HomeMy WebLinkAbout022-1003-45-000 (2) ZONING ACTIVIT ORI{SHEET
Property ID#• - �S - �7 r_3 Parcel#: C' a /Ou 3 • C��'
Municipality:
Property Address:
Owner Name:
Other Interest:
Other Interest:
Activi ty: Special Exception riance - Rezonement
Request Date: f _ G�� Acres:
Zoning District: A2 AG
RES COM IND
P o A2 AG A/R RES COM IND
Overlay District: SHORELAND WETLAND FLOODPLAIN RIVERWAY NONE
Type of Variance/Special Exception:
Ordinance Citation:
Ordinance: ZONING SANITARY SUBDIVISION
Conditions
Decision: APPROVED DENIED WITHDRAWN
Date of Decision:
Notes:
Support Linked to Rezoning _Objections Hardship
Conditions
Parcel #: 022-1003-45-000 02/10/2014 10:58 AM
PAGE 1 OF 1
Alt. Parcel M 02.28.18.27B 022-TOWN OF KINNICKINNIC
Current ❑X ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN
Creation Date Historical Date Map# Sales Area Application# Permit# Permit Type #of Units
00 0
Tax Address: Owner(s): O=Current Owner, C=Current Co-Owner
LENARD W& DIANNE M KINDEM O-KINDEM, LENARD W& DIANNE M
1315CTYRDN
ROBERTS WI 54023
Property Address(es): '=Primary
Districts: SC= School SP=Special * 1315 CTY RD N
Type Dist# Description
SC 4893 SCH DIST RIVER FALLS
SP 0100 CHIP VALLEY VOTECH Notes:
Legal Description: Acres: 11.759
SEC 2 T28N R18W PT SW SW BEING LOT 1 OF
CSM 9/2659 11.759 ACRES(ADD-L HISTORY Parcel History:
809/320) EZ-UT-1405/289 EZ-UT-1413/411 Date Doc# Vol/Page Type
05/08/2003 720562 2234/336 WD
05/08/1997 559128 1238/012 WD
06/04/1996 544788 1182/268 TI
08/20/1993 504211 1029/219 WD
more
Plat: *=Primary Tract: (S-T-R 401/4 1601/.) Block/Condo Bldg:
2659-CSM 09-2659 022-1993 02-28N-18W SW SW LOT 01
2013 SUMMARY Bill M Fair Market Value: Assessed with:
261040 312,700
Valuations: Last Changed: 09/07/2010
Description Class Acres Land Improve Total State Reason
RESIDENTIAL G1 11.759 115,000 231,000 346,000 NO
Totals for 2013:
General Property 11.759 115,000 231,000 346,000
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Totals for 2012:
General Property 11.759 115,000 231,000 346,000
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Lottery Credit: Claim Count: 1 Certification Date: Batch M 132
Specials:
User Special Code Category Amount
Special Assessments Special Charges Delinquent Charges
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
C RO I X COUNTY
WISCONSIN
ZONING OFFICE
N N N• - ri ST. CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
- 1101 Carmichael Road
Hudson, WI 54016-7710
_ (715) 386-4680 Fax(715)386-4686
November 21, 2000 File Ref: 42-00
Rita Ronningen
1315 County Road N
Roberts, WI 54023
Re: Board of Adjustment Decision
Dear Ms. Ronningen:
The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has reviewed your application for a variance
to the minimum setback requirements of a Class C Highway and has approved your
application with conditions. The enclosed document is the formal decision regarding your
application.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact me.
Sincerely,
e Fisher
Zoning Director
dz
Enclosure
cc: Carole Hoopman, Clerk - Town of Kinnickinnic
0
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,AND DECISION
OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ST. CROIX COUNTY,WISCONSIN
Case: 42-00
Complete Application Received: October 16, 2000
Hearing Notice Publication: Weeks of October 30 and No
6, 2000
Hearing Date: November 16, 2000
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Having heard all the testimony, considered the entire record herein, and conducted an on-site
inspection, the Board finds the following facts:
1. The owner of the property is Rita Ronningen, whose address is 1315 County Road N,
Roberts, WI 54023.
2. The applicant on October 16, 2000 filed with the Zoning Office an application for a
variance to the minimum required setbacks from a Class C Highway. The variance is to
allow a newly constructed shed 75-feet from the road right-of-way of a Class C Highway.
The ordinance requires a 100-foot setback to the road right-of-way of a Class C Highway.
3. The applicant requested a 25-foot variance from the road right-of-way requirement due to
an extended right-of-way along the described property.
4. The Chairman for the Town of Kinnickinnic appeared at the public hearing and verbally
stated they have no objection to the application. The Town issued the building permit,
believing the location for the shed was accurate, and road centerline setbacks were met.
5. The Board finds that granting of the variance will not be contrary to the public interest as
expressed by the objectives of the ordinance.
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 variance on the following findings:
1. The Board viewed the site and due to the topography of the land, determined that this
would be the best location for the building. The Board further believes this to be a safe
location for the building, and would minimize erosion problems on the property.
2. The Board found that there is a steep slope on the property from the building down to
the Class C Highway that makes up the road right-of-way. The road right-of-way on the
curve within this property is unique and larger than the typical 66-foot right-of-way. It is
unlikely that if the road is ever widened, that it would encroach on the property, as there
is land to the north of the road that would be better suited to widen a road.
3. The St. Croix County Highway Department has reviewed and has no objection to the
request.
4. The Town of Kinnickinnic appeared at the hearing and recommended approval of the
request.
5. This 25-foot variance is not contrary to the public interest.
6. There was no opposition to the request.
7. The Board believes that by granting this variance, the spirit and in
of the ordinance
is being met.
The variance is approved on the following vote: King, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, no;
Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote.
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(l 0), 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, which is available
from Northwestern Court Reporters, Hudson, Wisconsin. 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
c
Signed
Ch ' erson
Attest
Zoning Administrator
Dated: 11/21/00
Filed: 11/21/00
i
2
�`r/✓\Yy
14&6?ate/
03144 ?, JAMES O'CONNELL 9
Register Of Oeods
St.C,rOM Co„W► 0
W/14 C O R. SEC. 2, T 28N, R Is W, CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP \•
N �
/C O U N T Y S U R V E Y O R'S MON.) NAMES DEAN FISK AND L r r l T Al l YII(]L-F=GM&3
Part of the Southwest 114 of the Southwest 114 of Section 2,
Township 28 North, Range 18 West, Town of Kinnickinnic,
a St. Croix County, Wisconsin.
K U_NPLATTED LANDS
N89.3/ 47"E /4. 07'
/
O Indicates 1" x '??" iron pipe weighing 1.13 lbs./lin. Ft. set.
o \ ,s11111111f//p
I 33 y ��1 W
4' : I� +++++`S1�sG.�NSA ''•,� 3
so' 1 \� LAUR NCE'
tu
!/ \ \ m W M P = 2 APPROVED
RIVE FALLS,./ 4Q
\ \\
00 LAND
L A N D Ss�.•'� x 3
c \ Laur�er��b/M,srl�urphy ° ( h -;T T. CROIX COUNTY
\ FENCE\ \ \ Registered Land Surveyor o e 'rpahwnsive Planning
G N Zoning and
I
X(F) O Parks Committee
\5O \ ` o
� � z
5 `O
Z. � N not recorded
b � \ \FQ W 3 tu tu within 30 days of
W In -N 0 / s m ? y approval date
b \— — "° ? \ q � ampreval shag be
I (
7 5 9%A C R E S \ �\ QS Q y Q r;-,df & void
O 3.1,22 6 SO, F ` }
Q o f 9 '�,\' Owners Address:
vl 9. 909 ACRE'S' EX'E ROAD
� a\ � ` � 1?79 C.T.H. .fN.,
Z 4 3 /, 653 S o. F r. Roberts, WI T-40?':'
!'hone No.- 71'=T4': �_��4.1
'9� �� b� • H� �C)
Dated: June 8, 1993 `°
\ \ (i Qom/
zThis instrument drafted by c 2�\ \
Laurence W. Murphy S 88.43 15 "w 11\
S O/116'45"E/00.001 .0 N�9�J4 \�f bt •15 Q�
539.22'
SW COR. SEC. 2, 7-28N, R18 W, S 88' 43' 15 "W 2656. 03'
(COUNTY SURVEYOR 'S MON.1 UNPL A TIED LANDS
SCALE / "= 200' S LINE SW //4
0 50' /00' 200' 300' 400' 500' 600' S 1 1 4 C OR. SEC . 2, T 28 N, R18 W,
/ COUN rY SURVEYOR'S MON. 1
CURVE DA TA
CURVE CHORD 8EAR/N6 CHORD D/ST ARC RADIUS CENT. AN /ST TAN, BEAR. 2N0 TAN. BEAR
/- ? S25158' 13 "E 616. 66 ' 637.5t, 7 716.20' 5/• 00' 00" S00.28'/3"E S51.28'/3"E
3-4 S55.50' /3"E /24. 64 ' /24.7 /8.5/' 08.44'00" S51,28'/3"E 560.12' 13-e
5.6 N34. 46'02"W 440. 43' 446.7366.20' 33.14 '22" N5/•28'/3 "W N/8.03'5/".W
Vol . 9 !'age 2659
Certified Survey Maps
St. Croix County, Wisconsin. SHEET 1 OF 2
C .
2 do 2 133HE; UTSUODSTM 'AqunoO xTO-43 -4S
sdeW AanJnS paT4TZJ93
6592 abed 6 •Ion
JOAan.�nS puel pa.4a�ST6aa
Dsi
Al
lb -c EldL t 0
. o M �++ �
Ni anv-1
. �•. „
go
sN O rJSN``���
11rsolls 1 •_4oa.,ay4 uo-[4e4ues9,.id9j goa,jj°o pue anj4 a a,ae UOT4dTJDSap
pue dew Sjg4 : e2H4 pue A4unoO xTo�O •:�S _4o saOUeuTp.aO ay4 pue saln4egs uTSUOOSTM
aye _40 bE•gE2 ,a94dey0 'spjooeJ TeTDT43O L44TM 90Uep.JODOe UT uoa,Iay UMOys SpueT ,8y4
papTnTp pue paAanjns aney I '6ue64TOM puelaal pue >jsT3 Ueso sewer 's.aaum0 eqq 40
UOT409JTp Aq geyq A4T!:�uao Aga,.lay op 'JOAeAjnS pue-1 pa„ia4sT693 'AHdinW •M eouaine1 'I
(aojaTd _4o ftunoO
(UTSUODS;TM 40 M4e!ZS
•80Tnpe
,404 201440 6UTUOL Aquno0 xTO..rg '4S ay4 goe4UOD laojed AUe 6UTdolan9p JO 6UTsey0.and
aJO�ag ( •D�a ' laoied oq ssaooe 'azTS 401 wnwTUTw 'spuel49M ' •a•T) suoTqelnBaa
pue salni 'smel A4un03 pue 94e4S off. 4oafgns sT dew STy4 UO UMOHS Tacued- yoe3
AHdjnW •M roue-met Aq pa44eip quawnalsuT STyl
E66T 19 sunr :pa4ep
•pjooaj _4o s4uawases
off. goargns 6UTaq OsTe pue sasodind 'M-0-U ,N„ 'H'1'0 J04 Teojed pTes 40 SUOT4JOd
AjjG4seay4.lON .nano 4U2wase9 o4 4Dargns 6uTaq 'sa,.toe 6SL'TT 6UTUTegUO0 'ONINNI929
AO 1NIOd ay4 04 '2 UOT403S pTes 4O b/1 482My:�noS ay4 40 aUTJ g4noS ayz uo ,22,6ES
M,,ST,Ebo88 S aOUay4 '• ,00'001 311SV191010 S 20UGH4 ! ,00'001 M„ST,EbOgg S aouay4 ` ,26'692
M,,02,bS 6g N a0uay� '. ,OT'E9T M„Lb,TEoBE S a°uay� :aUTjJS4U@0 pTes UO ' ,bg'b2T
-4o aoue46Tp eO3„ET,OS0SS S S.aeaq p.�OHD asoyM ' ,T5'919 40 snTpe.a a 6uTney '�seay�.aoN
ayq 04 GA20UOC anjno a uO AT„94seaygnoS 9OU2HZ '. ,09'SgZ 3 11ET,92OTS S aUT lJa:ua0
pTes uo anui4uoO a0u2y4 '.,,N„ 'H'1'0 _4o 2UTTJa4u90 ay4 uo ' ,99.919 �o aOUe�9. e
3„ET,85OS2 S s.�eaq p.�oyo asoyM ' ,02,91L _4o snTp2J a 6UTney '�se3 ay4 off. aneOU00 aAino
e uO ATia4sesg4noS souay4 : ,LO'bT 3„Lb,TEO69 N a0uay4 : ,gL•292T 4o a0ueqsTp a (2
UOT43aS pTes 40 VIT gsamg4noS ayq 40 aUTT :�saM aye. UO 6UTJeaq pownsse) M„95,920 00 N
aOUayq !pagTJOSap UTaJay aq oq laoied ay4 40 'ONINNIS39 30 1NIOd ay4 '2 UOT400S pTes
_4o .jaujoo 4saMygnoS aye. 4e SUTDUawwOO !sMOTT04 se pagTjosap �CTTn4 a,aow 'UTSUOOSTM
�
' quno0 xTo,�O •4S 'DTUUT>JDTUUT>{ 4O UMO1 '4SaM 81 a6UeS 'y4.40N 92 dTysUMO1 '2 UOT408S
40 b/T 4saMy4noS ay4 4o b/1 gsamH4noS ay4 UT pe4eool puel -4O lao.aed UTe4.aao 4e41,
:UOT4dTiosa0
.uTsuooScM IftunoO xTO.4J •4S 'DTUUT�jOTUUT}j _4O UMO1 '+saM gT
a6ued 'H4JON 92 dTysuMOl '2 UOT409S -4O b/T 4samg4nOS 2y4 -4O t7/T 4samg4noS ayz 4o 4,aed
SW9--[-M cNV-GM OW >6IA MM S3*r
c W AMUM 03IJI1S30
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING AND HEARING MINUTES
November 16, 2000
(This meeting was recorded by Northwestern Court Reporters)
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Julie Speer at 8:30 a.m. A roll call was
made. Julie Speer, Dick King, Nick Golz, Rich Peterson and Tom Rose were present.
Staff included: Steve Fisher, Zoning Director, Rod Eslinger, Zoning Specialist, and Deb
Zimmermann, Administrative Assistant . Chairperson Speer believes this to be a
properly noticed meeting.
Motion was made by Golz, second by King to adopt the agenda. Motion carried.
The Board set the next meeting date as December 21, 2000. 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 October 26th meeting. All
in favor. Motion carried.
CORPORATION COUNSEL REPORT/ UPDATE ON VIOLATIONS AND LITIGATION
Corporation Counsel will be available if needed.
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,
November 16, 2000 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. ARTICLE: Variance request to the setback requirements for a Class C
Yi hwa pursuant to Section 17.64(1)(c ) 2. Request is for a 25-
9
foot variance from the right-of-way setback line of a Class C
Highway. Variance is to allow a newly constructed outbuilding to
continue to be located within the right-of-way setback in the
Ag/Residential District.
APELLANT: Rita Ronningen
LOCATION: Located in part of the SW%of the SW'/4 of Section 2,T28N-R18W,
Town of Kinnickinnic
- ADDRESS: 1315 County Road N, Roberts, Wisconsin
2. ARTICLE: Special Exception request for a permit to construct a mechanical
lift on applicant's property to allow access to the St. Croix River
pursuant to Section 17.36(6)(a)4.
APELLANT: Daryl L. and Bonnie G. Zimmer
LOCATION: Located in Government Lot 4, Section 22,T30N-R20W, Town of
St. Joseph
ADDRESS: 1420 Hilltop Ridge, Houlton, Wisconsin
3. ARTICLE: Special Exception request to construct a 250-foot
Telecommunications Tower in the Agricultural District pursuant to
Section 17.84(2)(b).
APELLANT: Richard L. Beer/Phillippine U. Beer, Owners/APT Minneapolis,
Inc.,Agent
LOCATION: Located in part of the NE '/4 of the NW'/4, Section 2,T29N-R19W,
Town of St. Joseph
ADDRESS: 1150 County Road A, Hudson, Wisconsin.
4 ARTICLE: Special Exception request to construct a maintenance building
and salt storage for government use pursuant to Section
17.15(6)(u).
APPELLANT: St. Croix County Highway Department
LOCATION: Located in part of the SE '/of the SW%, Section 36, T31N-R19W,
Town of Somerset
ADDRESS: Site is located west of the Somerset Town Hall off of STH 64,
Somerset,Wisconsin
5. ARTICLE: Variance request to 100-foot property mining line setback to allow
continuous mining within the common property line between the
Olson gravel pit and the St. Croix County Highway Department
gravel pit(Casey property) pursuant to Ordinance No. 226(89)(F(d).
APPELLANT: Ralph & Marguerite Olson, Owner/American Materials, Agent
LOCATION: Location is along the west line of the E1/2 of the NW '/4 of Section
11, T31 N-R17W, Town of Stanton. The west line is the common
property line between the Olson and St. Croix County (Casey)
properties.
ADDRESS: Off of County Road H &T, 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: Rita Ronningen
Eslinger explained that this request is for a 25-foot variance to allow a structure to remain
within the road right-of-way setback. The ordinance requires a structure to be built 133-
feet from the centerline of a road or 100-feet from the road right-of-way. This instance is
unique, as the road right-of-way on this property is wider than normal, due to the curve in
the road. It was not noticed by the Town, and the Town of Kinnickinnic issued the
applicant a building permit to construct a new 30 by 50-foot shed in August of 1999.
Eslinger went over the staff report. This issue was brought to the attention of the zoning
office through a complaint that the shed was constructed within the 100-foot right-of-way
road setback.
The following exhibits were introduced:
Exhibit 1: Staff report with attachments
Exhibit 2: Copy of application and attachments
Exhibit 3: Copy of site plan
Exhibit 4: Copy of Certified Survey Map
Exhibit 5: Copy of a letter from the St. Croix County Highway Department stating no
objection to the variance request.
Exhibit 6: Copy of a map showing the location of the property.
Exhibit 7: Copy of building permit issued from the Town of Kinnickinnic.
Rita Ronningen, being duly sworn, is the owner of the property. She went over the history
of the construction of the building, stating that the whole building process took about eight
2
months. She stated Ave different eo le measured the distance from the road to the
P P
structure, and no on stated that there was a setback problem. Ronningen believes that
the erosion control is much better on the properly now, than before. There is a steep
hillside going down to the road, and that if this shed is to be moved, there would be trees
that would have to be removed. She stated that would cause more erosion control
problems, and would not want to see that. Ronningen further stated that by granting this
25-foot variance, it would not be contrary to the public interest. The Board reviewed the
Certified Survey Map with Ronningen.
Chuck Andrea, being duly sworn, is the Chairman for the Town of Kinnickinnic. He stated
that the Town did issue the building permit, and did not realize that there was a wider
setback at that part of the road. Andrea said that he believes if the road is ever widened, it
would go away from the applicant's property, as there is a steep slope on the side of the
road where the structure is located, and the other side of the road, to the north, is the
logical place to widen the road, if that ever happens. When the Town issued the building
permit, they believed that the structure met the 133-foot setback from the road. The Town
supports this variance application and asks the Board for a favorable decision.
The Board will visit the site.
Article Two: Daryl Zimmer
Eslinger explained to the Board that this application is for a mechanical lift on the St. Croix
River. Eslinger went over the staff report, explaining that there is already one lift on the
bluff face that is shared with a neighbor. The applicant would like to put in a second lift.
There are two options to consider with this request. The first option is to construct a lift
parallel with the lot line, to the a point near the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) with a
connecting walkway form the landing area to a concrete platform. The second option is to
remove the existing stairway to the river, and construct a lift in approximately the footprint
of the stairs.
Bob Heise, of the Land and Water Conservation Department, supports option two, in a
letter dated November 6, 2000. He would like to see an erosion control plan put in place
for this project.
Correspondence was received from the Minnesota/Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission
and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, supporting option two. Eslinger
went over special considerations listed on the staff report.
The Town of St. Joseph has written a letter dated November 6, 2000, supporting this
request.
The following exhibits were introduced:
Exhibit 1: Copy of staff report. -
Exhibit 2: Copy of application for special exception with narrative with pictures of
stairway.
Exhibit 3: Copy of site plan
Exhibit 4: Letter from the Land and Water Conservation Department
Exhibit 5: Engineering data and pictures of lift
Exhibit 6: Letter from the Minnesota/Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission
Exhibit 7: Letter from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Exhibit 8: Letter from the Town of St. Joseph
Daryl Zimmer, being duly sworn, is the owner of the property. He agrees that option two is
the best one. He has no problem with taking out the stairs. With option two, the lift will be
relatively inconspicuous.
3
• •
Eunice Post, being duly sworn, is with the Wisconsin DNR. The Board had a question on
the OHWM labeled on one of the maps as being 675-feet. Eslinger stated that this needs
to be established, as that number was the average pool height at the Army Corps of
Engineers monitoring site at Stillwater. A discussion was held. If the Board approves this
request, one of the conditions would be to submit a plat identifying the OHWM, as the 675-
feet may be incorrect.
The Board will visit the site.
Article Three: APT Minneapolis, Inc./Richard and Phillippine Beer
Fisher told the Board that this request is for a permit to construct a 250-foot lattice
telecommunications tower in the Town of St. Joseph. Fisher updated the Board on where
the site is located and went over the staff report. He stated that he has received a letter
from Jeff Nelson, the county tower consultant, stating that there is a reasonable, technical
basis showing the need for the tower. The consultant also supports the proposed height,
design and location of the tower.
The following exhibits were introduced:
Exhibit 1: Staff Report
Exhibit 2: Copy of Tower Special Exception Application.
Exhibit 3: September 14, 2000 correspondence from applicant's attorney explaining
justification of the request with attached plans.
Exhibit 4: October 2, 2000 letter from staff requesting clarifications/additional
information.
Exhibit 5: October 13, 2000 letter from attorney addressing issues raised in staff
letter.
Exhibit 6: November 6, 2000 letter form Town of St. Joseph requesting that the
county postpone a decision until the Town has had an opportunity to
review county consultants analysis of the request.
Exhibit 7: Letter from the Town of St. Joseph asking the Board to postpone a
decision until they have reviewed the opinion from Jeff Nelson.
Exhibit 8: Structural Analysis from Valmont
Exhibit 9: Letter from Jeff Nelson, W.M. Montgomery and Associates, stating his
opinion on the tower.
Fisher added that the opinion from Jeff Nelson was forwarded to the Town, via fax, on
Monday, November 13", for their review.
Greg Korstad, being duly sworn, is an attorney representing APT. He stated it is important
to them to follow all federal and local codes. This area needs coverage and believe the
Beer property is the best location. The proposed tower would be located at the
intersection of County Road A and E. A discussion was held on the height of the
proposed tower. Korstad stated that a 250-foot tower is needed for proper coverage. The
best design is the lattice tower as a monopole design is not feasible for the proposed
height. The lattice design allows for any changes in equipment much easier than the
lattice. On the engineering report from Valmont, the lattice tower is the one that is
suggested for APT to construct. It is designed to collapse upon itself if it fails. Korstad
explained that APT did look into using the existing power poles on the property, but they
are not tall enough and would not be able to handle the equipment that would be needed.
A discussion was held on the 221-foot setback. The Board asked if the location of the
tower could be moved to increase the setback from the power lines and the road. Korstad
answered that he would discuss with the landowner, but believes that would not be a
problem.
4
• •
There was a discussion held on screening around the base of the tower. Korstad stated
that if the Board feels screening is necessary, they would be willing to do that. Fisher
added that it is a requirement of the ordinance.
Pat Collins, being duly sworn, is the Chairperson for the Town of St. Joseph. He asked
the Board to hold off on a decision today until a recommendation is forwarded from the
Town of St. Joseph. The Town had some questions on height, design and location. A
discussion was held. It was noted that all of these questions are addressed in the letter
from Jeff Nelson. The Board asked if there were people at the Town meeting that were in
favor of the tower. Collins stated that there were people who spoke in favor.
Eunice Post, being previously sworn, representing the DNR, stated that she received
notice on behalf of the Willow River State Park, and forwarded the notice to the Park
officials. That notice was sent from the Zoning Office on October 19, 2000.
The Board will visit the site.
The Board recessed at 10:00 a.m. and reconvened at 10:15 a.m.
Article Four: St Croix County Highway Department
This request is to allow the St. Croix County Highway Department to locate a maintenance
storage building and salt storage facility on a property in the Town of Somerset. The
proposed facility would be similar to the one in Hudson off of Highway 12. This facility will
be replacing the one that is now in Houlton, as that building is located in the state right-of-
way and needs to be removed for the Highway 35/64-realignment project. The Town of
Somerset has no objection to this request.
The following exhibits were introduced:
Exhibit 1: Staff report
Exhibit 2: Application with narrative
Exhibit 3: Copy of site plan
Exhibit 4: Letter from the Town of Somerset
Steve Schofield, being duly sworn, is representing the Highway Department. He reiterated
that this maintenance facility is to replace the one now in Houlton, due to the State
Highway 35/64 project. The building will house trucks, graders, loaders, etc. A buffer will
be placed between the salt storage building and the west line of the property. They plan to
move in some pine trees onto the property. There is not a septic system in at this time,
but the property may be annexed into the city in the spring of this year, and they would be
able to then hook up to city water and sewer.
The Highway Department is in the process of getting approvals from the Department of
Commerce. They are within the setbacks from the property lines, but will move the salt
shed back another 15-feet to accommodate for the proposed buffer. They may also put
some trees around the front of the project, as well, to make it look a nicer. Golz asked
when they would be starting this project. Schofield stated that they have already started
the project.
The Board has already viewed this site.
Decision: Motion by Rose, second by Golz to approved this request based on the
following findings:
1) The Town of Somerset approves of the request.
5
•
2) The Highway Department is working with all appropriate agencies for permits
needed.
3) The new site is necessary, as they will be losing the Houlton site due to the State
Highway 35/64-realignment project.
4) The Board believes the facility serves a public need and is in the best interest of
the public.
5) The use is compatible with surrounding uses. There is a similar Town building
near this location.
6) There was no objection to the request.
7) The spirit and intent of the ordinance will be met by approving this request.
With the following conditions:
1) The applicant is to provide a tree planting plan for approval by the Zoning Office
for the west side (adjacent to salt storage shed) of the property per town
recommendation. There is also to be screening along the roadway on both sides
of the gate.
2) The applicant is to secure a sanitary permit before commencing construction for
the maintenance building.
3) The applicant is to secure all necessary building permits from the town before
commencing construction.
4) The setback for a Class B highway are 150 feet from the centerline or 100 feet
from the right-of-way, which ever is greater.
5) All security lighting shall be illuminated downward along the buildings.
6) Dust abatement practices shall be used to minimize when necessary.
7) The applicant shall have one (1)year from the issuance of the Special Exception
permit to act on the Special Exception Permit. Failure to commence business
operation in this timeframe shall result in the expiration of this Special Exception
permit. If the Special Exception permit expires, the applicant will be required to
secure a new Special Exception permit before commencing the business
operation.
8) Any minor change (or addition) in expansion of the project, including the
business, signage, lighting, hours of operation, shall require review and approval
by the zoning administrator. Any major change and/or addition to the originally
a pp roved plan will go through the special exception approval process, where
applicable, as stated in the ordinance.
pp ,
The following vote was taken to approve: King, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes;
Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried.
Article 5: American Materials
Fisher explained that the Board ranted a permit to American Materials for non-metallic
p 9 p
mining last month, and this request today is for the second part of that application. St.
Croix County operates a gravel pit on land that joins this property. The Board gave a
waiver to the 100' setback from a property line to St. Croix County, and American
Materials is asking for that same waiver. The intent behind this is to allow continuous
mining between the two properties to make use of as much material as is possible, and
to facilitate a better reclamation plan. The west line of the property is the common line.
Fisher stated that the Zoning office supports this request from American Materials.
Decision: Motion by Golz, second by Rose to approve the variance request to waive
I
the 100 foot property mining setback between property lines based on the following
findings:
I
6
• i
1) The property line is located between the Olson and St. Croix County (formerly
Casey) properties. This variance will allow mining through this "common"
property line.
2) This variance provides for improved reclamation for"both" properties. Applicant
has stated that they will work with the DNR Prairie Restoration Program.
3) The Town of Stanton approves of the request.
4) There is no objection from surrounding landowners.
5) The spirit and intent of the ordinance will be met.
With the following conditions:
1) Applicant is granted a variance to waive the 100-foot property line setback
requirement and allow mining in-between the common property lines of County
(former Casey) and Olson. This variance includes the west line of the east%of
the NW%T 31 N, R17W, Section 11 Town of Stanton.
2) Applicant must maintain a 100-foot setback from all property lines and road right-
of-ways excepting as stated elsewhere.
3) Any change to the above conditions shall require a new public hearing.
4) Any change (or addition) in use, or expansion of the non-metallic mining project
shall require review and approval by the zoning administrator and in some
circumstances through the Special Exception approval process, where
applicable, as stated in the ordinance.
5) Failure to comply with the above conditions shall result in revocation of the
Special Exception Permit.
The following vote was taken to approve: King, yes; Golz, yes; Rose, yes; Chairperson
Speer, yes. Peterson abstained. Motion carried.
The Board recessed at 10:40 a.m. to view the sites.
Decisions
The Board reconvened at 12:20 p.m. to render the remaining Decisions.
Article One: Rita Ronningen
A motion was made by Peterson, second by King to approve the applicant's request for a
variance on the following findings:
1) The Board viewed the site and due to the topography of the land, determined
that this would be the best location for the building. The Board further believes
this to be a safe location for the building, and would minimize erosion problems
on the property.
2) The Board found that there is a steep slope on the property from the building
down to the Class C Highway that makes up the road right-of-way. The road
right-of-way on the curve within this property is unique and larger than the
typical 66-foot right-of-way. It is unlikely that if the road is ever widened, that it
would encroach on the property, as there is land to the north of the road that
would be better suited to widen a road.
3) The St. Croix County Highway Department has reviewed and has no objection
to the request.
4) The Town of Kinnickinnic appeared at the hearing and recommended approval
of the request.
5) This 25-foot variance is not contrary to the public interest.
6) There was no opposition to the request.
7) The Board believes that by granting this variance, the spirit and intent of the
ordinance is being met.
7
The variance is approved on the following vote: King, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes; Rose,
no; Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote.
Article Two: Daryl Zimmer
Motion by Golz, second by Speer to approve the request for a mechanical lift on the St.
Croix River. The Board reviewed two options, and made the decision to approve option
two based on the following findings:
1) The Board found that by installing the lift, and removing the existing stairway, there
would be an improvement to the property, as the lift would be less obtrusive than
the stairway currently is.
2) The lift would minimize the disturbance of the bluff and the natural vegetation.
3) The plans for the lift have been designed by a professional engineer.
4) The lift is a conditionally permitted activity.
5) The installation of a lift would allow reasonable access to the river for the property
owner.
6) The proposed lift will be shared with neighboring property owners.
7) There were no objections to the request.
8) The use is compatible with surrounding properties.
9) The Town of St. Joseph supports the request.
10) The Board believes that by granting this permit, the spirit and intent of the
ordinance will be met.
With the following conditions:
1) The applicant shall submit a plat identifying the OHWM pursuant to section 17.36
(6) (b) 1.
2) The applicant shall comply with the provisions of 17.36 (5)(i) lifts.
3) No reflective glass to be on the lift.
4) The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan before commencing construction.
5) The applicant shall submit a planting plan depicting how the site will be re-
established with vegetation.
6) Comply with all DNR and Army Corps of Engineers requirements and obtain any
permits necessary.
7) The applicant shall have one (1)year from the issuance of the Special Exception
permit to commence construction. If the Special Exception permit expires,the
applicant will be required to secure a new Special Exception permit before the
mechanical lift can be constructed.
8) Any minor change (or addition) in expansion of the project, shall require review
and approval by the Zoning Director. Any major change and/or addition to the
originally approved plan will go through the special exception approval process,
where applicable, as stated in the ordinance.
The following vote was taken to approve: King, yes; Rose, yes; Peterson, yes; Golz, yes;
Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried.
Article Three: APT Minneapolis, Inc/ Richard and Phillippine Beer
Motion by Rose, second by Peterson to table the request. A vote was taken to table,
with 2 voting for, 3 voting against. Motion failed due to a 2-3 vote.
Motion by Golz, second by King to approve the request for a permit to construct a
telecommunications tower based on the following findings:
1) The Board found that the tower consultant for St. Croix County recommends
approval of the tower, based on his research of the project.
8
• 0
2) The use is compatible with the surrounding property. There are other existing
power poles in the area.
3) The construction of the tower would serve a public need for service in that area.
4) The applicant has been working with all appropriate agencies to secure proper
permits for the project.
5) There were no objections by surrounding landowners.
6) The Board believes that by granting this permit, the spirit and intent of the
ordinance would be met.
With the following conditions:
1) A building permit must be obtained from the Town of St. Joseph prior to
construction.
2) Tower to be constructed according to the plans submitted. Applicant to follow all
written stipulations noted in their application.
3) The Zoning Office is to be notified at the start and the finish of the project.
4) Project to meet all requirements of the Wireless Communications Facilities
Ordinance (attached).
5) All FAA and FCC approvals/permits are to be obtained
6) Applicant to agree to allow collocation of 3 competitors on tower at market rate
consistent with 17.86 (3).
7) The color of the tower is to be galvanized steel.
8) The tower must be removed, and site restored within 12 months of cessation of
operation or use (consistent with 17.83 (6)).
9) Applicant to submit a detailed screening plan consistent with 17.86 (4), of the
Wireless Communication Facilities Ordinance,
10) Applicant to submit proof,with scaled site plan and setback distances noted that
they comply with Setbacks and Separation requirements set by the Board.
Towers must be setback a minimum of 250-feet from the power lines and a
minimum of 250-feet from the town road. A new site plan must be submitted to
verify that this condition is met.
11) Any change (or addition) in use, or expansion of the project shall require review
and approval by the zoning administrator and in some circumstances through the
Special Exception approval process, where applicable, as stated in the
ordinance.
12) Failure to comply with the above conditions shall result in revocation of the
Special Exception Permit.
13) The applicant shall have one (1)year from the issuance of the Special Exception
permit to finish the project. Failure to start the project in this timeframe shall
result in the expiration of this Special Exception permit. If the Special Exception
permit expires, the applicant will be required to secure a new Special Exception
permit before starting or completing construction on the project.
The following vote was taken to approve: Peterson, yes; Rose, no; King, yes; Golz, yes;
Chairperson Speer, yes. Motion carried on a 4-1 vote.
The Board will look at the Vang request and the Morrow request, that were previously
tabled, at the meeting in December. The Board will set a date in January when a
decision will be made on these two applications. The staff will notify the applicants.
9
• 0
A motion was made by Golz, second by King to adjourn at 1:15 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried.
Res tfully submitted:
c
R' h Peterson, Secretary Debbie Zimmerm , Recording Secretary
I
10
0
BUILDING PERMIT
FOR: ( ) DATE S'
t ( ) Subdivision of Land approval
Non-conforming permit PERMIT 1
A, { } Variance permit
Reclassification of Zoning , permit
Other .
if ' ? omm e n t s �¢ �C {�,Ld CA,54Y C.{1
i
GO�N,jrtrr -
? ,,
A P P j.,,I"t A"NT- SIiAME (,�� fast
HdM'EADDRE ��LL �� ��rr
- RIS C V !y. ?064fS WI PHONE 42-V SU
BUSINESS ADDRESS J%p a, T(Url tA. . ISPHONE
Agent ' s Name
Agent ' s Address Phone
TYPE OF BUILDING PERMIT REOUESTED
{ ) HOME FARM OUTBUILDING
( } COMMERCIAL BLDG . ( ) ACCESSORY BLDG.
{ INDUSTRIAL BLDG. ( ) TRAILER HOME
( ) SEASONAL DWELLING ( } BASEMENT HOME
( } REMODELLING ' { ) OTHER
LOCATION OF LAND - DESCRIPTION
Section Township Range
Quarter Road Abutting
SIZE b VALUE OF BUILDING
27 x ! $ 15f, 60�
Comments -
DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION UNDER PRESENT ZONING ORDINANCE—AS AMENDED
FResidential Industrial
( ) Agricultural ( ) Lake - Stream
( ) Commercial ( ) Manufacturing
Comments
Above is a true present ion of the facts , to the best of my knowledge .
INITIALS (OWNER) 14J440h (AGENT)
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
EXCEPTION NOTE
Set Back : 133 feet from center of road or 100 feet from right-of-way,
( whi'chever is greater )
LOT AND BUILDING LOCATION
DRAM DIAGRAM of Lot, Building, Accessory Building, Roads and
Parking Area on an 1111x 811 paper. Show Highway set-back and
identify highway.
DIMENSION OF LOT
Front______FT. , Rear Ft. , Left side Ft. , Right
Side FT.
Approved ( ) Non-Conforming ( )
Approximate Area Square Feet.
Comments: d
LOCATION OF BUILDING ON LOT
Yard around home or main building:
Front______Ft. , Rear._____Ft. . Left side Ft. , Right
Side Ft.
Approved ( ) Non-Conforming ( )
Comments:
YARD DISTANCE OF ACCESSORY BUILDING
From Main Building Ft. , From Side Lot Lint-LO—Ft.
From Rear Lot LinelFt.
Approved ( ) Nan-Conforming ( )
Comments
Above is a true presentation of the facts: '
Initials: owner: Agent:
Zoning Administrator:
Exceptions Noted: ( ) None
( ) Yes
If yes, please explain:
1
! � I � � 1 � ail . .._ ►! � ,....
LA i �Q
N
1
-
�
i ► I C--3.N
I I 1
I ,
I I
i
l I
I I,
t I I! jl i
Ii �► � I I S_.
I
C3
f I I