HomeMy WebLinkAbout040-1146-50-000 DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT
ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN
Case No: 28-91
Filing Date: 4-29-91
Notice Dates: Weeks of May 6 & 13 1991 O D
Hearing Date: May 23 , 1991
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented,
the Board find the following facts:
1. The applicant or appellant is: William &-44a�y Marzolf
1863 Selby Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following
described property which is the subject of the application or
appeal: Gov't Lots 1 & 2 of Sec. 13 , Town of Troy, St. Croix Co.
3 . The property is presently used for: Vacant land
4 . The applicant or appellant proposes: Construct a 28' by 42'
residence 40' from the bluff line of the St. Croix • River and
immediately adjacent to the road right-of-way.
5. The applicant or appellant requests: Variance
Under section 17. 36(5) (c)1 & 17 .64(1) (e) 2 of the ordinance.
6 . The features of the proposed construction and property which
relate to the grant or denial of the application or appeal are:
The applicant is requesting a 42' by 28' residence that is set
back 40' from the bluffline to the West and on the edge of the
drive easement to the East access is provided by a driveway
easement that serves four other lots. These lots were created in
1971 prior to the effective date of the ordinance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based on the above finding the fact the Board concludes that:
VARIANCE - The variance must meet all three of the following
tests:
A. Unnecessary hardship is present in that a literal enforcement
1
Aof the terms of the zoning ordinance would deny the applicant all
reasonable use of the property because a 421x28 ' structure
exceeds reasonable use dimensions . This property cannot
accommodate this large of a structure.
B. The hardship is due to physical limitations of the property
rather than the circumstances of the appellant because the
property is very restricted by slopes exceeding 12% and to the
access of the property.
C. The variance will be contrary to the public interest as
expressed by the objectives of the ordinance because the existing
driveway access provides possible inaccessibility by emergency
vehicles.
ORDER AND DETERMINATION
The basis of the above finding of fact, conclusions of law and
the record in this matter the board orders:
VARIANCE/SPECIAL EXCEPTION - The requested special exception is
denied.
Motion to by Stephens, seconded by Sinclear. Motion carried.
Vote: Stephens, yes; Menter, yes; Sinclear, yes; Kinney, yes and
Bradley, yes.
******************************************************************
This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certiori in
county within 30 days the circuit court for this c y s after the date y
of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability
for and make no warranty as to the reliance on this decision if
construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day
period.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS/ADJUSTMENT
Date: — - `
Signed Filed: 6-18-91
Chairperso
cc: Town Clerk and file
I�
2
A� BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING AND HEARING
May 23 , 1991
(This meeting was recorded by a court reporter)
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kinney at 8:00 A.M.
Chairman Kinney explained that individuals wishing to testify
sign their names on the register in the front of the room.
Supervisors Stephens, Menter, Kinney, Sinclear, and Bradley were
all in attendance.
Staff included Zoning Administrator Tom Nelson and Corporation
Counsel, Greg Timmerman.
Bradley made a motion to adopt the agenda, seconded by Sinclear.
Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
ED AFFOLTER
Nelson explained that there were still concerns on the property
and that Ed had not coordinated a meeting to go over the issues
as had been requested. Discussion on survey of lot line. It is
felt this line should be properly located.
Nelson was directed to organize the onsite meeting.
Motion by Sinclear, seconded by Bradley to postpone a discussion
on the request until the next regular meeting.
ALLEN HANSON
Nelson stated that he has of this time not received updated plans
addressing the non-metallic mining ordinance. Bob Anderson
stated they would be developed in the near future.
Motion by Sinclear, seconded by Bradley to postpone the decision.
NEW BUSINESS
Hearing was called to order at 8:30 A.M. Nelson read the notice
as published.
The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public
hearing for Thursday, May 23, 1991 at 8:30 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 on site 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
1. ARTICLE: 17.29(2) (a) Filling and grading
APPELLANT: Trout Unlimited/Ivan Schloff
LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 18, T29N-R19W,
Town of Hudson
2. ARTICLE: 17.29(2) (a) Filling and grading
APPELLANT: St. Croix Alliance/Greg Warner
LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 17, T31N-R18W,
Town of Star Prairie
3. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (c)2 Setback - County Rd.
APPELLANT: Rick & Cheryl Fenstermaker
LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 7, T29N-R17W,
Town of Hammond
4. ARTICLE: 17.31(2) Setback - Original high water mark
APPELLANT: John & Linda Godfrey
LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 30, T31N-R18W,
Town of Star Prairie
5. ARTICLE: 17.31(c)1 Setback - bluffline
17.36(5) (b) Net project area
17.64(1) (e)2 Road setback
APPELLANT: Wm. J. and Patricia Marzolf
LOCATION: Gov't. Lots 1 and 2, Sec. 13, T28N-R20W,
Town of Troy
6. ARTICLE: 17.31(2) Setback - Ordinary high water mark
APPELLANT: Charles & Blanch Bjorklund
LOCATION: NW 1/4. of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 31, T31N-R18W,
Town of Star Prairie
7. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (D)2 Setback from a class D road
APPELLANT: Steven & Linda Wirth
LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 22, T31N-R16W,
Town of Cylon
8. ARTICLE: 17.36(5) (c)1 Setback - Bluffline
APPELLANT: Alex S. Kosa
LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 24, T28N-R20W,
Town of Troy
9. ARTICLE: 17.64(3) Driveway separation
17.64(3) (c)l Widening of driveway
APPELLANT: John Bettendorf
LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 19, T28N-R18W,
Town of Kinnickinnic
TROUT UNLIMITED/IVAN SCHLOFF
Ivan presented a request for a special exception to repair an
existing project. The repair on the riverbed would include
planking and rip raping to replace what had been dislodged.
The purpose is to maintain the depth of the pool and its width.
2
DNR supports the project.
ST. CROIX ALLIANCE/GREG WARNER
Greg presented a request to grade and remove materials on the bed
of Squaw Lake to improve the public boat landing. Because of the
fluctuating water levels, access is very difficult when the water
is down.
DNR has no problem with the request.
RICK FENSTERMAKER
Nelson stated that this was a violation of the ordinance and a
violation had been issued for a garage that had been built closer
to the road than the required 100 feet for the right-of-way line.
Rick stated that his ex-contractor was responsible for not
obtaining the permits and building it too close to the road. The
contractor was Croixland builders.
JOHN & LINDA GODFREY
Nelson stated that he had received a request for the withdrawal
of this appeal.
WM. J. & PATRICIA MARZOLF
Bill presented a request to build a 421x28' residence on a parcel
that existed before the effective date of the ordinance. The
building would be 40' from the bluffline, 25' from the side yards
and immediately next to the road easement that provides access to
two other lots.
Nelson stated he had met on the site with the applicants
providing technical information. one of the great difficulties
is the property accesses are very limited due to the excessive
slopes. No grading or filling can be done on slopes that exceed
12%.
Bob Marzolf, the applicants brother, expressed concerns as to how
it might adversely affect his property for future development of
a residence.
The township of Troy expressed concerns for emergency vehicle
access to these properties because the road is very restrictive.
CHARLES & BLANCH BJORKLUND
Charles presented a request to rebuild on his property closer to
the Apple River than the 75' setback requirement of the
ordinance. Currently no hardships are shown to exist.
Dan Koich, DNR, expressed concerns that the county ordinance had
not been amended to allow setback averaging which would allow
this request.
Ed Halkowski, neighbor to the south, stated he did not feel the
variance should be granted violating the ordinance.
3
STEVE WIRTH
Steve requested a variance for a setback off of a town road for a
pole shed.
Due to drainage problems on the property, this is the only
location that can accommodate the building.
The township does support this proposal.
ALEX KOSA
Alex Kosa requested a variance so that he could build closer to
the bluffline with a deck and a three season porch. In addition
he would like to add an additional level to the residence
exceeding the 25' height allowed by ordinance.
Nelson stated that this request should be denied because it was
for convenience and not a hardship. There were other
alternatives that would accomplish his needs.
Dan Koich, DNR, stated that he also could not support this
request for the same reasons.
JOHN BETTENDORF
John requested that his driveway be widended from 44' to 118' to
better accommodate his commercial trucking terminal.
Nelson stated that the driveway was already in violation being
441 . The ordinance allows 35' on this type of use. Discussion
on driveway separation and instillation of driveway without
permits.
Respectfully submitted:
Robert Stephens
TCN:cj
4
DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF
[APPEALS] [ADJUSTMENT]
ST. Croix COUNTY, WISCONSIN
Case No.
Filing Date: 4_.4 q!
Notice Dates:
Hearing Date:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented,
the Board finds the following facts:
1. The applicant or appellant is:ujim,
2. The applicant or appellant is the [owner] [lessee] [mortgagee]
of the following describld__pr�oP �r,t y//�wiich is the subject of
the applicat'on or appeal: / o� fhe 1/4, Sec.
Town of , St. Croix County.
3. The property is presently in use for Ua4X.1tGLVJ and has been
so used continuously since 1911
II r
4. The applicant or appellant proposes: C,p %T, r"C C'
Ui
�C
5. The applicant or appellant requests:1411 -�
tion.
ic vari ce.
I1. 3(. (S )Cc) I
Under section 1'1•toy G) (C) 2. of the ordinance.
6. The features of the proposed construction and property which
relate to the grant or denial I f, the ap lication or appeal
are: W
tkc-k L-<:> Jaa 6wtk y 0
Itz
ad'akr)ej 51
-T" 4nv 9-4),L civa eA2.AJ 1 9-7 1
ov
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based on the above finding of fact the Board concludes that:
INTERPRETATION - The Zoning Administrator's interpretation of
Section of the zoning code [is/is not] a correct
interpretation because:
APPEAL - The order of the Zoning Administrator [is/is not] in
excess of [his] [her] authority because:
VARIANCE - The variance must meet all three of the following
tests:
A. Unnecessary hardship Ote is not present in that a literal
enf e m e h t of the the zoning ordinance
[w=erty would not] deny applicant all reasonable use of
because:
2' x OR s - C
Wo nai
B. The hardship Per [ is not] due to physical limitations of the
property rat than the circumstanc s f tt}e appellant
because: b
C. The variance will [will not] be contraw to the public
interest as expressed by he , objectives of the ord' ance
because: Cr
a
SPECIAL EXCEPTION - The application for a special exception use
permit [does] [does not] qualify under the criteria of Section
of the ordinance because:
ORDER AND DETERMINATION
The basis of the above finding of face, conclusions of law and
the record in this matter the board orders:
INTERPRETATION - The Zoning Administrator's interpretation of the
zoning code or map is [affirmed/modified/reversed ] and the
administrator is order to:
VARIANCE/SPECIAL FXCEPTION - requested [permit] [special
exception ] [varian_ce is denied granted] (granted in part]
subject to the following conditions:
1 .
2.
3 .
4 .
5.
*****************************************************************
Vote : K' nney_ _, Bradley_ , Stephens , Menter_ ,
Sinclear
Motion by seconded L� Motion carried.
The Zoning Adminis r d rected to issue a zoning permit
incorporating these 1 s.
Any privilege granted by his de ' sion must be exercised within
12 months of the date of thKif ion by obtaining the necessary
building, zoning and other for the proposed construction.
This period will be exte is decision is stayed by the
order of any court or op ation of law.
This order may be revoked b e Board after notice and
3
opportunity to be heard for olation of any of the conditions
imposed.
This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certioari in
the circuit court for this county within 30 days after the date
of filing of the decision. The municipality assumes no liability
for and make no warranty as to reliance on this decision if
construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30 day
period.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS/ADJUSTMENT
Signed Filed:
Chairperson
Date:
cc: File
Town clerk
v
�I
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN
The Application of: DECISION
Wm. J. & Patricia A. Marzolf File No. 61-92
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, Wm. & Patricia Marzolf, whose address is 1863 Selby
Ave. , St. Paul, MN 55104 requests a variance permit pursuant to
section 17.35(5) (c)1 and 17.64(1) (e)2 of the St. Croix County
zoning ordinance for the following described parcel of land, which
applicant 11661W. located in GovOt Lots 1 & 2, Section 13, T28N-
R20W, Town of Troy, St. Croix County, Wisconsin.
The applicant proposes to construct a twenty-eight (28) by forty-
two (42) foot residence that would be forty (40) feet from the
bluff line of the St. Croix River and immediately adjacent to the
road right-of-way.
The undue hardship applicant claims as a basis for the variance is
this property which was created as a lot in 1971 was made
nonconforming by the adoption of the Riverway District Ordinance.
FINDINGS OF FACT
(1. ) The project is as described in the permit and plans.
(2. ) The project will not adversely effect the intent to preserve
and maintain the scenic characteristics of the district.
(3. ) The parcel existed prior to the effective date of the Riverway
Ordinance.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant variance permits
as per 17.36(5) (c)2 the Zoning Ordinance.
DECISION
Based on the finding of fact and conclusions of law, the
application of Wm. & Patricia Marzolf for a variance permit is
conditionally approved with the following conditions:
1. All vegetative screening be maintained. Trees are removed
in the future because of disease or other damage must be
replaced with comparable trees.
2. Structure be an earth tone color and not be visually
intrusive. Color to approved by Zoning Administrator prior to
construction.
NAME YES/NO
voting: John Bradlely yes
Bernard Kinney yes
George Menter yes
Robert Stephens yes
Jerome Neuman absent
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.
J n'-Brac�'Ie , airman Filed:,'
DATE: Oct. 12, 1992
� N
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.
WILLUN 0LF. RIB, URWLY; AM RICH&=, XU
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 no new evidence would be
provided. Roll call vote: Neuman, yes; Menter, no; Bradley, no;
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.
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 MARZOLF
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.
C'
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:
C�
lijy
George enter, secr a
TCN:cj
r
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—Stephens. 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.
h
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
gaiter 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 �t size, septic system, ano-ommercial- 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.
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:
Georgg7Menter, secre a rvy
TCN:cj
r Parcel #: 040-1146-50-000 07/14/2009 03:26 PM
PAGE 1 OF 2
Alt. Parcel#: 13.28.20.576A-4 040-TOWN OF TROY
Current X ST. CROIX COUNTY,WISCONSIN
Creation Date Historical Date Map# Sales Area Application# Permit# Permit Type #of Units
00 0
Tax Address: Owner(s): 0=Current Owner, C=Current Co-Owner
WILLIAM & PATRICIA MARZOLF O-MARZOLF, WILLIAM & PATRICIA
7180 FOXBORO LA
WOODBURY MN 55125
I
Districts: SC= School SP=Special Property Address(es): *=Primary
Type Dist# Description
SC 2611 HUDSON
SP 1700 WITC
Legal Description: Acres: 1.160 Plat: N/A-NOT AVAILABLE
SEC 13 T28N R20W PT GLS 1 &2 COM 743 FT Block/Condo Bldg:
WOFNECORGL1,THS1230 FT,THW340
FT, TH S 788 FT,TH N 67 DEG W 290 FT, Tract(s): (Sec-Twn-Rng 40 1/4 160 1/4)
TH N 53 DEG W 400 FT,W 70 DEG W 177 FT, 13-28N-20W
TH N 47 DEG W 310 FT, TH N 12 DEG W23.5
FT TO POB: CONT. N 12 DEG W 133 FT, TH W
more
Notes: Parcel History:
Date Doc# Vol/Page Type
07/23/1997 479/70
2009 SUMMARY Bill#: Fair Market Value: Assessed with:
0
Valuations: Last Changed: 07/21/2004
Description Class Acres Land Improve Total State Reason
RESIDENTIAL G1 1.780 423,500 184,200 607,700 NO
Totals for 2009:
General Property 1.780 423,500 184,200 607,700
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Totals for 2008:
General Property 1.780 423,500 184,200 607,700
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Lottery Credit: Claim Count: 0 Certification Date: Batch#:
Specials:
User Special Code Category Amount
Special Assessments Special Charges Delinquent Charges
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parcel #: 040-1146-70-000 07/14/2009 03:27 PM
PAGE 1 OF 1
' Alt. Parcel#: 13.28.20.576B-1 040-TOWN OF TROY
Current X ST. CROIX COUNTY,WISCONSIN
Creation Date Historical Date Map# Sales Area Application# Permit# Permit Type #of Units
00 0
Tax Address: Owner(s): O=Current Owner, C=Current Co-Owner
WILLIAM &PATRICIA MARZOLF O-MARZOLF, WILLIAM &PATRICIA
7180 FOXBORO LA
WOODBURY MN 55125
Districts: SC= School SP= Special Property Address(es): '=Primary
Type Dist# Description
SC 2611 HUDSON
SP 1700 WITC
Legal Description: Acres: 0.000 Plat: N/A-NOT AVAILABLE
SEC 13 T28N R20W PT GLS 1&2 DESC AS COM Block/Condo Bldg:
NE COR SEC 13;TH S 89 DEG W 704.68';TH
N 89 DEG W 951.58'; TH S 0 DEG E 409'; Tract(s): (Sec-Twn-Rng 40 1/4 160 1/4)
TH S 89 DEG E 100'; TH S 18 DEG W 13-28N-20W
991.47'TO POB TH S 1 DEG W 197.14'; TH
N 47 DEG W 200; TH N 12 DEG W 155.72';
more...
Notes: Parcel History:
Date Doc# Vol/Page Type
07/23/1997 1000/97 QC
07/23/1997 988/385 WD
2009 SUMMARY Bill#: Fair Market Value: Assessed with:
0 040-1146-50-000
Valuations: Last Changed:
Description Class Acres Land Improve Total State Reason
Totals for 2009:
General Property 0.000 0 0 0
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Totals for 2008:
General Property 0.000 0 0 0
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Lottery Credit: Claim Count: 0 Certification Date: Batch M
Specials:
User Special Code Category Amount
Special Assessments Special Charges Delinquent Charges
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
l
v
fD A m � s
CD
C 3 0 �W d ! o " o .0
CD CD 51
mO N N N =C^ O C O
W N 3 N "O 0 V Ol
O N 0 O O
CO O A O)
.�.+
n N D O
V J O 3 A O
cn
N N �° N
d
m D m F,
CD :. N
CD In fl- Q.
p m
M M
N°o i rn o cn
A N
N A W j ! .r cr lr
Z
_. 5 cn cn cn a N.
CD a -0 v v o s
m 'm m m
7 :3 w
m
C a
° N
zcoz o
D
o a ' �
CD
CO m
D N
N [�
N c
O N
m °'
3 E
fl A 2 <o
0 A z 3
i
p N W
W
` CO
G r z
3 r
°o o
y! z
CD
N
i
O v N N C N Q
N A a n Q (D
2 m 0 O < ? T
,n.. C7(n n Sll C
O < C O Z C.
O fD v n C O
O NN Co N
p.
v O Q N N
Fn o 3 m
¢0 0 a o e
w m CD n y�
N
7 p N N ;z-
cc 007
O.
N N (T O O
N c
N W O w N
Oho
w D 3
n �
o N m °
CD n : b N
q c
<
O O
CD
O n