Estate of Elizabeth MacDonald
c/o Robert Nicholson, agent
177 Riverview Acres Rd.
Hudson, WI 54016
Re: St. Croix County Variance Requests
Code Administrauotr Parcel #030-2067-20-000, Town of St. Joseph
715-3864680
Dear Mr. Nicholson:
Land Information
Planning The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment (Board) has reviewed your requests for the following items:
715-386-4674
Item #1: Variance for expansion of a legal nonconforming principal structure in the Lower
Real Prop . St. Croix Riverway Overlay District pursuant to Section 17.36 I.2.e.1)i)i of the St. Croix
715-38V4677 County Zoning Ordinance.
Re cAng
15-3864675 Item #2: Addendum variance for reconstruction of a nonconforming accessory structure
(deck) in the Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay District pursuant to Section 17.36.1.3.b. of
the St. Croix. County Zoning Ordinance.
•Y _
Item #3: Special exception permit for maintenance and repair of a lift in the Lower St.
Croix Riverway Overlay District pursuant to Section 17.36.F.3.a.3) and subject to the
performance standards in Section 17.36.H.13 of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance.
After the hearing on March 1, 2012, the Board voted to deny the variance request, approve the special
exception for work on the lift, and allow deck repair with conditions. The enclosed document is the
formal decision regarding your application.
Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
amela Quinn
Zoning Specialist/ Zoning Administrator
Enclosure: Formal Decision
;a
cc: Clerk, Town of St. Joseph
f; Steve Olson, St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department
w Mike Wenholz, WI Dept. of Natural Resources
` y..
ST. CRO/X COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
1101 CARM/CHAEL ROAD, HUDSON, Wi 54016 715386.4686 FAX
PZCaCO. SAINT~C'R01X. W1. US W W W.CO.SAI NT-CROIX. W I. US
FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
OF TBE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN
File Number: SE87411
Applicants: Elizabeth A. MacDonald Estate, property owner
Agent: Robert A. Nicholson, adjacent landowner & potential buyer
Parcel Numbers: 35.30.20.609H
Complete Application Received: January 3, 2012
Hearing Notice Publication: Weeks of February 13 and 19, 2012
Hearing Date: March 1, 2012
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Having heard all the testimony, considered the entire record herein, and visited the site, the Board of Adjustment makes
the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law pertinent to the applicant's special exception and variance
requests (Items #1, #2 and #3):
1. The applicant is the estate of Elizabeth MacDonald, property owner, represented by agent, Robert Nicholson,
potential buyer and adjacent landowner.
2. The site is located at 175 Riverview Acres Rd in Part of Gov't Lot 2, Section 35, T30N, R20W, aka Lot 2 of
Riverview Acres, Town of St. Joseph, WI.
3. The Town of St. Joseph Town Board at the February 9, 2012 meeting and upon consideration of the Plan
Commissions recommendation passed unanimously the motion made by Supervisor Gullickson and seconded
by Supervisor Colbeth to recommend approval of the County Variance application(s) expansion of existing
nonconforming principal structure; construction of accessory building outside 40' bluff line setback;
renovation and restoration of current structure; and repair of existing tram all variances to County Zoning
Ordinance Sections 17.36 12c; 17.36 12e; 17.36 F. 3. A; 17.36 F. 2a 1.
4. The St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department does not object to any of the requests as long
as mitigation requirements are implemented according to 17.36 1.5 (in particular vegetative screening and
stormwater management). In addition, the LWCD recommends the applicant follow the performance
standards found in 17.36 H. 13.a.(7)and(8), vegetation screening of the lift and removal of vegetation from the
lift route.
5. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources understands the existing principal structure is approximately
1500 square feet and the proposed addition is 150 square feet, which meets the maximum limit of 2000 square
feet in Subchapter III.V sec. 17.36 I.2.e.1)i). The addition must meet all of the other requirements of sec.
17.36 I.2.e.1)i). Finally, the applicant must submit a mitigation plan that is approved by the county
(according to sec. 17.36 I.2.e.1)m)). The nonconforming accessory structure language does not allow
reconstruction of a deck, thus the department recommends that this request be denied. However, if the BOA
approves the variance, the department recommends the applicants understand that since their proposed deck is
to be 336 square feet, they are only allowed a total of 164 square feet of additional accessory structure within
the bluffline setback to comply with sec. 17.36 I.3.b.4). Finally, if the BOA approves the variance the
applicant must submit a mitigation plan that is approved by the county (according to sec. 17.36 I.3.b.7)). This
mitigation plan should not be one in the same as the mitigation plan for the other variance request, if both are
approved, but include additional measures that appropriately offset the impacts of the proposed work. The
department has no comments regarding the special exception permit request to repair and make operational
the existing tram.
6. When determining whether an unnecessary hardship exists, the Board of Adjustment must identify unique
physical characteristics of the property that would otherwise prohibit the applicant from using the property for
a permitted purpose or would render conformity with such restrictions unnecessarily burdensome ' and then
weigh the burden placed on the applicant in meeting the requirements of the Ordinance against the public
interests being protected. The lot is very narrow and the house and its accessory structures (porch, portico,
and deck) were constructed lest an 40 feet from the bluffline and less that 5 feet from the north lot line in
1972, prior to the adoption of setback requirements contained in the county Riverway ordinance, and as such
are legal nonconforming structures. Because the ordinance setbacks were adopted after construction of the
house and deck, the hardship was not self-created by the property owner.
Item #1 variance for expansion of a nonconforminL principal structure in the Lower St. Croix Riverwa
( y
District
The Board made the following general findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to Item # 1:
7. The applicant's agent submitted a variance application to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment for
expansion of a legal nonconforming principal structure in the Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay District
pursuant to Section 17.36.1.2 of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The applicant testified that it was
necessary to expand the present entry to provide for the possibility of future handicap accessibility, whether
for a ramp or mechanical lift. If at a future time a handicapped person resides in this house, Section 17.36.J.3
provides standards for obtaining a land use permit for a temporary structure.
8. The variance is denied because the applicant did not demonstrate a hardship that required expansion of the
portico that would allow a ramp for disabled persons at this time. Preparing the house for a possible future
sale does not meet the standard for a hardship.
Item #2 (variance for reconstruction of a nonconforming accessory structure (deck) in the Lower St. Croix
Riverway District)
The Board made the following general findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to Item #2:
9. The applicant's agent filed an addendum application with the Board of Adjustment for a variance to
reconstruct a nonconforming accessory structure (deck) within the bluffline setback area in the Lower St.
Croix Riverway district pursuant to Section 17.36.I.3.b of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The deck
is attached to a legal, nonconforming principle structure that was approved by the Board of Adjustment in
1974 and meets the intent of the ordinance in that
• The reconstructed deck will be no larger than the original one, which is 336 square feet in area;
• No vegetation will be harmed during reconstruction;
• The public interest would not be harmed by granting the variance;
• The deck will be inconspicuous from the river;
• and property values will not be negatively affected.
10. The house and deck are legal nonconforming structures that were originally constructed within the 40-foot
bluffline setback and 25 foot lot line setback prior to adoption of the County Riverway ordinance. Literal
enforcement of the ordinance prohibiting the reconstruction of a nonconforming accessory structure (except
garages or sheds) would limit the applicant's continued use of the deck as a safe, structurally-sound platform
for ingress and egress from existing doorways on the main floor of the house. The Board finds that
replacement of decayed deck materials constitutes repair rather than reconstruction.
11. In Chapter NR 118.08(3) ordinary maintenance and repair of nonconforming accessory structures is allowed,
but "Nonconforming accessory structures may not be structurally altered, reconstructed or expanded".
Ordinary maintenance and repair of the existing deck structure was not sufficient to prevent further
deterioration or meet decay prevention requirements in Comm 21.10 of Wisconsin Dept. of Commerce
Chapter Comm 21 Construction Standards. The applicant's repair would also bring the deck into compliance
with state specifications for safe handrails, footings, frost protection, and structural support/attachment to the
principal structure.
12. The proposed repair of the deck will not expand the existing nonconforming accessory structure's footprint or
increase its encroachment into either the 40' bluffline setback or lot line setback.
13. The deck will be repaired to current Wisconsin building code standards. With conditions that mitigation
measures will include a stormwater management plan to comply with requirements and standards in Section
17.36.H.7 and that an affidavit ll be recorded to describe the approved stwater management plan and
discloses its maintenance requirements pursuant to Section 17.36.H.7.g,1) & 2), the repaired deck will meet
the spirit and intent of the Ordinance and comply with mitigation requirements in Section 17.36.1.5.a., b., and
c.3).
Item #3 (special exception for maintenance and repair of a lift in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District)
The Board made the following general findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to Item #3:
14. The applicant's agent submitted an addendum application to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment for a
special exception permit to repair and maintain an existing lift in the Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay
District pursuant to Section 17.36 F.3.a.3) and subject to the performance standards in Section 17.36 H.13 of
the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance.
15. According to the applicant's agent, the existing lift will require maintenance and repair to meet all design
standards stipulated in Section 17.36 H.13.a.1)-10) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The lift is
necessary to provide pedestrian access to the St. Croix River due to slopes exceeding 25 percent, and is the
only lift accessing the St. Croix River on the site. There is currently no other stairway or trail access to the
river. The lift does not allow for the transport of boats or other equipment, and the passenger car does not
exceed the allowable dimensional standards. Some vegetation and/or tree removal may be required one foot
from either side of the passenger car to make the lift operational again. The lift is green in color and visually
inconspicuous. A professional tram company will conduct an evaluation of its condition and identify repairs
needed to certify that the lift will be structurally satisfactory and in compliance with International Building
Code requirements.
16. The wooden landing platform(s) for the tram have rotted and are currently unsafe for use to access the tram
cart. The platform structure will need to be repaired and/or rebuilt as part of the maintenance and repair to
make the lift operational for pedestrian access down to the river.
DECISION
On the basis of the above Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and the record herein, the Board denied Item #I and
granted Items #2 and #3 with the following conditions:
1. The special exception will allow work to be completed that will bring the existing lift back into operation.
The variance will allow the applicant's agent to repair a deck attached to the principal structure within the
same footprint as the original deck in accordance with the plans submitted on January 3, 2012, and as
provided in the conditions below. This approval does not include any additional structures, impervious
coverage, filling and grading, or other activities.
2. The applicant's agent shall secure all necessary permits and approvals from the Town of St. Joseph and obtain
any other required local, state, or federal permits and approvals, including but not limited to a land use permit
for construction of a detached garage.
3. The applicants will direct all roof gutter discharge away from the riverward slopes into approved stormwater
structures and protect existing trees along the bluffline to maintain slope stability and visual screening In
compliance with the mitigation requirements in Sections 17.36.1.2.e.1)m), the applicant's agent will direct
stormwater runoff away from riverward slopes into approved stormwater infiltration structures and protect
existing trees within the bluffline setback to maintain slope stability and visual screening of the house from
the river. Prior to commencing construction, the applicant must submit to and have approved by the Zoning
Administrator the following items:
• A storm water management plan designed to infiltrate runoff from all impervious surfaces on this site as
recommended by the Land and Water Conservation Department.
• An operation and maintenance agreement for all storm water management measures to maintain long-term
infiltration, as well as a timeline for planting and to ensure that all vegetation establishes successfully and is
maintained long-term.
4. As indicated in the plans submitted by the applicant's agent, the proposed project will be visually
inconspicuous, will comply with requirements for earth-tone building materials, and will not require removal
of existing mature trees that screen the house from the river.
5. Within 30 days of the Board's decision, the applicant shall record an affidavit against the property referencing
the decision and stormwater management plan, including a long-term operation and maintenance agreement
for approved runoff infiltration structures. The applicant shall submit a recorded copy of the affidavit to the
Zoning Administrator at this time. The intent is to make future owners aware of the limitations and
responsibilities incurred as part of the Board of Adjustment's decision.
6. 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 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.
7. The applicant shall have one (1) year from the issuance of these approvals to commence work on the lift, and
repair of the deck and two (2) years to complete the project. Failure to do so may result in expiration or
revocation of this decision, after which time the applicant will be required to secure a new special exception
before starting or completing the project.
8. These conditions may be amended or additional conditions may be added if unanticipated circumstances 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.
9. Accepting this decision means that the applicants and all property owners have read, understand, and agree to
all conditions of this decision.
The following vote was taken to deny portico expansion variance, approve the special exception for the lift and repair
of the deck as amended: Chairman Malick, yes; Nelson, yes; Peterson, yes (Hurtgen and McAllister were absent).
Motion carried.
APPEAL RIGHTS
Any person aggrieved by this decision may file an appeal in St. Croix County circuit court within 30 days after the filing
date shown below, pursuant to Sec. 59.694(10), Wisconsin Statutes. St. Croix County assumes no responsibility for
action taken in reliance on this decision prior to the expiration of the appeal period. St. Croix County does not certify that
the identity of all persons legally entitled to notice of the Board of Adjustment proceedings, which resulted in this
decision, was provided to the County.
If an appeal is taken of this decision, it is the responsibility of the appellant to submit at his/her expense a transcript of the
Board of Adjustment proceedings to the circuit court. The Planning and Zoning Department can be contacted for
information on how to obtain a transcript. It is the responsibility of the Board of Adjustment to submit its record (file) of
this matter to the circuit court.
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Signed:
Date Filed: 03/2/2012 ce W. "Buck" Ma ick, Chairman