Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout018-1005-30-000(1) 0 d 3 3 y O N O OD c l• 3 C W m 3 N Imo( C 1 CD -4 N oo a K 7 N OD = 3 S° o C N N J C 7 O O =r 0 O O v 0 Q m O o o C 7 •0 'D N f0 a A W O O O O N N C m 7 D 3 O fT ! O 7 N C.) 7 O 0 o Z D a e~ I N Oo O o m a ~ C O W D (3) pj N N 3 O r. co 0\m 2 d CL -4 (O OD 10 8 O O O O (n 0 C !r cn a 3 a O O O cn 2 a m ~ y N N cn it m `D m ~ (D y o m 90 W = o m r. a ~ a 7 co A° o D D o O Zb r_ no~i ooi Ooi a !V • rn > > Oro c fD 3 _ = p Z N ? G 7 II II Z N w W 'fl ~ o CL 3 z O I m a O O p~ m N (CO<Oa v Q N M CD CL w A a 0 c o N 7 m m o o 0 d 'I a a) =r E 2L= ZS (D p) Z (n .O• CCD f =r of m o m r°s. w 3 sy m (Z N m O cn ye o a m N I ~ ~ (0 m s- -4 = ! Q .tmn O ~ O O tv CD co o o O~=0 D 0 m aro o m C> O o I ~ ~ a I o a 'Ij ORDINANCE DECISION TREND ANALYSIS Data Collection/Analysis Would Include: Initial Data Computer/Property I.D. - d l~~ Jam- d ~1 ZVhr}'!l Owner's Name - '`a den 1~l I Y Q Property Address /x5-3 A yen ye- Lamm M Zoning District A2 AG CAR) RES COM IND Past Zoning A2 AG AR. RES COM IND Overlay District NONE SHORELAND WETLAND FLOODPLAIN RIVERWAY Location Section, Town, Range, Lot N w , Acres \ 5 5-0 Request Date 10 - - 9 f j Dispositio DENIED APPROVED WITHDRAWN POSTPONED Date I' _a I Activity Rezoning / Variane pecial Exceptio Type of Varian /S ecial ExceptioU~ ~enn~ ROAD/HWY. SETBACK WATER SETBACK BLUFFLINE SETBACK LOT RATIO DRIVEWAY SEPARATION NONCONFORMING LOT SIZE Ordinance Citation 11 l ~ I ~ I `Supporting Evidence Description 5 _ LOT MAP/P- LA SITE PLA TOWN A LTR SM PHOTOS MAPS SOIL TEST Hardship YES N Linked to Rezoning YES NO Conditions EXPIRATION DATE COMPLETION ACCORDING TO PLAN ALL PERMITS COMPLETE ZONING OFFICE ACCESS & NOTIFICATION UPON COMPLETION EROSION CONTROL Objections YES NO As~ ST. CROIX COUNTY WISCONSIN ZONING OFFICE N■-■i ST. CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1101 Carmichael Road Hudson, WI 54016-7710 (715) 386-4680 January 16, 1997 Karen P. Lindstrom 1853 120th Avenue Hammond, WI 54015 RE: Board of Adjustment Decision File Ref: 91-96 Dear Mrs. Lindstrom: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has reviewed your application for a dog kennel and has denied your application. The enclosed document is the formal decision regarding your application. Per your request, I am also enclosing a copy of the minutes from that hearing. If you have any questions, please give our office a call. Sincerely, *00 Thomas C. Nelson Zoning Administrator db Enc. cc: Marcia Ivy, Clerk Town of Hammond 1993 County Road J Baldwin, WI 54002 0 0 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, DECISION AND ORDER OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case: 91-96 Complete Application Received: 10/16/96 Hearing Date: 11/21/96 Dates of Publication: Weeks of 11/04/96 and 11/11/96 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 Karen P. Lindstrom, whose address is 1853 120th Avenue, Hammond, Wisconsin 54015. 2. The applicants, on October 16, 1996, filed with the Zoning Office an application for a special exception for a dog kennel. 3. John & Karen Lindstrom are the owners of the property which is the subject of this application which is located in the NW-, of the NE; of Section 3, T29N, R17W, Town of Hammond, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 4. The subject property is currently zoned Ag-residential. 5. The Town of Hammond is taking no position on this application. 6. Nelson stated this was a request for a dog kennel in the Town of Hammond. Nelson introduced Exhibit #1, a letter of intention from the applicant; Exhibit #2, an aerial photo showing location of the proposed operation; Exhibit #3, a photo showing the building they wish to utilize; Exhibit #4, a land title; Exhibit #5, a cross-section drawing of the proposed kennel building; Exhibit #6, interior plan of the building; Exhibit #7, warranty deed to property; Exhibit #8, a petition in opposition of the proposed kennel. Nelson noted that the Town of Hammond is taking no position in this request. 7. Karen Lindstrom, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1853 120th Avenue, Hammond. Lindstrom stated they wish to have 24 kennels within the enclosed building. There will be inside and outside runs. Dogs will be taken out on leashes for exercise. 8. Filipiak questioned the number of dogs. Lindstrom stated there would be only one per kennel and on occasion possibly two. Filipiak asked how far the kennels would be from the property line. Lindstrom stated 400'. 9. Bradley asked Lindstrom if she had operated a kennel before. Lindstrom stated yes. 10. Bradley inquired about the location of the kennel. Lindstrom stated it was about 1/2 from the Goodings operation but that she has no intentions of having 200 dogs. 11. Bradley asked if the operation could be run without conflict. Lindstrom stated yes because the dogs would be kept inside. 12. Filipiak questioned the kinds of dogs to be kenneled. Lindstrom stated German Shepards, Golden Retrievers and Black Labs. Jensen asked if they train dogs. Lindstrom stated no, just their own. 13. Bradley asked Lindstrom how many dogs she has. Lindstrom stated four. 14. Filipiak asked if they would be breeding the dogs. Lindstrom stated yes and that puppies are kept three to four months, only keeping the select ones. 15. Bradley asked if the dogs would be kept on a cement slab. Lindstrom stated yes. 16. Mindy Lux, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1842 120th Avenue, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lux stated that they have a septic system installed and are building a new home on 120 acres they purchased in 1995 which is across the road from the proposed kennel. Lux stated she does not want to live across the road from a kennel. 17. Filipiak asked Lux how far she lived from the Lindstrom property. Lux stated about 1,7001. Lux expressed frustration on lack of notification to adjacent landowners and said they would not have purchased the property had they known there would be an airstrip and another dog kennel so close. 18. Ken Lindus, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1034 160th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lindus stated he owns 40 acres less than one mile from the Lindstroms and approximately mile from the Goodings operation. Lindus stated that the Town did not address the issue of how many dogs were female. 19. Bradley asked Lindus the assess value of his home. Lindus stated his land to be valued at $17,000. 20. Jean Lindus, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1034 160th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin. Mrs. Lindus stated this was retirement land which they purchased in 1992 - they wanted a place that would be peaceful and quiet. 21. Bradley asked if they had intentions of building. Mrs. Lindus stated it was indefinite. Bradley asked if they were to build how far they would be from the Lindstroms. Mr. Lindus stated a little over a , mile. 22. Mark Lux, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1842 120th Avenue, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lux identified his property on Exhibit #2 and it was labeled as A. He expressed his frustration with the events that occurred at the Town meeting. He expressed his disapproval of the airstrip and having the Lindstroms as neighbors. 23. Charles Pace, 991 150th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin, being duly sworn, stated he is an appraiser. Pace stated his frustration living in an ag-residentially zoned area and all the special exceptions being permitted. He noted there is already a similar use within of this proposed kennel. Pace also expressed his frustration with the lack of adjacent landowner notification at the Town level. 24. Bradley asked if property would be devalued. 25. Ken Lindus, previously sworn, wanted clarification on the use of the pole shed with a tin roof. Lindus stated that if the pole shed were used to house these dogs the tin roof would reflect the sound and it would be noisier and travel farther. 26. Karen Lindstrom, previously sworn, addressed the concerns and stated that the barn to be used is a hay barn and it will be insulated. CONCLUSION OF LAW The Board Concludes that: 1. The Board of Adjustment has authority under Section 17.70 (5) (c) 4 to approve special exception uses. 2. Special exception uses may be terminated as per 17.70 (7) (d) of the St. Croix County Zoning ordinance if the plan or the conditions of the decision are not followed. 3. Section 17.15(6)(f) allows a special exception for a dog kennel. i • DECISION On the basis of the above Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law, and the record herein, the Board denies the applicant's request for a dog kennel on the following vote: Vote to deny: T. Filipiak yes J. Neumann yes N. Golz yes A. Jensen yes Chairman Bradley yes 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 Singed Chairperson Dated: 01/16/97 Filed: 01/16/97 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING St. Croix County Government Center, Hudson, Wisconsin (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter.) Thursday, November 21, 1996 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 8:30 a.m. A role call was made. All were present. Motion by Neumann, second by Golz to adopt agenda. Motion carried. The Board set December 19, 1996 as the next meeting date. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Andrew T. Piccone/Elliot Architects Nelson reminded the Board that they had requested an estimate on construction cost. Nelson presented Exhibit #1, a breakdown of the project costs. Dan Koich, being duly sworn, stated he is the Water Regulations and Zoning Specialist with the Wisconsin DNR in Eau Claire. Koich said he supports the project cost information and he recommended that the Board place a restriction on the applicants deed stating they have met the 50% rule and that no future improvements can be made. Corporate Counsel Timmerman stated that assessed value may increase and he is not sure that this could be made a deed restriction. Town of St. Joseph request of rehearing concerning Gateway Group International, Ltd./Metro Aerial Structures Bradley acknowledged that the Board approved this request in error. Scott Teigen The Board discussed their concerns with the driveway variance and the possibility of a future strip mall at that location. It was noted that the City of New Richmond and the Department of Transportation have concerns as well. Nelson said there is a meeting scheduled for December 10th at 7:30 p.m. to discuss these concerns. OLD BUSINESS Jana Paulson/Brooksbank Nelson read the letter he received from Mike Brose. He said they are still relying on old prints and information. Jensen asked if the Zoning Office had received a CSM from them. Nelson stated no. He said that the Board needs to see the staking and noted that the Paulsons believe they can build at the bluffline. NEW BUSINESS: Chairman Bradley called the hearing to order at 9:00 a.m.. Nelson read the notice of the hearing as published: PUBLIC HEARING The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, November 21, 1996 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. An on-site investigation will be made of each site in question, after which the board will return for the purpose of deliberating and voting on the appeals. 1. ARTICLES: 17.29(1)(a) Filling and Grading Shoreland District 17.28 Tree Cutting Shoreland District APPELLANT: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Marty Engel LOCATION: St. Croix County 2. ARTICLE: 17.29(2) Filling and Grading Shoreland District *CANCELLED* APPELLANT: Jeffrey V. Christensen LOCATION: SE',, SW,, Sec. 15, T28N-R18W, Town of Kinnickinnic 3. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(f),Dog Kennel APPELLANT: Karen P. Lindstrom LOCATION: NW',, NE',, Sec. 3, T29N-R17W, Town of Hammond 4. ARTICLE: 17.64(5)(a)(3) Driveway Separation Variance - Town Road APPELLANT: Ralph Mondor/Gary Motto LOCATION: SW,, SE;, Sec. 29, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 5. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(1) Telecommunications Tower APPELLANT: Brian & Roxanne Hable/American Portable Telecom LOCATION: NE,, SE,, Sec. 33, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 6. ARTICLE: 17.18(1) Telecommunications Tower APPELLANT: County Concrete Corporation / American Portable Telecom LOCATION: NW,, NW;, Sec. 34, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 7. ARTICLES: 17.15(6)(d) Contractor's Storage Yard 17.64(1)(c) Setback Variance from County Road *CANCELLED,* APPELLANT: Scott A. Bryan LOCATION: NW'-,, SW;, Sec. 2, T29N-R19W, Town of St. Joseph 8. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(1) Telecommunications Tower APPELLANT: John T. Larsen/Metropolitan Aerial Structures *CANCELLED* LOCATION: SE';, NW' Sec. 2, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy 9. ARTICLE: 17.15(6)(1) Telecommunications Tower *CANCELLED* APPELLANT: Ray Galep/Metropolitan Aerial Structures LOCATION: SW'., SE;, Sec. 12, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy 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 Administrator, Hudson, Wisconsin at (715) 386-4680. John Bradley, Chairman St. Croix County Board of Adjustment Chairman Bradley introduced the other members of the Board as being Art Jensen, Tim Filipiak, Jerry Neumann and Nick Golz. Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator, was present to assist the Board with the introduction of the materials as well as recommendations as to how the ordinances apply. On call was Corporation Counsel Greg Timmerman. In the alternative, if he is not available, then Assistant Corporation Counsel Don Gillen. Chairman Bradley explained the procedures of the hearing requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their name in the front of the room on the sign up sheet provided. Wisconsin. Department of Natural Resources-Marty Engel Nelson stated that this was a request for a blanket permit for all DNR activities done in St. Croix County. Nelson introduced Exhibit #1, a. descriptive application for fish and wildlife projects; Exhibit #2, a bulletin entitled "Removal of Woody Streambank Vegetation to Improve Trout Habitat"; Exhibit #3, a brochure entitled "Just Add Water"; Exhibit #4, a brochure entitled "Lodating and Identifying Drained Wetlands for Restoration"; Exhibit #5, a two-page document entitled "Private Lands Management and Wetland Restoration"; Exhibit #6, Wetland Development Agreement; Exhibit #7, Wetland Restoration Checklist; Exhibit #8, Log Crib Fish Shelter; Exhibit #9, Winterkill Prevention in Lakes and Ponds Using Artificial Aeration; Exhibit #10, a pamphlet entitled "Wisconsin Trout Street Habitat Management"; Exhibit #11, Guidelines for Management of Trout Stream Habitat in Wisconsin; Exhibit #12, a bulletin entitled "A Review of Fisheries Habitat Improvement Projects in Warm Water Stream, with Recommendations for Wisconsin". Marty Engel, Wisconsin DNR Fisheries Biologist and Harvey Halvorsen, Wisconsin DNR Wildlife Biologist, being duly sworn, stated their work address to be Suite 104, 990 Hillcrest, Baldwin. Bradley asked Engel and Halverson the territory they are responsible for covering. Engel stated they cover St. Croix, Pierce, Pepin and Dunn. Koich noted that he issues permits for these projects and tree cutting, under Chapter 30, does not require a permit, but ponding would. Engel stated that he is requesting a blanket permit for fish and wildlife projects and wants to clarify any confusion between local government and the DNR. Engel noted that three other counties which they serve do not require permits and he feels St. Croix County has become more and more restrictive over the years. He said that most properties have master plans which go before a public hearing and are updated every 10-15 years. The DNR is usually involved as a part of the master plan. Engel stated the DNR often has to do urgent repairs, such as cattle crossings. He feels there is a duplication of process. He believes that State agencies are not regulated by local zoning. Koich stated that the DNR isn't legally required to come before the Board for their projects, but will do so for information purposes. Koich noted that Harold Barber, previous Zoning Administrator, did not want the DNR to come before them. Timmerman stated that Section 13 of the State Statutes does not give the DNR exemption from local regulations. Bradley noted that the DNR may be in violation of the zoning code in numerous instances. Koich presented a letter from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources which stated exemption from local zoning on State sponsored wetland restoration projects. This letter was labeled as Exhibit #13. Bradley said there is a need to explore in greater depth clear- cutting and erosion control. Engel said that brushing was a part of the Kinnickinnic plan in 1975 and he feels there is opposition to brushing because it is not understood. Brushing is often done to reduce erosion conditions and improve lake vegetation. Koich stated he has reviewed projects for the DNR for 21 years and has received two complaints on projects on the Kinnickinnic. Koich said the DNR addresses the concerns of persons who are in opposition. Bradley stated there are local residents who may have concerns which may not reach the DNR and that the Board of Adjustment is the only opportunity for them to address their concerns. Filipiak asked for clarification on the blanket request. Engel stated that he wants these two government bodies to work together to come to an understanding on how they are going to interact. Bradley noted that the DNR is in violation of two zoning articles. Koich agreed that applications for permits should have been submitted. Bradley read from the Planning, Zoning and Parks minutes violations and citations portion and noted the violations on the Kinnickinnic by the DNR. Engel stated that brushing is done to restore streams to their beneficial stages. Engel said that the Kinnickinnic is a prairie type stream and that there is a master plan for the Kinnickinnic which was developed through public hearings. The Board recessed at 10:20 a.m and reconvened at 10:25 a.m. Kevin Kuchevar, being duly sworn, stated he is representing several people in opposition to this request. Kuchevar presented Exhibit #14, a petition signed by 130 people, not all from St. Croix County. Kuchevar feels there are other ways of restoring streams in addition to brushing and clear-cutting. He feels the removal of the trees and shrubs creates erosion and siltation problems and that there are concerns for other wildlife. He also opposes the blanket permit because it eliminates public hearings for which individuals can voice their opinions. Kuchevar expressed concern about flooding and erosion. Engel stated that there is a lot of research and documentation which show improvements to aquatic and plant life as a result of brushing. Kuchevar asked how many fish per river acre there were in the Kinnickinnic. Engel stated there were 1,500 per river mile. Bradley stated that public relation work is needed on DNR projects. Engel stated that files are open to the public and he would like to meet with groups to discuss their concerns. Jensen suggested the DNR come in once a year to go over projects. Bradley noted that the DNR holds public hearings. Chairman Bradley indicated that the Board weigh and evaluate the testimony presented and render a decision later this date. Karen P. Lindstrom Nelson stated this was a request for a dog kennel in the Town of Hammond. Nelson introduced Exhibit #1, a letter of intention from the applicant; Exhibit #2, an aerial photo showing location of the proposed operation; Exhibit #3, a photo showing the building they wish to utilize; Exhibit #4,-'a land title; Exhibit #5, a cross- section drawing of the proposed kennel building; Exhibit #6, interior plan of the building; Exhibit #7, warranty deed to property; Exhibit #8, a petition in opposition of the proposed kennel. Nelson noted that the Town of Hammond is taking no position in this request. Karen Lindstrom, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1853 120th Avenue, Hammond. Lindstrom stated they wish to have 24 kennels within the enclosed building. There will be inside and outside runs. Dogs will be taken out on leashes for exercise. Filipiak questioned the number of dogs. Lindstrom stated there would be only one per kennel and on occasion possibly two. Filipiak asked how far the kennels would be from the property line. Lindstrom stated 4001. Bradley asked Lindstrom if she had operated a kennel before. Lindstrom stated yes. Bradley inquired about the location of the kennel. Lindstrom stated it was about 1/2 from the Goodings operation but that she has no intentions of having 200 dogs. Bradley asked if the operation could be run without conflict. Lindstrom stated yes because the dogs would be kept inside. Filipiak questioned the kinds of dogs to be kenneled. Lindstrom stated German Shepards, Golden Retrievers and Black Labs. Jensen asked if they train dogs. Lindstrom stated no, just their own. Bradley asked Lindstrom how many dogs she has. Lindstrom stated four. Filipiak asked if they would be breeding the dogs. Lindstrom stated yes and that puppies are kept three to four months, only keeping the select ones. Bradley asked if the dogs would be kept on a cement slab. Lindstrom stated yes. Mindy Lux, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1842 120th Avenue, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lux stated that they have a septic system installed and are building a new home on 120 acres they purchased in 1995 which is across the road from the proposed kennel. Lux stated she does not want to live across the road from a kennel. Filipiak asked Lux how far she lived from the Lindstrom property. Lux stated about 1,7001. Lux expressed frustration on lack of notification to adjacent landowners and said they would not have purchased the property had they known there would be an airstrip and another dog kennel so close. Ken Lindus, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1034 160th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lindus stated he owns 40 acres less than one mile from the Lindstroms and approximately h mile from the Goodings operation. Lindus stated that the Town did not address the issue of how many dogs were female. Bradley asked Lindus the assess value of his home. Lindus stated his land to be valued at $17,000. Jean Lindus, being duly sworn, stated her address to be 1034 160th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin. Mrs. Lindus stated this was retirement land which they purchased in 1992 - they wanted a place that would be peaceful and quiet. Bradley asked if they had intentions of building. Mrs. Lindus stated it was indefinite. Bradley asked if they were to build how far they would be from the'Lindstroms. Mr. Lindus stated a little over a a mile. Mark Lux, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1842 120th Avenue, Hammond, Wisconsin. Lux identified his property on Exhibit #2 and it was labeled as A. He expressed his frustration with the events that occurred at the Town meeting. He expressed his. disapproval of the airstrip and having the Lindstroms as neighbors. Charles Pace, 991 150th Street, Hammond, Wisconsin, being duly sworn, stated he is an appraiser. Pace stated his frustration living in an ag-residentially zoned area and all the special exceptions being permitted. He noted there is already a similar use within of this proposed kennel. Pace also expressed his frustration with the lack of adjacent landowner notification at the Town level. Bradley asked if property would be devalued. Ken Lindus, previously sworn, wanted clarification on the use of the pole shed with a tin roof. Lindus stated that if the pole shed were used to house these dogs the tin roof would reflect the sound and it would be noisier and travel farther. Karen Lindstrom, previously sworn, addressed the concerns and stated that the barn to be used is a hay barn and it will be 0 insulated. Chairman Bradley indicated that the Board would view the site and render a decision later this date. Ralph Mondor/Gary Motto Nelson stated this was a request for a driveway separation variance. Nelson introduced Exhibit #1, a site plan showing the location of the proposed driveway being 55' from the west line of Lot 2 and 166' from the existing driveway; Exhibit #2, correspondence from the Town of Star Prairie stating no objection to this request. Doug Zahler, Surveyor, being duly sworn, stated his address to be P.O. Box 325, New Richmond, Wisconsin and Gary Motto, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1860 100th Street, New Richmond, Wisconsin. Zahler stated they are requesting the variance because proposed lot 3 was never sold and there are existing driveways on lots 1 and 2. Zahler stated the proposed driveway is 50' from the west line of lot 2 and there is a swamp to the west. Neumann asked if it met the 1/3 to 2/3 lot ratio. Zahler stated just barely. Chairman Bradley indicated that the Board would view the site and render a decision later this date. County Concrete Corporation/American Portable Telecom Brian & Roxanne Kable/American Portable Telecom Nelson stated this was a request for a telecommunications tower in the Town of Warren. Nelson introduced Exhibit #1, correspondence from Peter Coil; Exhibit #2, a Fact Sheet from the Federal Communications Commission; Exhibit #3, Auctions Fact Sheet; Exhibit #4, a series of four drawings, page one showing proposed site location, page two showing site plan and enlarged plan, page three showing north and south elevation, page four showing east and west elevation; Exhibit #5, correspondence from the Town of Warren approving the transmission tower for the County Concrete site; Exhibit #6, a fax copy of the resolution from the Town of Warren; Exhibit #7, an article entitled "Babel of Phones". Gregory Korstad, lawyer representing APT, Steve Ramberg, Jeff Peterson, Project Manager for APT and Doug Cowan, Zoning Manager for APT, were all duly sworn. Korstad stated that APT wishes to obtain a wireless tower site at the County Concrete location, but they prefer the Hable property. Korstad stated they submitted the Hable property in September to the Town Board and did an analysis of other locations and chose County Concrete as an alternate. He said they are currently working out an agreement and site location with the County Concrete property owners. Korstad presented Exhibit #8, a revised site plan which substitutes drawing 2 of Exhibit #4. Korstad noted that the 100% setback elevation is met and that the new drawing is less incompatible with the property owners wishes. Bradley asked if the Warren Town Board is aware of the change in location. Korstad stated no, but have property owner approval. Bradley inquired about area to be covered. Ramberg stated the area covered would be from Menomonie to St. Cloud. Filipiak asked how many towers there would be. Ramberg stated four towers total in St. Croix County. Bradly, asked how the tower at County Concrete would improve transmission. Korstad stated that multiple antennas can be put on a single tower. If there are multiple towers then the placement of those tower is a factor. Korstad stated that the Town Board had asked them to look at the James Schwalen, the water tower, Twin Lakes Park and the Hable properties as possible tower sites. Korstad then presented Exhibit #9, an analysis of the various sites. Ramberg noted that terrain plays a big factor in the signal transmission. Bradley inquired about erecting taller towers. Ramberg stated that you would lose frequency with a taller tower. Ramberg presented Exhibit #10, a diagram demonstrating coverage area from a tower located at the County Concrete facility and Exhibit #11, a diagram demonstrating coverage area from a tower located at the Hable property. Bradley asked if they intended to pursue the Hable property even though the Town is opposed. Korstad stated yes and they will address the screening and aesthetics issue. Korstad said they do not intend to build on both properties. The Hable property would be in the best interest of the County and the community because it would do a better job than the County Concrete site and would eliminate the need for another tower. Cowan stated that he has been involved in the planning of both of these sites and that they are sensitive to the concerns of neighbors. Bradley asked Cowan if he was at the Warren Town Board meeting. Cowan stated yes. Bradley asked Cowan if he thought the Hable site was superior and asked him to rate the two sites. Cowan said Hable was superior and rated County Concrete as a 3 and Hable as a 9. Ken Herink, Warren Town Chairman, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1057 110th Street, Roberts, Wisconsin. Herink stated that he was approached in June regarding the Jim Schwalen site. This was considered to be the perfect site to serve all the people of Warren. Since then the Town Board didn't like that as a gateway to the Town. Herink believes there will be multiple towers in the future and as part of the condition for approval of the County Concrete site, Warren is willing to accept more than one tower. Bradley noted that the Hable property was zoned Ag.-residential and that the Board had the authority to overrule. Neumann asked Herink why he didn't want APT to locate at the Hable property. Herink stated that private landowners object to it. Filipiak asked what the landowners were objecting to. Herink stated safety, health issues and the by-products given off. Korstad reviewed Exhibit #9 and the five different sites and the reasons for them not working out. Filipiak summarized that of the five sites Hable is the primary choice and County Concrete is secondary. Bruce Brantner, Emergency Communications Department, St. Croix County Government Center, being duly sworn, stated his address to be 1110 2nd Street, Menomonie, Wisconsin. Brantner presented information from the FCC and noted there are over 40 million cellular users and 22,000 cell sites. Brantner read the 1996 telecommunications act section 704 regarding rules and tower site placement and the conditions relating to same. Brantner stated that this is a technology that citizens want. Bradley inquired on the elevation between Hable and County Concrete. Ramberg stated 100' difference. Brantner noted that the County had to settle for a second site to accommodate the public safety system. He said communities may want to look at this tower issue at an economic vantage point. Korstad noted two issues they face today is that communities dislike towers because they are visible and the possible future technology of towers. Herink noted that they only want to approve one site to accommodate multiple towers. Ramberg stated that the Hable property was most optimal. Korstad note that the Schawlen site will not work. Bradley suggested postponement. Korstad objected to this idea and wants to see a resolution. Cowan stated that it is eminent that they have County Concrete by the first of next week. Brantner suggested utilization of existing towers. Bradley indicated that the Board would view the site and render a decision later this date. The Board recessed at 1:40 p.m. The Board reconvened and rendered the following decisions: DECISIONS Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources/Marty Engel The Board of Adjustment postponed this matter to a later date. Karen P. Lindstrom Motion by Bradley, second by Filipiak to deny applicant's request for a dog kennel. The following concerns were noted: The town of Hammond did not make a recommendation supporting this proposal; surrounding neighbors were opposed to this application; there was a lack of a good noise barrier; sanitation was not addressed which could create possible health concerns. The following vote to deny was taken: Filipiak, yes; Neumann, yes; Golz, yes; Jensen, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. DECISIONS CONT. Ralph Mondor/Gary Motto Motion by Neumann, second by Golz to approve applicant's request for a driveway separation variance from a town road. The following vote to approve was taken: Neumann, yes; Golz, yes; Filipiak, yes; Jensen, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. Brian & Roxanne Hable/American Portable Telecom Motion by Bradley, second by Filipiak to approve applicant's request for a telecommunications tower on the Brian and Roxanne Hable property in the Town of Warren. The following vote to approve was taken: Filipiak, yes; Jensen, yes; Golz, yes; Neumann, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. County Concrete Corporation/American Portable Telecom Motion by Filipiak, second by Bradley to deny applicant's request for a telecommunications tower on the County Concrete property in the Town of Warren. There was another site which was more viable because it would provide better service and be less conspicuous. The following vote to deny was taken: Filipiak, yes; Golz, yes; Neumann, yes; Jensen, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted: Art Jen n, Secretary I ~I I'