Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout040-1146-10-000 STATE OF WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE JAMES E.DOYLE 123 West Washington Avenue ATTORNEY GENERAL P.O.Box 7857 Madison,WI 53707-7857 Patricia J.Gorence Deputy Attorney General Lon-aim Q Assistant AManwy Genwal April 23, 1993 6061" "° " FAX 608W-2M Richard A. and Mary E. Marzolf 1092 Fairmount Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 Pe: State v. St. Croix County Board of Adjustment Dear Richard and Mary Marzolf: I am in receipt of your letters dated April 6 and 8, 1993, and of the accompanying information you have sent me. I am in the process of evaluating all of the information I have received, both what you sent me as well as the record which has been filed by the county. I expect - to make a decision shortly as to whether settlement may be possible, as you requested. You stated in your letter that you are open to meeting with me if I wish. It appears that the written information I have received is rather complete; however, if you feel there is more that you would like to add in person, I am open to hearing that. So, I will leave the decision as to a meeting up to you. If you have more to add which you feel should be done in a meeting rather than by letter, please let me know and I will make arrangements to travel to St. Croix County as soon as possible. Sincerely, Lorraine C. Stoltzfus Assistant Attorney General LCS:bhs cc: Greg Timmerman . 9� l0� ,.. cif tD 2cp���f `yam .� April 8, 1993 S � Lorraine C. Stoltzfus, Assistant Attorney General State of Wisconsin, Department of Justice 123 West Washington Avenue P.O. Box 7857 Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7857 Dear Ms. Stoltzfus: The purpose of this letter is twofold. It is our understanding that our file was sent to you last month by the St. Croix County Zoning Office. Therefore, we wish to thank you for the time you have spent in reviewing our case to date. Secondly, we respectfully ask that you bring this case to a settlement as soon as possible. A summary of our case, along with copies of some related documehts accompany this letter of transmittal. If you would like more information, or if you wish to meet with us in per- son, please let us know and we will make arrangements. As you can see, this case represents a great deal of time, work and expense. We are most anxious to bring closure to it and to move on to what we hope will be the more enjoyable part of our efforts, namely building our homes on our St. Croix River lots. In spite of our efforts to deal with this case in a straight-forward manner, we have encountered many disappoint- ments and set backs. Nonetheless, we continue to draw some of our strength to persevere from persons who believe we can and should receive a favorable decision. Among these people are Tom Nelson (St. Croix County Zoning Administrator) , Greg Tim- merman (St. Croix County Corporation Counsel) , the Troy Town Board, and the St. Croix County Board of Adjustments. We are hopeful that you will agree, also, and provide us with a decision in our favor. The main objection to our request seems to be that our homes would be visible from the St. Croix River due to the lack of 'trees between the project area and the river. Although that issue is debatable, we have nonetheless addressed it squarely by consulting with Cathy Nelson, St. Croix County Forester (Baldwin, Wisconsin) , and by developing a comprehensive screening plan that is consistent with her recommendations. The implementation of that plan necessitates the planting of several rows of fast-growing trees on our property. With the most ideal tree planting season almost upon us, we wish to be ready to take full advantage of this window of opportunity for planting this spring. Furthermore, clean, uncontaminated fill (which we will need in order to raise our building sites up out of the flood plain) is going to be available from excavations planned by two adjacent land owners within several weeks. That fill would be not only ecologically favorable, but economically opportune as well. As for the Marzolfs, other factors prompt us to ask for your help in settling our case at this time. We are almost sixty years old and wish to retire soon. our dream is to become permanent residents in the St. Croix Valley and to live on land that has been in our family for over half a century. My husband and I are both teachers. We will be free this summer, and we would be able to be on the building site in question, in order to supervise the construction of our home during the months of June, July and August. In addition, both the Marzolfs and the Muellers wish to take advantage of the low interest rates which are available on construction loans at this time. We are also fearful that the rapidly rising cost of lumber may put the homes we have de- signed out of our financial reach, unless they can be built in the near future. Ms. Stoltzfus, on behalf of my husband and the Mueller family, thank you sincerely for taking time to read this cover letter. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Yours truly, Mary E. Marzolf mem i • I April 6, 1993 I Lorrai a C. Stoltzfus, Assistant Attorney General State f Wisconsin, Department of Justice 123 We t Washington Avenue P.O. B x 7857 Madiso , Wisconsin 53707-7857 t I Dear Mic Stoltzfus: Enclosi d please find copies of those documents which we thought would be mosl helpful to you as you assess the case which is now before you concerning our property on the St. Croix River. These documents have been arranged chronologically, and conclude with a recent letter writ- ten to Mr. David Kluesner, Policy Advisor to Governor Thompson. In ord r that it will give you some idea of the overall picture, I am providi ng the following time-line summary of what has transpired. 1. 1941 -- My parents, George and Ella Marzolf, purchased approximately 400 acres of Wisconsin farmland, just south of Hudson. This land included roughly one-half a mile of frontage along the Wisconsin shore of the St. Croix River. I worked on this farm during the summers from 1941 to 1950. 2. 1950 -- My parents sold this farmland, but they retained approximately 68 acres of St. Croix River frontage [most of the one-half mile referred to above] . 3. 1957 -- My parents built a winterized home on a portion of the riverfront acreage which they retained. 4. 11968 -- Parcels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 were surveyed and platted. With the exception of parcel 4, these lots were subsequently deeded to my siblings and me by our parents, George and Ella Marzolf, in the fall of that year. At the same time, my parents also conveyed to each of their six sur- viving children a one-sixth interest in their river- front home and in the remaining acreage contiguous I with it. 5. 1972 -- Federal legislation [NR 118] was passed, designating the Lower St. Croix River as a protected scenic riverway. I I 6. 1990 -- Following my mother's and father's deaths in 1980 and in 1990 respectively, the decision was made by my five surviving siblings and myself to sell the St. Croix River home which had originally been built by my parents. The property was sold in June of that year to Douglas and Ann McMillan. According to the listing realtor's activity report, the McMillans were informed that the three lots to the north of my parents' former home ". . . could never be built upon per DNR regulations." This information, however, had never been previously substantiated by a test case [please see paragraph 7, below] . It now appears that the McMillans are very upset with the prospect that the lots adjacent to their own might be developed by f those of us who own them. 7. 1991 -- The Troy Town Board approved my brother, Bill's, request for permission to build a seasonal cabin on his lot [parcel 5 on enclosed sketch] . The Town Board's approval was forwarded to the St. Croix County Zoning office, and the application was placed on the Board of Adjustments' agenda for its May, 1991, meeting. At that meeting, the Board of Adjustments inquired of myself and of Dick Mueller as to whether or not we also had intentions of building on our lots [lots 6 & 7, respectively] . When we each responded in the affirmative, some discussion followed among the members of the Board, and my brother's ap- plication for a building permit was subsequently tabled. My brother, Dick Mueller and I were then asked to develop a "Master Plan" reflecting all three building projects. This was done, and the plan was submitted to the Board of Adjustments at its August, 1992, meeting. S. 1992 -- The Troy Town Board granted conditional approval to Richard and Mary Marzolf's and to Dick Mueller's ap- plication for permission to fill and grade; the Town Board then forwarded its recommendation to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustments. The two conditions contingent upon which the Town Board's approval was granted were immediately complied with [the easement road which provides access to lots 5, 6 and 7 was restored; overhanging tree limbs were pruned so as not to interfere with the ingress and egress of emergency vehicles] . My brother, Bill's, Application to build as well as the Richard and Mary Marzolf and the Dick Mueller application to fill and grade were presented to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustments at its hearing on August 27, 1992. Out of consideration for the b objections voiced by Doug M cMillan and y his at- torney at that meeting, the Board of Adjustments tabled the issue, and a motion was made and seconded for it to be continued at the Board's September 24, 1992, meeting. The St. Croix County Board of Adjustments reconvened on September 24, 1992, and the permits referred to above were once again on the agenda. At this meet- ing, Dan Koich [Water Management Specialist, Wis- consin DNR, Eau Claire] spoke pointedly in opposition to our plan, in spite of having previously endorsed it. The Board of Adjustments apparently believed that Mr. Koich's argument was unreasonable, because on October 14, 1992, all three [3] applications [Bill Marzolf's, Richard Marzolf's and Dick Mueller's] were approved. However, in its summons dated November 12, 1992, the Department of Justice of the State of Wisconsin, in a document sent to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustments, ordered the Board of Adjustments to rescind the approvals which had been given to ourselves and to Dick Mueller. In the December, 1992, it was suggested by Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator for St. Croix County, that we [ourselves and Dick Mueller] submit to the Zoning Office and to the DNR in Eau Claire a set of renderings that would illustrate both the existing trees and those which we would plant. The purpose of this vegetation would be to screen the Marzolf/Mueller project areas from the riverway. 9. 1993 -- On January 25, 1992, two sets of this vegetative screening plan were hand carried by my spouse, Mary, and me to me to Tom Nelson. He, in turn, forwarded the second set to Dan Koich in Eau Claire. As I have indicated in paragraphs 3 and 4 of my [January 28, 1993] letter to David Kluesner, Doug McMillan was the only person present at the August, 1992, Board of Adjustments meeting who raised any opposition to our "Master Plan." Kindly refer to that letter. Doug McMillan spoke in a very vindictive manner at that meeting, and his objections to our "Master Plan" were neither truthful nor substantive. Instead, his remarks bordered on being libelous. i . Il t i For manly reasons, Ms. Stoltzfus, my wife [Mary] and I, along with the Muellei s, are most anxious to have this issue become resolved: 1. The property has been in my family for over 52 years; 2. The parcel of land we were given by my parents was platted and deeded to us well in advance of the enact- ment of NR 118, and it is therefore a pre-existing parcel; 3. Should we be prevented from doing what is legally provided for by the statutes in NR 118, it would seem that this will constitute an unlawful "taking" of land from a land owner; 4. We are close to retirement, and look forward to becoming members of the community in which we have been spending our family vacations for the past 36 years; 5. �We have already invested a substantial sum of money in legal fees; surveyor, sanitary waste and soil testing fees; Itopographic mapping expenses; land appraisal and land acqui- sition fees; and court costs in our quest for being given ,permission to fill, grade, and then build; 6. !Mortgage loans in the metropolitan Twin Cities area are at la 20 year low. We would like to take advantage of this opportunity to obtain a mortgage we can afford to pay off on a fixed income; 7. Spring is the optimal season in which to plant those trees which will screen our project area, thus preventing its being from being viewed from the St. Croix River. We are sincere and eager in our intent to comply with the recommendation of the St. Croix County Board of Adjustments by planting the species of trees recommended by the St. Croix County Forestry Office, Baldwin, Wisconsin. 8. Throughout the process of applying for permission to fill, din hopes of then building on our land, we have worked honestly land with integrity in attempting to comply with the requests and recommendations of the various agencies with whom we have been cooperating. If there is any way in which you can be of help to us, Ms. Stoltzfus, we wou d be most grateful. Should you need additional information, or if you wish to speak with us, please call collect [HOME: (612) 224-8896; WORK: (612) 454-6477] . Respectfully and appreciatively, li Richard A. and Mary E. Marzolf 1092 Fairmount Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 ram I Enclos res I I i i �S Gc,�e diSucSSeoC z�ao� � �Le�e, ass any Sed bur l d iLi C 0) - ,e_ 'o rapter� 3 c� Gwc d- ,57'rw e:t z"G�G.f- 7Z�-e- 7Zr.�� /,- c�Cs S-747 7V G fine, dw 01 5cep iG yr WA k) d,j,x.a�Ce h Q , rte oC t Gt'•' r'u-�7� PL lr' Z`�� r'�vc Cis re •�e oC- � tk�l ro se oL i 5 ill- advise aC_ a 6e,5 f- i e 511'90'kL YD�'d GZ`' �,� ✓GZ��L� 1�1�7`�'<<vC �eSO-lw�- ���`� V � 9 CO oti 3i3 G�eSt�re SO o �i dsoh, GJ T rya�� fc I�-,-!,o-,Obo r Z w � V i ST. CROIX CO. 'ZONING OFFICE 911 4th St. Hudson, WI (715) 386-4680 APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION NO: FEE: $150.00 DATE_ July 6, 1992 APPLICANT OR AGENT:_ Richard A. and Mary E. Marzolf ADDRESS: 1092 Fairmount Ave., St. Paul, MN 55105 HONE: 612) 224-8896 OWNER: Richard A. and Mary E Marzolf ADDRESS: 1092 Fairmount Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT, 6 SUBDIVISION: Government Lots 1 & 2 1/4 , 1/4 , Sec. 13 , T 28 N, R 20 W, Town of Troy Government Lots 1 & 2 PARCEL NO: 6 (six) VARIANCE SPECIAL EXCEPTION X This property is currently used for recreation and has been used continuously since the year 1940; lot, itself, was matt ed & deeded on Spilt. 24, 1971 SPECIAL EXCEPTION NOTE: Special p exception use permits are granted in the discretion of the Board of Adjustment Committee . They are made available to validate uses which, while not approved within the zoning district in question, are deemed to be compatible with approved uses and/or not found to be hazardous , harmful , offensive or otherwise adverse to other uses , subject to review by the circumstances and the imposition of conditions, subject to the provisions of the St. Croix County Zoning ordinance. If it is your belief that a special exception use permit should be granted to you for the above-described property, please set forth, in detail, the intended use of the property and your justification in applying for such a permit: Our intended use of this property is that of building a retirement home and then becoming resident members of this community. Because the building site is in the flood plain, it will be necessary for us to raise the elevation of a portion of +6e 1 site, whose slope is less than 12%, to a new elevation of 694.0 feet above mean sea level, in accordance with the stipulations found in NR 118.05 (2) and t NR 118.06 (12) & (14). It is our intent to do this in a manner that is consistent with current standards for soil stabilization and the prevention of subsequent erosion. The fill which we intend to use shall be clean and uncontaminated, and shall meet with the approval of local zoning administrators. Use shall be made Of silt fencing in order to provide a sediment barrier until the topsoil of the fill has become overgrown with the types of native vegetation recommended in the University of Wisconsin publication titled Shoreline Landscape Plants, published by the Waupaca County Extension Office. Please see NOTE found on pgs. 2, 3, &4 of VARIANCE the cross-sectional views which accompany this application. NOTE: Variances from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be applied for- only where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the Ordinance will result in an "unnecessary hardship" which is defined, in the Zoning Ordinance as meaning "an unusual or extreme decrease in the adaptability of the property to the uses permitted by the zoning district, which is caused by facts, such as rough terrain or good soil conditions, uniquely applicable to the particular piece of property as , distinguished from those applicable to most or all property in ' the same zoning district" . If you believe that under the facts and circumstances unique to your property a variance could be granted to you, under the definition cited above, please set for both the type of variance which you are requesting and the reasons that you have for making the request. The section below is to be completed by the Zoning Office. A variance/Special Exception use permit is requested as authorized by Section OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES: THE APPLICANT, AS WITNESSED BY IIIS SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE HAS READ AND THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THE FOLLOWING: 1 . Go to Township for approval and have Township send letter to the Zoning Office stating their position on your request. 2 . Applicants must submit a site plan showing distances from property lines ; roads, and/or water. 3 . Applicants are to submit a list of adjoining property owners including those directly across the road and their addresses. 2 V 4 . Applicants will be heard by the Board of Adjustment committee. After a public hearing on the application, at which time testimony and arguments will be received, the Committee will adjourn to view the sites in question after which time they will reconvene to render decisions. However, the applicant should not consider the decision to be final until written notice of the decision has been presented to him. 5 . At the public hearing the applicant may appear in person or through an agent or an attorney of his choice . The applicant/agent/attorney may present testimony and evidence and arguments in support of his application. 6 . The fact that an application for a permit has been filed does not * automatically mean that a permit is granted. If you are uncertain as to how to present your case you may want to consider the advise of legal counsel. 7. The fee assessed for this application is nonrefundable. S . All site plans, pictures, and etc. become property of the Zoning Office and .will remain in your file. 9 . Statements of representatives of the Board of Adjustment made to you concerning matters of whether the Committee cans will, or will not grant the permits you seek are understood to constitute the opinions of those representatives. Staff are not empowered to act on behalf or instead of the Board of Adjustment Committee. 10. Applications must be returned to the Zoning Office by the end of the month prior to the month of the next regular meeting. Board of Adjustment meetings are held the fourth Thursday of every month. Any assistance in the filling out of this application will be provided you by a representative of the St. Croix County Zoning Office at your request. DATE: July 6, 1992 SIGNED• �. y�� � . �/j�J Applicant/Agent L C �T Owner 8/90 cj 3 (4 . ) The project is described in the permit and plans. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant variance permits as per 17.36(5) (c)2 and 17.70(6) (c) of the ordinance, to the setback requirements for pre-existing parcels only where the applicant has proven that a hardship exists. The Board of Adjustment also has the authority to grant special exceptions as per 17.70(7) of the ordinance. DECISION Based on the finding of fact and conclusions of law, the application of Richard & Mary Marzolf for a variance permit is conditionally approved with the following conditions: 1. Stake the site showing the fill and buildable area as defined on the map; 2. Establish the fill area elevation and building elevation to a permanent bench mark; 3. Develop a stabilization plan for the fill area (seeding & mulching & silt fence) and time table as to when this will be done; 4. Develop a screening plan for planting trees. The basis of this decision is to permit the structures so they are visually inconspicuous to the river. The plan should be developed so that there is a density of trees of at least f ive (5) rows deep within a thirty (30) foot screening area. This should utilize existing trees and trees to be planted. Planted trees should be of a size and species that will provide rapid growth for rapid screening; 5. Prior to issuance of the sanitary permit and building permit complete building plans must be submitted for review so as to chick for compliancy. These plans should include the final site plan. These plans will then become part of the permanent file. 6. Color of house will be approved by providing a paint chip to the Zoning Administrator for approval prior to painting or staining; 7. All the above requirements are to be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and in some cases the Land Conservation Office prior to implementation. NAME YES/NO Voting: John Bradlely yes Bernard Kinney yes George Menter yes Robert Stephens yes Jerome Neuman no COPY" BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN The Application of: DECISION Richard G. Mueller File No. 59-92 A hearing was held in the above referenced matter on Aug. 27, 1992 before the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment, Chairperson Bernard Kinney and members, George Sinclear, Robert Stephens, John Bradley, and George Menter. The applicant, Richard Mueller, whose address is 612 Hickory Lane, Hudson, WI 54016 requests a variance permit pursuant to section 17. 36(5)1 of the St. Croix County zoning ordinance for the following described parcel of land, which applicant owns located in Gov't Lots 1 & 2, Section 13, T28N-R20W, Town of Troy, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. The applicant proposes to place fill in the floodplain to a level of one (1) feet above the floodplain elevation. This filled area will then be constructed upon so that the residence is one (1) foot above the filled area (two (2) feet above the floodplain) and at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the filled area. The structure will be less than one hundred (100) feet from the ordinary high water mark and immediately adjacent to the private road easement. The undue hardship applicant claims as a basis for the variance is the parcel that is in question is a parcel that was created prior to the effective date of the ordinance as a buildable lot. Due to the elevation of the property in relationship to the floodplain and the fact the property cannot meet the setbacks, a reasonable structure cannot be sited on the property. FINDINGS OF FACT (1. ) Single family residences are permitted uses in the Riverway District. (2. ) The lot in question was created prior to the effective date of the ordinance. (3. ) The ordinance requires the residential structures to be two (2) feet above the floodplain elevation and two hundred (200) feet setback from the ordinary high water mark. (4. ) The project is described in the permit and plans. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant variance permits as per 17.36(5) (c)2 and 17.70(6) (c) of the ordinance, to the setback requirements for pre-existing parcels only where the applicant has proven that a hardship exists. The Board of Adjustment also has the authority to grant special exceptions as per 17.70(7) of the ordinance. DECISION Based on the finding of fact and conclusions of law, the application of Richard Mueller for a variance permit is conditionally approved with the following conditions: 1. Stake the site showing the fill and buildable area as defined on the map; 2. Establish the fill area elevation and building elevation to a permanent bench mark; 3 . Develop a stabilization plan for the fill area (seeding & mulching & silt fence) and time table as to when this will be done; 4. Develop a screening plan for planting trees. The basis of this decision is to permit the structures so they are visually inconspicuous to the river. The plan should be developed so that there is a density of trees of at least five (5) rows deep within a thirty (30) foot screening area. This should utilize existing trees and trees to be planted. Planted trees should be of a size and species that will provide rapid growth for rapid screening; 5. Prior to issuance of the sanitary permit and building permit complete building plans must be submitted for review so as to chick for compliancy. These plans should include the final site plan. These plans will then become part of the permanent file. 6. Color of house will be approved by providing a paint chip to the Zoning Administrator for approval prior to painting or staining; 7. All the above requirements are to be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and in some cases the Land Conservation Office prior to implementation. NAME YES/NO voting: John Bradlely no Bernard Kinney yes George Menter yes Robert Stephens yes Jerome Neuman no This decision expires after one year from the date of the decision. If the proposal is not commenced within that time, a new application must be submitted and approved before proceeding with the proposal. If the proposal is not completed within that time, an extension of the decision must be obtained. This decision may be revoked by the Board, after notice and hearing, if any condition of the decision is violated. This decision may be appealed by any person aggrieved by the decision by filing with the St. Croix County Circuit Court an action for certiorari within thirty (30) days of the date of filing this decision. Applicant assumes all risk of relying on this decision within the thirty (30) day appeal period. John Bradley , C airman Filed: DATE: Oct. 14, 1992 r - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter) August 27, 1992 This meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 8:00 A.M. Chairman Bradley explained the procedures of the hearing requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names in the front of the room. Supervisor Kinney, Menter, Stephens, Neuman and Bradley were all in attendance. Staff present was Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator. Stephens made a motion to approve the agenda. Seconded by Menter. Motion carried. Stephens made a motion to approve the minutes of the last meeting as mailed. Seconded by Neuman. Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS TOM & KELLEY LEMIRE Nelson stated that this was before the Board of Adjustment for an extension of time on their permit for a Golf Course in Star Prairie Township. Kelly stated that the financing took longer than expected and an additional year was needed for completion. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to extend their permit for an additional year. Motion carried. JOHN BETTENDORF Nelson stated that this was a request to be placed on next months agenda so as to provide more information for his driveway permit that was denied. Dan Federly will assist in developing additional information for this commercial driveway. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Kinney to allow this to come before the Board of Adjustment Committee next month. Motion carried. DENNIS ULLOM Nelson stated that Ullom was requesting to be heard again next month. Stephens made a motion, seconded by Kinney that the decision rendered last month to deny should stay. Motion carried. PRINTING COSTS Bradley stated these could be a cost savings to the Board of Adjustment budget if hearing were only published in the county paper and not the local papers. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Kinney to keep the publishing as it has been with both county and local papers. Motion carried. FRANK BACHNAN Attorney Steve Dunlap, representing the Bachmans requested that this be placed on next months agenda so as to provide additional information. He wants to show why there is a need for the garage. Motion by Kinney, seconded by Stephens not to rehear the application. Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, no; Neuman, no; Bradley, no. Motion defeated. Motion by Menter, seconded by Bradley to allow this appeal to be reheard. Kinney, no; Bradley, yes; Stephens, no; Menter, yes; and Neuman, yes. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS The hearing was called to order by 9:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice of the hearing as published: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, Aug. 27, 1992 at 8:30 A.M. in the County Board Room of the St. Croix County Courthouse, Hudson, WI to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. An onsite investigation will be made of each site in question, after which the board contemplates adjournment into closed session for the purpose of deliberating on the appeals, pursuant to Sec. 19.85(1) (a) , Wisconsin Statutes, and will reconvene into open session for the purpose of voting on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: 17.31(2) Setback from Water APPELLANT: Robert & Carol Benish LOCATION: NW 1/4 the NE 1/4 of Sec. 26, T30N-R19W, Town of St. Joseph 2. ARTICLE: 17.31(2) APPELLANT: Walter Laumeyer (Money was sent back) LOCATION: Gov't Lot 1, Sec. 14, T30N-R18W, Town of Somerset 3 . ARTICLE: 17.50(1) Road setback' APPELLANT: Philip & Carol Nelson LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 2, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 4. ARTICLE: 17.35(3) (i) Boathouse APPELLANT: Robert Kunz LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 2, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 5. ARTICLE: 226(89) Nonmetallic mining APPELLANT: Arthur Overgaard LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 33 , T31N-R15W, Town of Forest , 6. ARTICLE: 226(89) Nonmetallic mining 15.03(3) Demolition/Solid waste disposal APPELLANT: William Liddle/Tri-County Disposal LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 and the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 13, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 7. ARTICLE: 17.64(5) (3) Driveway separation APPELLANT: Brian Siedschlag LOCATION: N 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 16, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 8. ARTICLE: 17.60(1) (c) Road setback APPELLANT: Charles & Kathy Lederer LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 9, T29N-R19W, Town of Somerset } 9. ARTICLE: 17.70(3) (c)3 Temporary occupancy APPELLANT: Mary Jo Gray LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 5, T29N-R16W, Town of Springfield 10. ARTICLE: 17.36(5) (1) Filling & grading 17.36(5) (c) Setback from water APPELLANT: Richard G. Mueller LOCATION: Gov't Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 13 , T28N-R20W, Town of Troy 11. ARTICLE: 17.36(5) (c)l Setback from bluff APPELLANT: Wm. & Patricia Marzolf LOCATION: Gov't Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 13, T28N-R20W, Town of Troy 12. ARTICLE: 17.36(5) (c)l Setback from water 17.31(5) (1 Filling & grading APPUJANT: Richard & rzolf LOCATION: Gov't Lots 1 & 2, Sec. 13,- T28N-R20W, Town of Troy 13. ARTICLE: 17.15(6) (o) Golf course APPELLANT: Patrick O'Malley LOCATION: N 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 26, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy ROBERT & CAROL BENISH Carol presented a variance request to add onto an existing cabin that is twenty-eight (28) feet from the high water mark of Bass Lake. This addition would be on the side of the existing structure and no closer than twenty-eight (28) feet. The septic system and well will also be replaced. The township of St. Joseph as well as the Bass Lake Rehab District support the proposal. + U WALTER LAUMEYER Nelson stated that this is a variance request for a fifty-five (55) foot setback from the highwater mark of Bass Lake. The structure will be no closer than the residence or the neighbors cabin to the south. The township of Somerset and the Bass Lake Rehab District support the proposal. PHILIP & CAROL NELSON Nelson stated that this is a setback variance request of thirteen (13) feet from a town road. The original residence is one hundred- twenty (120) feet from the centerline of the road and they would lake to build a garage next to it, no closer than the residence. Discussion on the location of the property lipes. The township of Star Prairie supports the proposal. ROBERTS KUNZ Nelson stated that this was a request for a twenty-four by twenty- four (24x24) foot boat house fifteen (15) feet from waters edge of Cedar Lake. Boat houses are special exceptions in the Shoreland District. Kunz stated the large dimension is for storage of his boat and other items such as lawn mowers and etc. Nelson cautioned the Board stating that the intent of the boat house should be restricted to only boat storage. The township of Star Prairie supports the proposal. ARTHUR OVERGAARD Dick Erickson presented the application for a nonmetallic mining permit for property in Forest township that has been in operation since the 1950's. They are currently expanding the pit and need this special exception use permit. Discussion. The township of Forest supports the proposal. WILLIAM LIDDLE/TRI-COUNTY DISPOSAL Nelson stated that this is a two part request for special exception use permit. One part is for a nonmetallic mining operation for clay to be used at the North Hudson landfill. The other part of the request is for the expansion of the demolition land fill after the hole is enlarged. Both DNR and township of Warren support the proposal with some conditions. Discussion. BRIAN SIEDSCHLAG Nelson stated that this is a request for a driveway variance on a town road. Siedschlag indicated that due to the difficult topography on the property he cannot meet the two hundred (200) foot driveway separation. The township of Warren supports this proposal. CHARLES & KATHY LEDERER Nelson stated that this is a request for a setback variance from a town road. Lederer stated that a variance allowing one hundred-twelve (112) feet from center of road is desired so as to protect trees on the property and to accomplish to overall traffic plan developed for the property. Discussion on whether this was a hardship or g convenience. MARY JO GRAY Nelson stated that this was a request for a temporary occupancy permit to live in a mobile home while the permanent residence is being constructed. The township of Springfield supports the proposal. RICHARD MUELLER, WILLIAM & PATRICIA MARZOLF AND RICHARD AND MARY MARZOLF Nelson stated that it was best if these were all heard at the same time since they were all neighboring properties. The requests being asked are: 1) Forty (40) foot setback variance from the bluffline for William Marzolf; 2) Filling & grading in the floodplain and setback from the highwater mark of the St. Croix for Richard Marzolf; 3) Filling & grading in the floodplain and setback from the highwater mark for Richard Mueller. Detailed plans were presented showing details of the property. Nelson stated that he was recommending a buildable project area to be considered which he described rather than what was being requested. The reason for this area was that it met the intent of the ordinance for a reasonable use beyond which should be considered convenience. Discussion. McMillian an adjoining property owner expressed his objections to these projects stating that he purchased his property from the Marzolfs with the understanding that these lots were unbuildable. Discussion. PATRICK O•MALLEY Nelson stated that this was a request for a golf course as a special exception permit. O'Malley presented his plans for an 18 hole golf course he was planning. Several of the neighboring properties have expressed concerns for safety and the need for screening. Discussion. After the hearing the Board visited each site in question and upon returning rendered the following decisions: ROBERT & CAROL BENISH Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve the variance providing the septic system and well be replaced. Motion carried. WALTER J. LAUMEYER Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to return applicaton fees since applicant can use setback averaging. Motion carried. PHILIP & CAROL NELSON Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to postpone a decision until the lot line can be surveyed to validate testimony of lot line location. Motion carried. ROBERT KUNZ Motion by Bradley seconded by Kinney to approve a sixteen by twenty-four (16x24) foot boat house. Kenney, yes; Menter, yes; Stephens, no; Bradley, excused. Motion carried. ARTHUR OVERGAARD Motion by Stephens, seconded by Bradley to approve the nonmetallic mining operation providing proof of insurance can be provided and performance bonds be secured. Motion carried. WILLIAM LIDDLE/TRI-COUNTY DISPOSAL Nonmetallic mining issue: Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve the nonmetallic mining operation providing proof of insurance can be provided and performance bonds be secured. Motion carried. Demolition issue: Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve the permit as per all DNR requirements. Motion carried. BRIAN SIEDSCHLAG Motion by Bradley, seconded by Menter to approve the variance as requested. Motion carried. CHARLES & KATHY LEDERER Motion by Stephens, seconded by Bradley to deny the requested setback since no hardship can be demonstrated. This request of convenience, alternate sites available. Motion carried. MARY JO GRAY Motion by Stephens, seconded by Kinney to approve the temporary occupancy permit for one year. Motion carried. MUELLER, W. MARZOLF AND R. MARZOLF Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to postpone the discussion until further information can be obtained. Motion carried. PATRICK WHALLEY Motion by Bradley, seconded by Menter to approve the golf course conditionally with the conditions being all screen be planted with two (2) rows of mature trees and percolation test be conducted. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, : 4 George Menter, secretary TCN:cj v E 110 Second Street Post Office Box 802 PORKER & Hudson,Wisconsin 54016 Telephone(715)386-3200 LU"EEN, S C Facsimile(715)386-5447 • • Minnesota(612)436-5934 A Professional Service Corporation Attorneys Licensed in Wisconsin and Minnesota Robert W.Mudge Joel D.Porter Bradley C.Lundeen September 17, 1992 Barry C.Lundeen Lisa A.Elander James T.Parent Mr. Thomas H. Boyd WINTHROP & WEINSTINE, P.A. Attorneys at Law 30 East Seventh Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: Marzolf Estate Dear Mr. Boyd: As promised, I am enclosing a copy of the Stipulation and-Order which has been submitted to Judge Lundell for his signature. I apologize for the delay in getting this to you, but as I explained to earlier, this was because there were some minor changes to be made in the final draft before all three attorneys would sign it. I am also including a copy-of the transcript of the hearing',which sets forth the agreement of the parties. You will note that the attachments to the Stipulation and Order show the areas adjacent to Lots 5, 6 and 7 that will be transferred to William and Richard Marzolf. I also have other maps of the property that I would be more than happy to review with you if you feel that this is necessary. Once you have had an opportunity to review the Stipulation and Order, which agreement was negotiated over a period of three years, I believe you will come to the conclusion that nine of the parties to this Agreement have the ability to develop any of the remaining property without purchasing the entirety. Neither William Marzolf or Richard Marzolf have the financial wherewithal to do this and the rest of the family certainly would not agree to any further!parceling of the property than what has already been agreed to. My clients are meeting with Tom Nelson on Friday, September 18th, in order to finalize the placement of structures on their particular lots so that the final plan is not subject to change, such as it was at the last meeting. I am sure that copies of this are available to you if you contact',Mr. Nelson's office and I am sure that he would be more than happy to sit down with 8 9 Z N cn !O co � rn z8� -° r-r7 ' 0CC7 N C-13 -� 1 O Z J6 I o n n:�Q M CJ / i Mr. Thomas H. Boyd Septeml er 17, 1992 Page two you and go over the final plans. I might suggest that if it meets with your schedule, that we get together Monday or Tuesday of next week, perhaps with Mr. Nelson, to review the proposal and to discuss the adjacent property covered under the Stipulation and Order enclosed herein. Very truly yours, PORTER & UNDEEN,_.S Rob rt W. Mudge RWM:jb Enclosures cc: Richard Marzolf Thomas Nelson i WINTHROP & WEINSTINE A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION SHERMAN WINTHROP JON J.HOGANSON ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW JULIE WIDLEY SCHNELL PATRICK W.WEBER ROBERT R.WEINSTINE SANDRA J.MARTIN CHRISTY JO GASPERS CHARLES A.DURANT RICHARD A.NOEL GARY W.SCHOKMILLER 3200 MINNESOTA WORLD TRADE CENTER THOMAS H.BOYD CRAIG A.BRANDT ROGER D.GORDON TODD B.URNESS JOSEPH C.NAUMAN DAVID A.KRISTAL STEVEN C.TOUREK SCOTT J.DONGOSKE DANIEL C.BECK KARL A.WEBER STEPHEN J.SNYDER PETER J.GLEEKEL 30 EAST SEVENTH STREET ERIC J.NYSTROM JONATHAN D.CRAN HART KULLER ROBERT S.SOSKIN BRIAN J.KLEIN ALOK VIDYARTHI DAVID P.PEARSON EDWARD J.DRENTTEL SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55101 KRISTIN L.PETERSON TOMAS L.STAFFORD THOMAS M.HART IV JEFFREY R.ANSEL JOANNE L.MATZEN CARLA J.PEDERSEN OARRON C.KNUTSON LAURIE A.KNOCKE TELEPHONE 16121290-8400 WILLIAM L.WINSON JAMES W.DIERKING JOHN A.KNAPP LLOYD W.GROOMS TIMOTHY K.MASTERSON EARLE F.KYLE IV MICHELE D.VAILLANCOURT JULIE K.WILLIAMSON FAX (6121292-9347 EVAN D.COOKS DAVID E.MORAN,JR. MARK T.JOHNSON THOMAS A.WALKER JOSEPH S.FRIEDBERG DONALD J.BROWN BETSY J.LOUSH IN DIRECT DIAL Q GINA M.GROTHE FOLLEN OF COUNSEL (612) 290-"520 DANIEL W.HARDY OF COUNSEL September 2, 1992 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL 9 10 Mr. Robert W. Mudge Mudge, Porter & Lundeen, S.C. N N p �,�► N 110 Second Street Hudson, WI 54016 �0,G2�0 RE: Marzolf Estate Dear Mr. Mudge: t� This letter will confirm our telephone conversation of late September 3, 1992. At the time, I reiterated my request on behalf of our client, Mr. Douglas McMillan, that you provide me with copies of the transcript that has been prepared with respect to the above-referenced proceedings; a draft of the parties' proposed Settlement Agreement; and a copy of the Agreement with Century 21 to serve as a sales agent for the property in question. During our telephone conversation, you indicated to me that the parties have not reached a final agreement. You further indicated to me that your clients have expressly instructed you to withhold any of this information at this time. The position taken by you and your clients is very disturbing. First, it had been my understanding that the parties would be forthcoming with all of this information. This understanding had been confirmed at the hearing before the Board of Adjustment on August 27, 1992, and in our conversation as recently as September 1, 1992. Second, the fact that the parties to the above-referenced matter have not reached an agreement makes it even more important that we be given access to these documents as soon as possible. As stated to you and the other counsel involved in the above-referenced matter, our client is extremely interested in the availability of the property at issue in the above-referenced matter. We are seeking to determine whether, in fact, said property is available for use by those ' w Mr. Robert W. Mudge September 3, 1992 Page 2 individuals who seek to develop the property neighboring Mr. McMillan's home. Your clients' refusal to provide us with these documents is obviously intended to interfere with any efforts to demonstrate that said property is available for alternative developments plans. I would again express my extreme disappointment with the position taken by you and your clients in this matter. We believe that the position is inconsistent with your earlier statements and constitutes an unfair obstruction to resolve the zoning issues that the parties currently face. Very truly yours, WINTHROP & WEINSTINE, P.A. By - Thomas H. Boyd THB/dkt17692 c: Mr. Douglas McMillan Mr. Daniel Koich Zoning Board of Adjustment NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER'S OBJECTIONS TO VARIANCE APPLICATIONS MADE BY RICHARD MARZOLF, WILLIAM MARZOLF AND RICHARD MUELLER 1. THE "HARDSHIP" IS SELF-CREATED 2. THE "HARDSHIP" IS PURELY ECONOMIC 3. NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER HAS OFFERED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY AT FAIR MARKET PRICE 4. APPLICANTS HAVE USED AND CONTINUE TO HAVE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY 5. APPLICANTS ARE SEEKING VARIANCE FROM ALL SETBACK ORDINANCES - PROPERTY LINES, BLUFF LINES, AND ROADWAYS 00 6. APPLICANTS ARE FURTHER SEEKING VARIANCE FROM SLOPE REQUIREMENTS 7. APPLICANTS' PROPOSAL WOULD CHANGE THE NATURAL APPEARANCE OF THE SHORELINE, SLOPE, AND BLUFF LINE 8. HEALTH CONCERNS RELATING TO SEPTIC TANK AND EROSION 9. SAFETY CONCERNS RELATING TO ROAD EROSION, ROADWAY SETBACK, AND TRAFFIC 10. WELFARE CONCERNS RELATING TO NOISE LEVELS, VISUAL APPEARANCE, AND EROSION 11. SUBSTANTIAL DEVALUATION OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES . ' 4 Y „ go State of Wisconsin ` DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES URAL 2004 HIghWW Avenue Eau Claire,WI 547014346 Carrot D. 8esedry TELEPHONE 7154393777 Secretary September 23, 1992 File Ref: 3590 Tom Nelson St. Croix County Zoning 911 4th St. Hudson, WI 54016 Re: Mueller and Marzoffs, St. Croix River Dear Mr. Nelson: Please admit this letter as a record of my testimony regarding the above-referenced case at the Board of Adjustment hearing on September 24, 1992. Upon additional site inspection and an opportunity to view the project site from a boat on the river and upon further review of NR 118, I have changed my opinion regarding the approval of the variances for the Mueller and Marzoff proposal . In recognition of the fact that the hearing for all three properties is being held as one hearing, please recognize that these comments refer to all three proposals. On September 1 , 1992, I observed this property by boat from the St. Croix River. It is now obvious to me that the proposal will be quite visible from the riverway. NR 118.06(3)(b) states that the Board of Adjustment may grant a variance to the setback requirements for pre-existing parcels only where the applicant has proven that a hardship exists. However, no variance may be granted for a setback which results in a change in the natural appearance of the shoreline, slope, or bluffline as viewed from the river. It is the responsibility of the applicant to justify the need for such a reduced setback and display how the proposed structure will be visually inconspicuous from the river. Upon the site inspection after the hearing last month on August 27, 1992, I realized that the filling of nine feet above the ground surface in addition to the size of the structures will make this project visible from the river if a setback such as is proposed is authorized. For this reason 'I cannot support approval of the Mueller proposal and the Richard "Buzz" Marzoff proposal . The Bill Marzoff proposal appears unlikely to cause this impact and is therefore not a project. I could object to. This recommendation is obviously a direct contradiction of my testimony last month, I can only offer the reason for this that my previous testimony was clouded by a willingness to do everything possible to help the applicants. This willingness to help removed my objectivity and my ability to review in its entire scope. In essence, I spent too much of my available time helping and not reviewing the entire proposal . F.1(14"BIT iq r Tom Nelson Page 2' September 23, 1992 The testimony presented by Douglas McMillan at last month's hearing was in my opinion very comprehensive and pointed out many issues that I should have been reviewing. Upon further thought on this proposal , I find that the concerns expressed were, and are, very accurate and are fully supportive of a opinion to deny the Mueller and "Buzz" Marzoff proposals. Based on the fact that other testimony may come in during the hearing, this letter may not reflect all of the concerns that I have on this project. Oral testimony will be provided in addition to this letter. Sin erely, Dan oich Water Regulation and Zoning Specialist cc Bill Marzoff St. Croix NR 118 file Richard Marzoff St. Croix NR 118 file Mueller St. Croix NR 118 file i PHONE:(612)644-5594 FAX: (612)644-4330 THE MAR ZO LF COMPANY �( 1863 SELBY AVENUE • ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55104 • P.O.BOX 40367 MEMORANDUM TO: Owen Williams, Attorney DATED: June 29, 1990 li REFERENCE: Your letter dated June 14, 1990 re: offer on the family cabin. Owen, Both Geri and I feel that t/eofgfuer.0 offer is a good one albeit a far cry I from their $335,000 and $29res in the Stipulation. Oddly, neither Geri or I have been able to aimed ads in the St. Paul paper. Never- the-less, we won't challeng I do question as a possible mis-re presentation the Harris statement in the realtor' s activity report (last item on date 5/21 /90) : "Chuck H also stated at this time, lots to N aren't buildable per DNR restrictions." Neither the DNR nor County Planning Commission have ever ruled on this, and I don't want- any hassles from the prospective cabin buyer at such time as I might seek to obtain a 'ui in ermit for my lot which, having been platted in 1972, is _ gran at 'ere 7 in on several critical points and is a good candidate for granting of variances thereby. Also enclosed F.Y.I. and review is a settlement offer I made to their Attorney, John Patterson, re: their petition for my removal as Co-personal Representative for my Father's estate. Their petition and my counter-petition will adversely affect the proposed July 31 closing on the family cabin as noted in my opening paragraph of the offer. No answer from them so far. I will advise you as soon as they respond. Straws in the wind would indicate they are amenable, but it 's not over till it's over. If you have any questions or comments, please call. I will follow up with you on Monday, July 1 . 6id William J. Marzolf, Sr. cc: Geri Bodmer r sE 20 SELLERS ACTIVITY REPORT .05 LASiIMAKE PROPERTY AQORESS ACTIVITY OATE COMMENTS COMMENIS zolf/I Cahle 112 East Cove Road 05/02/90 LISTED. 1199,000. Tom Oahle is referee/contact person. zolf/T Dahle 211 East Cove Road 05/04/90 Exterior photos of entire property taken zolf/I Oahle 211 East Cove Road 05/04/90 SHOWING: Very good. May see again. (Cudd) zolf/T Dahle 172 East Cove Road 05/05190 SHOWING: 2nd. Very good. (Cudd) zolf/I Dahle 271 East Cove Road O5/O�190 SHOVING: 3rd. Very good. Are considering (Cudd) zolf/1 Oahle 271 East Cove Road 05/01/90 Submitted to MLS, office staff b Star Observer ad. zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/00/90 COMPANY TOUR. 5250-290,000.Good torments re: setting. Mork to be done in house. zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/OR190 SHOWING: Good showing. zolf/T Oahle 272 East Cove Road 05/11/90 Letter w/tour results sent. •zolf/T Oahle 272 East Cove Road 05/11190 Property promoted to several MLS agents. -zolf/I Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05111190 OFFER from Charles C Cudd for 1250,000 cash. �zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/11/90 Counter from Seller: 11289,000. -jolt/T Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05/11/90 Contacted Cudd re: Counter. •zolf/T Oahle 172 East Cove Road 05/1,2/90 SHOWING: Fairly good. Buyer had some questions which I answered. zolf/T Dahle 171 East Cove Road 05/1;1/90 Talked w/Buzz Marzolf.He called w/ questions about property re: marketing. zolfjT Dahle 212 East Cove Road 0511i2/90 Buzz stated well was tested this last Wed by Bud Mantyla.Pump back on. zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/11/90 Buzz gave me additional info re: condition of property. •zolf/1 Dahle 112 East Cove Road 05/12/90 Talked again w/Cudd re: Counter. zolf/T Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05/14/90 Cudd decided will not accept or counter. loo much work is needed on house. -zolf/T Dahle 271 East Cove Road 05/15/90 SHOWING: Price too high for amount of work to be done. (Showed to Or) zolf/I 0ahle 212 East Cove Road 05/10/90 Special ad submitted to Homes Magazine. -zolf/I Oahle 212 East Cove Road 05/11/90 Special ad submitted for Sunday's St Paul Pioneer Press. zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/11/90 informational brochure sent to prospective buyer, -zolf/T Oahle 212 East Cove Road 05/17/90 SHOWING: Good showing. May see again with husband. (Edelman) zolf/I Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05/11/90 SHOVING: Went quite well. She will talk to husband about 6 poss see this wkend. -zolf/1 Oahle 212 East Cove Road 05/17/90 Star Observer ad under NEW LISTINGS. zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/1:7190 Star Observer ad under NEW LISTINGS. zolfjl Oahle 211 East Cove Road 05/10/90 SHOWING: Loved beach but not ready to consider drastic revamping. zolf 11 Dahle 171 East Cove Road 05/19/90 SHOVING: Has possibilities (professional person from TC) ,zolf/T Dahle 171 East Cove Road 05/11/90 SHOVING: 2nd/3rd showings. Cancelled. Will reschedule. -zolf/I Dahle 172 East Cove Road 051119/96 Noted basement is leaking quite a bit in boys dressing rm 6 store re behind ktchn -zolf/I Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05,120/90 SHOVING: 2nd showing w/ husband this tile. -zolf/T Oahle 272 East Cove Road 05/20190 SHOVING:2nd showing to wife 6 husband, tEdelman)Extensive work needs to be done -zolf/T Dahle 211 East Cove Road 05/20/90 SHOWING: Continued:For 2nd home, may be cost prohibitive. zolf/T Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05/2!0/90 Noted basement is leaking quite a bit in boys dressing rm 6 store ra behind ktchn zolf/I Dahle 211 East Cove Road 05/2p/90 Sunday St Paul ad - 1 call. 'zolf 11 Dahle 111 East Cove Road 05/21/90 Talked to agent. Hay have interested party. •zolf/T Cahle 211 East Cove Road 05/21/90 Spoke w/Chuck Parris re: questions Richard Marzolf has. -zolf/T Oahle 271 East Cove Road 05/11190 Spoke w/Richard Harzolf f 8uzz) re: questions he had re: advertising. -zolf/T Dahle 271 East Cove Road 105121/90/21/90 Discussed w/both the St Paul ad l status of marketing.Report going to Tom 0 today zolf/f Oahle 271 East Cove Road /21/90 Discussed w/Chuck Harris re:eliminating easement.He felt nearly impossible. -zolf/f Oahle 272 East Cove Road Chuck H also stated at this time, lots to N aren't buildable per ORR restrctns. zolf/T Dahle 272 East Cove Road 05/22/90 Richard Marzolf stated water test done 6 he will send copy. lest OK. �zolf/T Oahle 172 East Cove Road 05/22190 Activity Report, copies of info sheet for review,copy rejtd Cntr offer to Tom. zolf/T Dahle 271 East Cove Road 051122/90 Recd message from Don Sisco re: Sunday ad t returned his call. ,zolf/I Dahle 172 East Cove Road 05/ 4190 Received water test report from Richard. ,zolf/T Dahle 271 East Cove Road 05124/40 Spoke w/Richard.Confirmed 2 signs up: 1 on beach,l at entrance d 1 by fork in rd ,zolf/T Oahle 172 East Cove Road 65/?4/90 Special ad submitted to the St Paul Sunday paper. zolf/T Cahle 272 East Cove Road 05/27/90 Spoke w/Richard re: St Paul Sun ad I ad above it.Will contact pons byr Tues AM. -zolf/T Oahle 211 East Cove Road 05/37/90 Richard will arrange for lawn cleanup. -zolf/1 Dahle 172 East Cove Road 05/21/90 Call from St Paul Sun ad. Property too much money for this buyer. -zolf/T Dahle 212 East Cove Road 05/28190 SHOWING: Good showing. They are considering. Jim Webber advised late Sept., '1989 that granite monument 'marking NorthFast Corner of Government Lot #1 sometime after -1948 (probalbl.y during the 1970's) was moved 40 feet WEST from the original location. Webber indicates that there is ample evidence to indicate monument was indeed moved, but he cannot determine why•and states•further that in all his experience location of original granite monuments has always been inviolable. This obviously.has a major impaction v&ifica.tion of dines of Marzolf Property as shown-on this sketch and in the accompanying legal description of the property which has its beginning at the granite monument.marking this NorthEast Corner of Government Lot #1 . • AW uaAv Barr. ser i • �drftr/Tl rwrZt� dS� �•yj�j�!�'�lotwrt TiJ ..•oo�r s.r o -X�4 h O t z a N 4 r"1 a0 Two ro ro ro ro �.- S > V u-- M M M M Z 4 r rrr UAI LTI rt I-h I--''•z i 7YCUNa 4 . - aa � ow �• (DHo 333 i-S N• N (D (D f 4 > > C . . H- (Dm rtrr0 rtcD MNr Q V-- c(DDH- cn0 a (D *Fro S 'f''"d N' Z rt O �S rt rt 0 � hfi A A . -!a s•vc (D Enrowa rt F (D a En •(n (A H- A rt rt LQ rt M rt A (D A) z U O 0 O 1-+ FF- N N Q, 0' V a o (D I.< U) S %(n o H. w 'o �'Fi. Onrt` nI-h (D rt* HQro: rn0) o o• W� Q, (D A sr0 � a H_ z i r (D - (D rI Z 0 0 0 InI_ Aw 1 ew rt m rt Al (D rt rt H N : N K 0 0 O o i cn o ^I A R .w o F PQ oArp. rr-S r~ C:�olx C oilNrK! w/S C. PA R2 Garr" LOTS/a2 SSCr• A P. r1-W. .2 8 N A1,4 /.:r 2.0W rROr r::'0° PHONE:(612)644-5594 FAX: (612)644-4330 THE MARZOLF COMPANY 1863 SELBY AVENUE ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55104 • P.O.BOX 40367 FAX TRANSMISSION DATED: 6-29-90 NO. PAGES INCL. THIS: 5 i TO: OWEN WILLIAMS, ATTORNEY 314 N. KELLER AVE. , P.O.BOX 417 AMERY, WISC. 54001 REFERENCE: YOUR LETTER DATED JUNE 14, 1990 WITH COPIES OF OFFER TO PURCHASE FAMILY CABIN -- MARZOLF VS MARZOLF. FOLLOW-UP: AS NEEDED FAX NUMBER: 715-268-9888 PHONE NUMBER: 715-268-8901 FROM: BILL MARZOLF it .1 t STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT ST. CROIX COUNTY GEORGE B. MARZOLF, JR. and F YETTE A MARZOLF STIPULATION ANTHONY MALERICH AND ORDER and HELEN MALERICH THOMAS MARZOLF and ESTHER MARZOLF #89 CV 08 RICHARD A. MARZOLF and MARY MARZOLF, Plaintiffs, V. WILLIAM J. MARZOLF and PATRICIA MARZOLF and GERALDINE (KELLY) BODMER and GEORGE BODMER, Defendants . COMES NOW the parties to this action by and through their undersigned attorneys represented and appearing before the Honorable Eric J. Lundell, Circuit Judge, Branch I, St. Croix County, Wisconsin, on June 3, 1992, as follows : George B. Marzolf, Jr. , Fayette Marzolf, Anthony Malerich and Helen Malerich all in person; Thomas Marzolf, deceased; Esther Marzolf not appearing in person, and by their attorney James R. Bartholomew; Richard A. Marzolf and Mary Marzolf in person and by their attorney Robert W. Mudge; William J. Marzolf and Geraldine Bodmer in person; Patricia Marzolf and George Bodmer not appearing in person, and by their attorney Owen R. Williams; and having advised the court personally or through their attorney that they agree and do stipulate to entry of an order effectuating the terms and conditions as set forth below without notice or further hearing hereon: 1 . That George B. Marzolf Jr. , Helen Marzolf Malerich, William J. Marzolf, Richard A. Marzolf, and Geraldine Kelly Bodmer are the living owners of record of title to THE PROPERTY which is described on ATTACHMENT A. 2 . That Thomas Marzolf is deceased; his widow Esther Marzolf may claim an interest in THE PROPERTY by reason of It 1 r marriage, devise, or inheritance. 3 . That Fayette Marzolf, Anthony Malerich, Patricia Marzolf, Mary Marzolf, and George Bodmer may claim an interest in THE PROPERTY by reason of marital interest or conveyance. 4 . The parties wish to compromise and narrow the issues outstanding in this lawsuit without trial before this Honorable Court and accordingly enter into this stipulation and order for those purposes . 5 . The parties wish to divide THE PROPERTY into three parcels from the single parcel that exists as of date of this stipulation and order. 6 . That the parcels to be created from THE PROPERTY shall be known as : a. Parcel 5A b. Parcel 6A C . THE PROPERTY REMAINING 7 . THE PROPERTY REMAINING is described in paragraph one of this agreement, diminished by and less parcels 5A and 6A. 8 . Parcel 5A shall be described by James M. Weber, surveyor, at the expense of William J. Marzolf, and described on ATTACHMENT B. Parcel 5A shall correspond in principle to Attachment B1 . Attachment B is the legal description of parcel 5A and will be constructed from Surveyor Weber's description. 9 . Parcel 6A shall be described by James M. Weber, surveyor, at the expense of Richard A. Marzolf, and described on ATTACHMENT C. Parcel 6A shall correspond in principle to that parcel described as Parcel 6A on Attachment C1 and which shall be more particularly described in Attachment C which shall be constructed from Surveyor Weber's description. 10 . Parcels 5A and 6A shall partially share a common boundary with each other. 11 . Parcels 5A and 6A shall be valued by using a price of $4 , 600 . 00 per acre to calculate the value of those parcels . The value of each of these two parcel of land shall hereinafter be referred to as each parcel 's Valuation Price. 12 . Parcel 5A shall be sold and deeded to William J. Marzolf by the parties upon preparation of the legal description by Surveyor Weber. This deed shall be held in trust by Owen R. Williams until payment in full of the Valuation Price by William J. Marzolf or upon closing of THE PROPERTY REMAINING and payment of the Valuation Price for parcel 5A shall be made from the proceeds of the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING. 13 . Richard A. Marzolf shall have the right to purchase parcel 6A at that parcel 's Valuation Price which shall be paid by Richard A. Marzolf from the proceeds of the sale from THE PROPERTY REMAINING at closing, or from personal funds at his option. Parcel 6A shall be deeded to Richard A. Marzolf upon preparation of the legal description of parcel 6A by Surveyor Weber. This deed shall be held in trust by Robert Mudge until payment in full by Richard A. Marzolf or upon closing of THE PROPERTY REMAINING and payment of the Valuation Price for parcel 6A from the proceeds from the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING. 14 . All parties agree that any conveyance of THE PROPERTY REMAINING shall restrict and limit vehicular travel over the existing roadway paralleling the easterly boundaries of Lots 1, 2 , 8, ' S, 6, and 7 , to owners of those lots . 15 . THE PROPERTY REMAINING shall be placed on the market for sale at a price of not less than $390, 000 . 00 for a period of not more than twelve months from effective date of this agreement and sold at the first offer of $350, 000 . 00 or more. If William J. Marzolf, Richard A. Marzolf, or Geraldine Bodmer decline to purchase parcels 5A or 6A, either of those unsold parcels shall be merged with THE PROPERTY remaining and sold in accordance with this stipulation and order. If any cash offer is received in an amount less than $350, 000, any party may apply to the Court for an order compelling sale at such lesser price as may be determined equitable in the discretion of this Court. 16 . THE PROPERTY REMAINING shall be listed for sale for a period of twelve months with Century 21 Real Estate agency in Hudson, Wisconsin; any real estate commission shall not exceed seven percent . 17 . Geraldine Bodmer shall have second right of refusal to purchase Parcel 6A under the same terms and conditions as has Richard A. Marzolf if, and only if, Richard A. Marzolf declines to purchase Parcel 6A. 18 . The sum of $2, 247 shall be paid to William J. Marzolf from the net proceeds of the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING before; the proceeds are divided between the parties . This amount is to reimburse William J. Marzolf for expenditures he made while maintaining a parcel of real property owned by the parties to this agreement which is not included in the descriptions of Parcels 5A and 6A or THE PROPERTY REMAINING and which is not the subject of this lawsuit. 19 . The sum of $850 shall be paid to each Richard A. Marzolf, George B. Marzolf, Helen Malerich and Esther Marzolf from the net proceeds of the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING before division between the parties to reimburse those parties partially for expenses incurred incident to the sale of THE PROPER'T'Y REMAINING. I 20 . The clients of James R. Bartholomew, Robert W. Mudge and Owen R. Williams shall each pay $100 to satisfy the $300 bill of Fred Nagel who appraised the properties which are the subject of this action. 21 . If it is necessary as an incident of the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING, then THE PROPERTY REMAINING shall be surveyed to determine the boundaries and to state those boundaries . Surveying shall be done by James M. Weber, who has already done a portion of the necessary surveying. All parties to this action shall bear an equal share of the surveying costs for THE PROPERTY REMAINING with the following exceptions: a. All surveying work done by James M. Weber or Al Nyhagen or anyone working under their direction prior to date of this stipulation and order shall be paid for by the parties contracting for the work, except as noted in Paragraph 19 . b. The costs of defining and describing Parcel 5A shall be borne by William J. Marzolf. These costs shall be those billed by Weber for work done after that work described in his invoice of May 14 , 1991 . C . The costs of defining and describing Parcel 6A shall be borne by Richard A. Marzolf. These costs shall be those billed by Weber for work done after that work described in his invoice of May 14, 1991 . 22 . All documentation, plats, maps, preliminary surveys, plot plans and records of any work done by Jim Weber to date of this stipulation and order shall be furnished to any requesting parties and costs of duplication shall be shared equally by the requesting parties . 23 . This action shall be stayed until THE PROPERTY REMAINING is sold and all terms and conditions of this stipulation and order are carried out and completed, or until further order of this Court. 24 . The net proceeds of the sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING shall be divided equally between the parties after all costs of sale and costs provided for in this agreement are deducted, and any credits and debits applied to any parties share in accordance with paragraphs 12, 13, 18 and 19 of this agreement are made. 25 . All monies, if any, remaining in the hands of Thomas Dahle, Attorney at Law, who acted as receiver in this action, shall be distributed to the parties in equal shares forthwith. 26 . Each party shall bear their own costs and attorney's fees incident to this action, except as noted otherwise. 27 . Upon completion of all the terms and conditions of this Stipulation and sale of THE PROPERTY REMAINING, this action shall be dismissed with prejudice and without award of damages, costs, or attorney's fees, without notice or further hearing hereon upon joint application of the parties . James R Bartholome Owen R. Williams Attorney iffs Attorney for defendants George B. and Fayette Marzolf, Anthony and Helen Malerich, Thomas and Esther Marzolf, and Esther Marzolf as administrator of ate of Tho s rzolf deceased Rober' W. Mudge Attorndy for plaintiffs Richard and Mary Marzolf O R D E R The Court being advised in the premises by the pleadings on file, representations of the parties and their attorneys and the foregoing stipulation; IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED That the foregoing stipulation entered into by the parties is approved and becomes the order of this court to be effective as of June 3, 1992 . Dated this day of September, 1992, nunc pro tunc to June 3, 1992 . BY THE COURT Eric J. Lundell, Judge Circuit Court, Branch I St. Croix County, Wisconsin y . MEW NU M 1)ER 1 9. ( 1 3 ABSTRACT OF TITLE II 'Z-:lo the fo1[owing described `Teal l;atate situated in ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN I Part of Government Lots "I" and "2" of Section 13-28-20 described as follows: Commencing on the North line of said Government Lot "1", 743 feet West of the f NE corner thereof; thence South parallel with the East line said Government I Lot "1", 1230 feet; thence West 340 feet; thence South 1400 feet more or less ito' South line of said Government Lot "2"; thence Westerly along South line of Government Lot "2" to the shore of Lake St. Croix; thence Northeasterly along said shore line of Lake St. Croix to the North line of said Government Lot "1"; thence Easterly along said North line to POINT OF BEGINNING; Except be- `I ginning at a point 1700 feet West from NE corner of Section 13-28-20; thence South 409 feet; thence West through center of natural channel or outlet of a spring pond to the East shore of Lake St. Croix; thence Northeasterly along East shore of Lake St. Croix to the North line of said Section 13; thence East along the North line of said Section 13 to POINT OF BEGINNING; and Except the following parcels: 1. to George Bernard Marzolf, Jr. and Fayette Marzolf in Vol.ume "394", page II 442 (No. 66) and Volume "479", page 68 (No. 67). � 2. to I1. Nippert Smith and Janet N. Smith in Volume "466", page 599 (No. 68); 3. to William J. Marzolf and Patricia A. Marzolf in Volume "479", page 70 i (No. 69); 4. to Richard A. Marzolf and Mary E. Marzolf in Volume "479", page 72 (No. 70); 5. to Thomas A. Marzolf in Volume "479", page 74 (No. 71) I 6. to J. Anthony Maleri.ch and Ile.len I. Malerich in Volume "479", page 75 (No. 72); 7, to Norbert B. Kelly and Geraldine E. Kelly in Volume "479", page 77 (No. 73). rn F_PARF_O FOn Mnun, Green, Hayes, Simon, Johanneson 6 Brehl St. Paul, Minnesota. ST. CROIX COUNTY ABSTRACT CO. Hudson. Wisconsin I APPROVED MFinaER I i AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION WISCONSIN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION, INC. II ,• o• mr.. nmgnu _mnm, nnm wn imaion rmn ATTACHMENT A •y k ° v a�oob � •o � cLv.�- � ` 0� f c� ,( D SLO?5S LESS THAN it% 1 1 M �` I ! 40PE S .rSS '• " 1 THAN z TNIAN • :r. g_OPES E s s �.•� N , IA EXISTING 30•WIDE ACCESS EASEMENT N \ • o ..�� ATTACHMENT B — 1 rte'' ice' � m N ' 3 � a O N •yC o � Ij - rt 0 v•d N 0 N G a � OD r�I I NI-� r• � � rn (D rl a n � / G Q, L Ln ra)� O `C � � ATTACHMENT C-1 L" BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING September 24, 1992 (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter) The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 8: 30 A.M. in the County Board Room, Courthouse, Hudson, WI. Bradley explained the procedures of the hearing requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names and addresses in the front of the room. Supervisors Kinney, Menter, Stephens, Neuman and Bradley were all in attendance. Staff included Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator. Stephens made a motion to approve the agenda, seconded by Menter. Motion carried. Stephens made a motion to approved the August minutes, seconded by Kinney. Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS JOHN BETTENDORF Nelson stated that Mr. Bettendorf was appealing the original decision on not allowing a driveway width of not greater than thirty-five ( 35) feet for his truck terminal. The Board of Adjustment had directed Bettendorf in August of 1992 to work with the County Highway Department to develop an engineered plan. Dan Fedderly, Highway Commissioner, presented the plan showing a forty (40) foot access with a one hundred (100) foot structure running through it. Also the plan provided for the abandonment of one of the existing driveways. Matt Biegert, counsel for Bettendorf, stated that he felt this was unreasonable. This access accommodates twenty-five (25) trucks per day and it is not wide enough to provide the safety needed in this area. A petition of support has been signed by local residents and there are other driveways that are much wider in the county. There was a general discussion on the requested one hundred-fifty (150) foot width and what Fedderly was recommending. Supporting comments were received from Don Gilbert and Warren Bader. FRANK BACHMAN Steve Dunlap, legal counsel representing Bachman, presented a request for a variance setback from the one hundred (100) foot setback from the bluff required by the ordinance. The new plan shows two additions that are being added away from the St. Croix River. He feels since they will not be visible from the river, they will not effect the intent of the ordinance. Dan Koich from DNR stated he was not properly provided with plans so that he is unable provide a recommendation. Stephens made a motion to delay the request until the next regular meeting so as to provide DNR and Township time to review the request. Seconded by Kinney. Motion carried. PHILIP NELSON Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator, stated that this variance request was back before the Board of Adjustment because Nelsons had requested a survey to show the relationship of the property line with the proposed garage. Phil Nelson stated that the property line was closer than he thought and the new garage would be on the adjoining property. He is currently working with the adjoining property owner trying to purchase additional land. WILLIM NSF, RICHMM NARBOLF AND RICURD NUEUA Nelson stated that this had been postponed because additional information and maps were needed so as to make a proper decision. These maps and information had been completed and are being presented today. Attorney Mudge presented these materials and explained the complexity of the family development and requested variances. Bill Marzolf is requesting a bluffline setback of forty (40) feet and an road easement setback. Richard Marzolf and Dick Mueller are both requesting filling in the floodplain of the St. Croix River, special exceptions and variances from the ordinary high water mark setback. Supporting comments were heard from Ann Cummings, Richard Marzolf, William Marzolf and Dave Hense, Township of Troy. Opposing comments were heard from Dan Koich, DNR and Thomas Boyd, counsel for McMillan, the neighboring property. Their position is that it would be conspicuous from the river. DAVID HUEHN Nelson stated that this was back before the Board of Adjustment so as to provide more information regarding Huehns junkyard. Nelson and Dave Hense from the Town of Troy had recently inventoried the junk vehicles on the property. There were approximately forty (40) vehicles most of which had been located on the property since 1974 the effective date of the ordinance. There was also a lot of miscellaneous "junk" on the property. Huehn uses these vehicles for his auto repair business. CHARLES LEDERER Nelson stated that there has been a request to be reheard next month on the Lederer appeal. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Neuman not to rehear the request since' Me new evidence wo ldnoe provided. Roll call vote: Neuman, y Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes. Motion carried 3:2 not to rehear the appeal. NEW BUSINESS The hearing was called to order at 10:00 A.M. Nelson read the notice of the hearing as published: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, Sept. 24, 1992 at 9:00 A.M. in the County Board Room of the St. Croix County Courthouse, Hudson, Wisconsin to consider the following appeals to the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. An onsite investigation will be made of each site in question, after which the board contemplates adjournment into closed session for the purpose of deliberating on the appeals, pursuant to Sec. 19.85(1) (a) , Wisconsin Statutes, and will reconvene into open session for the purpose of voting on the appeals. 1. ARTICLE: 17.15(6) (a) Duplex APPELLANT: Roland Mortell LOCATION: The SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 23, T31N-R19W, Town of Somerset 2. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (d)2 Setback from town road APPELLANT: Barbara Thomas LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 11, T28N-R18W, Town of Kinnickinnic ROLAND MARTELL Nelson stated that this was a special exception request for a duplex on property currently served by a single family residence. Martell presented plans showing the layout of the building as converted. Discussion on the septic system. The township of Somerset supports the request. I BARBARA THOMAS Dennis Christianson, representing Thomas presented a request for a forty by one hundred-ten (40x110) foot hay barn that would only be sixty (60) feet from the town road. The original building has burned down recently and they would like to replace it on the original concrete pad. The township of Kinnickinnic supports the proposal. Having completed the hearing, the board visited each site in question. Upon returning the following decisions were rendered. NOTE: These are abbreviated decisions. A copy of the complete decision may be obtained at the St. Croix Co. Zoning Office. JOHN BETTENDORF Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to conditionally approve a fifty (50) foot driveway width. Installation is to be according to plan and inspected by the St. Croix Co. Highway Department. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. PHIL NELSON Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to conditionally approve the construction of the garage providing he acquire additional property from the adjoining land owner. CRP release and property transfer (deed) to be provided to the permanent record. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. WILLIAM MARZOLF Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve conditionally the variance request. Site to be inspected by Zoning Administrator. Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. RICHARD NARZOLF Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to conditionally approve the special exception and variance in accordance with the plans. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. RICHARD MUELLER Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to conditionally approve the special exception and variance in accordance to the plans. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried. DAVID HUEHN Motion by Menter, seconded by Stephens to conditionally approve the junkyard request allowing no more than forty (40) vehicles and proper containment and storage of hazardous materials. Vote: Kinney, yes; Bradley, yes; Stpephens, yes; Neuman, no; Menter, no. Motion carried. ROLAND MARTELL Motion by Neuman, seconded by Menter to approve the duplex use conditionally. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Bradley, yes; Neuman, yes. Motion carried. BARBARA THOMAS Motion by Bradley, seconded by Stephens to approve the variance request as presented. Vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Bradley, yes; Neuman, yes. Respectfully submitted: George enter, st4ra TCN:cj ST. CROIX COUNTY h WISCONSIN OFFICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL ST. CROIX COUNTY COURTHOUSE -- 911 FOURTH STRE WI 54016 MEMO Cb TO: Members, St. Croix County Board of Adjustment Tom Nelson, County Zoning Administrator Dan Koich, DNR ^ FROM: Greg Timmerman, St. Croix County Corporation Couns DATE: November 17, 1992 RE: Marzolf and Mueller Hearings - September 24, 1992 This memo is in response to Dan Koich's letter to Chairman Bradley, dated November 2, 1992, regarding the above referenced hearing. A copy of the letter is attached. The purported effect of Mr. Koich's letter is to overrule the Board of Adjustment's decision in the Richard A. Marzolf appeal and the Richard G. Mueller appeal. Apparently the William J. Marzolf appeal is not objected to, since he does not mention that in his letter. Mr. Koich claims that special exception permits, conditional use permits, amendments or variances cannot be approved over the objections of the Department. That is true so long as the objections and the basis therefore are submitted to the Board of Adjustment in writing and the Department of Natural Resources appears at the hearing to explain its written objections. Mr. Koich claims that he presented "written testimony expressing the Department's objection." In a letter to Tom Nelson dated September 23, 1992, admitted as Exhibit 4 at the hearing, Mr. Koich indicates that "I have changed my opinion..." He had previously appeared before the Board and testified to his full support of the Marzolf and Mueller applications. Then he appeared at the hearing on September 24th with his letter of objection. This certainly raises questions of due process and fair play. He offers as an explanation for his change of heart that his support was clouded by a willingness to help. God forbid that a public servant should be willing to help a member of the public. His willingness to help removed his objectivity and his ability to review. We must conclude from this that the only way Mr. Koich can do his job objectively is to be totally unhelpful to the public. St. Croix County should not encourage that kind of "robotic behavior." I don't believe Mr. Koich's letter fulfills the spirit or intent of the ordinance requiring written objections. Mr. Koich also states in his letter that the variance granted is improper because it will result in a change in the natural appearance of the shoreline, slope or bluffline as viewed from the river. That condition applies to an application for a variance to a setback requirement. The Richard A. Marzolf and Richard G. Mueller decisions indicate that the variance requested was for grading and filling, not for a reduction in setback. Therefore, Mr. Koich's reason for objecting to a setback variance is incorrectly applied to a grading and filling variance. Mr. Koich concludes that he has the authority to overrule the Board of Adjustment's decisions. I could find no provision in the Wisconsin Administrative Code to support that position. I believe the Department of Natural Resources would be required to follow the provisions of§59.99(10), Wisconsin Statutes, allowing any person aggrieved by a decision of the Board of Adjustment to file within 30 days of the filing of the decision a petition seeking the remedy available by certiorari. (However, since it appears that the Department did not follow its own administrative code requirement of submitting written objections to the Board, the DNR may be precluded from having the Board's decisions reviewed by a Court.) If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me. GAT/kas Enclosure IState of Wicr•nncin DFPARTMFNT OF NATURA RFCyn1113CFS RAL RESOURCES 2004 Highland Avenue Eau Claire,WI 54701-4346 Carroll D.Besadny TELEPHONE 7153393777 Secretary TELEFAX 715-839.1605 November 2, 1992 File Ref: 3590 St. Croix Co. Board of Adjustment John Bradley, Chairman 309 North River Road River Falls, WI 54022 Subject: Marzolf and Mueller Dear Mr. Bradley: At the September 24, 1992 Board of Adjustment hearing I presented both oral and written testimony expressing the Department's objection to the variance and conditional use permits by Richard A. "Buzz" Marzolf and Richard G. Mueller. On October 15,1992, I received the written decision of the board which conditionally approves the permits. Section 3.12 6.6 (3) of St. Croix County's Lower St. Croix Scenic Riverway Zoning Ordinance and Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 118.07(2) (c) state: Special exception permits, conditional use permits, amendments or variances shall not be approved over the objections of the department. We feel that the variance you granted is not supportable for the following reasons: 1. Your ordinance and NR 118 both state that " . . .no variance shall be granted for a setback which results in a change in the nar_ural appearance of the shoreline, slope of bluffline as viewed from the river. " Testimonv rom myse ouglas cMi ian, and his attorneys clear y in icates that there will in fact be a change in the natural appearance of the g pp shoreline and slope as viewed from the water. 2. The application or plans submitted by the applicants do not show how the natural appearance of the shoreline will be preserved. (In addition, the Department still has not received a copy of the revised plans submitted at the September hearing. ) I made the board aware of the Department's objections to these proposals from the testimony I presented at the hearing, therefore the department must overrule these permits as the permits issued by the board are not valid. By means of a copy of this letter, the applicants are also notified that their permits are void and no work may begin. w The Board of Adjustments must bring this issue back onto its agenda, make a finding of fact that the project was objected to by the department, and reverse the decision. In this manner, compliance with the ordinance and code will be achieved. nc rely, Koich Water Regulation and Zoning Specialist cc: E. Bourget T. Nelson R. Mueller R. Marzolf L. Grooms (D. McMillian) R. Henneger R. Mudge C44 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING November 23, 1992 (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter) The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 8:00 A.M. Bradley explained the procedures of the hearing, requesting that individuals wishing to testify sign their names and addresses on the sheet in the front of the room. Supervisors Kinney, Stephens, Menter, Neuman, and Bradley were all in attendance. Staff included Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator and Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel. Menter made a motion seconded by Stephens to approve the agenda. Motion carried. Bradley made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Seconded by Stepheris-.—Motion carried. The next regular meeting will be December 29, 1992. OLD BUSINESS AMES CONSTRUCTION Greg Paranto presented an amendment to his original request for a nonmetallic mining application for the mining of clay. The new information included a two (2) year limit on the mining and restoration activities. The total depth of the excavation will be no deeper than ten (10) feet, taking about twenty-five thousand (25000) cubic yards of material. Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve the request as presented restricting it to a two (2) year operation period. Motion carried. JON-DE FARM Keith Rodli, attorney representing the township of Rush river expressed concerns for a hospital barn that was recently constructed. - Nelson stated that the hospital barn had no reflection on the decision of number of animal units permitted by the Jon-De operation. A building permit is required but could not be refused if a proper application was submitted. Discussion on building and waste management plan. MARZOLF AND MUELLER Nelson presented a letter from Dan Koich, DNR, who objected to the conditional approvals granted by the Board of Adjustment on these properties. In his letter he is requesting that it be reconsidered and denied because of the objections of the DNR. Motion by Kinney, seconded by Stephens to leave the decision as it stands in part because of the conflicting testimony given by DNR. Roll call vote: Kinney, yes; Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Neuman, no; Bradley, no. Motion carried to leave the decision as originally granted. NEW BUSINESS Hearing was called to order at 8:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice of the hearing as published: 1. ARTICLE: 17.14(6) (h) Exceeding No. of animal units APPELLANT: Gary Duclos/Duclos Farms LOCATION: Part of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 9, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy 2. ARTICLE: 17.15(6) (a) Duplex APPELLANT: Laverne & Rosella Kattre LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 3, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond 3. ARTICLE: 17.18(1) (r) Expanding a commercial enterprise APPELLANT: Walter & Deborah Briskie LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 28, T29N-R15W, Town of Springfield 4. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (c) Road setback APPELLANT: Gerald Brennan LOCATION: N 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 30, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond 5. ARTICLE: 17.64(5) (2) Driveway separation APPELLANT: Thomas F. Marson LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 and the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 9, T28N-R19W, Town of Troy 6. ARTICLE: 17.35(5) (C)1 Setback from bluff 17.31(5) (1) Filling and grading APPELLANT: Marc Putman/Dr. John Foker LOCATION: Gov't Lot 1, Sec. 36, T28N-R20W, Town of Troy GARY DUCLOS/DUCLOS FARMS Nelson read a letter from Gary Duclos stating that he was withdrawing his application and that he would operate his farm in accordance to the St. Croix County Zoning ordinance. Discussion. LAVERNE & ROSELLA KATTRE Nelson stated that this proposal was for a duplex in the Ag.- Residential district of Richmond Township. He outlined the standards that should be considered when reviewing this application. Rosella presented her request stating that they were selling the residence and the new owners wanted to make sure it had the proper permits. Discussion on the existing construction. WALTER: & DEBORAH BRISKIE Walter presented a request for special exception to expand his grinding business by adding onto the existing building. The current structure is also too close to the town road and requires a setback variance. Discussion on lotsize, septic s sy em, and commercial code 'requirements. GERALD BRENNAN Gerald was not present to give testimony. THOMAS MARSON Joe Ryan presented a request to place a driveway less than five hundred (500) feet along STH 35. There should be access along the town road but so as to not interrupt the efficiency of the farming of the property they are requesting this access. Upon completion of the hearing the Board of Adjustment visited each site in question after which they entered in closed session to render the following decisions: MARC PUTMAN/DR. JOHN FOKER Prior to the hearing, Marc Putman requested that their hearing be delayed until the next month so as to receive DNR recommendations. LAVERNE & ROSELLA KATTRE Motion by Stephens seconded by Bradley to conditionally approve the duplex use providing the lower bedroom has a safe egress window and smoke detectors are installed on both levels. Motion carried. -NAL `` &-DEBORAH--BRISKIE Motion by Menter seconded by Kinney to conditionally approve the expansion of the grinding shop. All commercial building codes must be met as well as permits for septic system and EPA hazardous material storage. Setback variances to granted providing addition is no closer to the road than the existing structure. THOMAS MARSON Motion by Neuman seconded by Bradley to deny the request for the driveway separation of less than five hundred (500) feet. No hardship could be shown. Roll call vote: Kinney, no; Menter, yes; Stephens, yes; Neuman, yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried 4:1. Respectively submitted: .f Georg Menter, secre a y TCN:cj / ST. CROIX COUNTY WISCONSIN 12 FICE OF CORPORATION COUNSEL CROIX COUNTY COURTHOUSE 9 RTH STREET • HUDSON, WI 54016 (715)386-4755 December 22, 1992 � Z� The Honorable Eric J. Lundell 5� Circuit Court Judgea� Branch h St. Croix County Courthouse Hudson, WI 54016 RE: State of Wisconsin v. St. Croix County Board of Adjustment and St. Croix County File No. 92 CV 503 (Mueller) and 92 CV 504 (Marzolf) Dear Judge Lundell: Enclosed is the Board of Adjustment record regarding the above entitled actions. It consists of one expanding file folder with sub-files as follows: - August 27, 1992 Exhibits - September 24, 1992 Exhibits - Transcripts of August 27, 1992, September 24, 1992 and November 25, 1992 - Miscellaneous The Board conducted a joint hearing for both applications; there are not separate transcripts for the 2 files. By copy of this letter, I am notifying Lorraine Stoltzfus, attorney for Plaintiff, of the filing of the record with the Court. Sincerely yours, r Grego A. Timmerman Corporation Counsel St. Croix County, Wisconsin GAT/kas Enclosure cc Lorraine Stoltzfus, Assistant Attorney General Tom Nelson, County Zoning Administrator Report for Parcel #040114610000 1 St Croix County, WI Page 1 of 1 2010 Property Record I St Croix County, WI Assessed values not finalized until after Board of Review Property information is valid as of 11/15/10 Years in red have delinquent taxes NOTICE:All payments received by County Treasurer will be posted the next day. Property Description Billing Information Parcel ID: 040-1146-10-000 Name/ Attn.: RICHARD &MARY MARZOLF Map ID: 13.28.20.576A Address: 276 SALISHAN DR Municipality: TOWN OF TROY City, State, Zip: HUDSON, WI 54016-8060 Public Land Survey: SECTION 13 28N 20W Quarter: Ownership QQ / Tract: Primary Owner: RICHARD &MARY MARZOLF Plat: NOT AVAILABLE Secondary Owner: NO SECONDARY OWNERS LISTED Description: Deed Information SEC 13 T28N R20W PT GL 1 &2 DESC AS COM NE CDR SEC 13; TH S 89 DEG W 704.68'; TH N 89 DEG W 951.58'; Volume Page Document# TH S 0 DEG E 409'TO POB; TH S 89 DEG E 100'; TH S 18 1000 95 DEG W 758.74'; TH W 287.14'; TH N 12 DEG W 133'; TH W 350' MOL TO SHORELINE; TH NELY 700' MOL ALG Other SHORE- LINE TO A POINT N 89 DEG W OF POB; TH S 89 DEG E 450' MOL TO POB ALSO A PARCEL DESC AS; COM Fair Market Value $.00 NE CDR SEC 13; TH S 89 DEG W 704.68'; TH N 89 DEG W 951.58'; TH S 0 DEG E 409'; TH 89 DEG E 100'; TH S 18 Assessment Ratio: NOT AVAILABLE FOR 2010 DEG W 758.74'TO POB; TH S 18 DEG W 232.73'; TH N 63 Net Assess.Val. Rate: NOT AVAILABLE FOR 2010 DEG W 205.50'; TH N 12 DEG W 133'; TH E 287.14'TO POB School Districts: 2611 - HUDSON Property Address: 276 SALISHAN DR Total Acres: 6.67 ACRES Tax Detail Net Tax Before Lottery, First Dollar Credits .00 Assessed Value Lottery Credit (-) .00 Valuation Date: 11/09/2009 First Dollar Credit(-) .00 Assessment Acres Land Improved Total Net Tax After .00 Type Value Value Value G1-Residential 6.67 500,000 329,200 829,200 Amt. Due Amt. Paid Balance Totals--> 6.67 500,000 329,200 829,200 Net Property Tax .00 .00 .00 Special Assessments .00 .00 .00 Installments Special Charges .00 .00 .00 Please pay your 1st installment or full payment to County Delinquent Charges .00 .00 .00 Treasurer, 2nd installment to the County Treasurer. Private Forest Crop .00 .00 .00 Woodland Tax Law .00 .00 .00 Period Due Date Amount Managed Forest Land .00 .00 .00 Total Taxes--> .00 Penalties .00 .00 Tax Payment History Interest .00 .00 Date Receipt Number Amount Total .00 .00 .00 Specials Category Amount http://stcroixwi.mapping-online.com/StCroixCoWi/ParcelReport.j sp?keyword=04011461... 11/16/2010