Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout026-1008-40-000 (2) \ \ � / 0 . \ \ � o 0 G + o )) \ f $ @ §$ ox $ \ CL w @ // C) � kk/ � / // § ) z x 0 x U) � ƒ �$ 7 R \ E < 3a@ \ \ ? y \ \ E n / ƒ a m ( B ( c w 2 c § o ¥ ® c = § ® G o o , a \ \ \ § ) / k \ } \ % � k 0 2 2 CLM\ a 3 3 a ® CO E \ y -� k \ ) 0 0 a � E S g B § , r Q ' z @ @ / \ < CD © - ( & = 2 / I § � U) . / \ \ \ ) ) $ \ « « ( G 3 § } / \ \ 0 \ ] ± \ \ B § o @ k - 2 2 $ _ & a & ; k C') j \ } G i 2 / { \ / § ' \ ) \ 0)§ \ ]} } k \C o f @ E % k 2 - CL >, CL ° - © & \ a. / k \ DECISION OF ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT I ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN Case No: 59-91 Filing Date: 8-5-91 Notice Dates: Weeks of Sept. 16 23, 1991 00 os Hearing Date: Sept. 26, 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: Jeffrey Lauck 1522 95th St. New Richmond, WI 54017 2. The applicant or appellant is the owner of the following described property which is the subject of the application or appeal E 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 3, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond 3 . The property is presently used for: Duplex 4. The applicant or appellant proposes: Obtain proper permit for a duplex. This use has been in operation illegally since 1975. 5 . The applicant or appellant requests : A special exception permit under section 17.15(6) (a) 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: An application has been received by th applicant. The township of Richmond supports the proposal. No local opposition has been received. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Based on the above finding the fact the Board concludes that: SPECIAL EXCEPTION- The application for a special exception use permit does qualify under the criteria of Section 17.15(6) (a) of the ordinance because the Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant special exceptions. 1 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 granted. Motion to approve by Stephens, seconded by Menter. Motion carried. Vote: Menter, yes; Sinclear, yes; Kinney, yes and Bradley, yes. The Zoning Administrator is directed to issue a zoning permit incorporating these conditions. Any privilege granted by this decision must be exercised within 12 months of the date of this decision by obtaining the necessary building, zoning and other permits for the proposed construction. This period will be extended if this decision is stayed by the order of any court or operation of law. This order may be revoked by the Board after notice and opportunity to heard for violation of any of the condition imposed. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certiori 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 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: 9-27-91 Chair er on cc: Town Clerk and file 2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING September 26, 1991 I (This meeting was recorded by a court reporter) i The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kinney at 8:00 A. M. Chairman Kinney 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 Bradley, Menter, Sinclear, Stephens and Kinney were all in attendance. Staff present was Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator. Stephens made a motion to adopt the agenda as submitted. Bradley seconded the motion. Motion carried. Discussion was held on item number 12 on hearing agenda. Kinney stated in view of the ruling corporation counsel has made in regards to Zappa excavating that he didn't think appellant Beverly Anderson should have to seek a permit. Motion by Kinney seconded by Menter that no hearing be held and she will be refunded her filing fee. This will apply to any requests in the future as well. Motion carried. OLD BUSINESS JOHN BROWN John Brown made an appeal to the decision of 110 feet granted at a previous hearing. He feel 82 feet is a reasonable variance request and would be even with the residents on either side. THOMAS OAKLEY Nelson stated that a stop work order had been placed on the property. At the time of the septic inspection it was found that the relocated residence was too close to the bluffline. The original application was for remodeling of an existing structure that was a non-conforming use. This request was granted with the understanding that remodeling would not exceed 50% of the assessed value. The house was torn down and a new dwelling constructed. Stop orders were issued in November 1990. Eventually a new site was permitted by hearing process and the house again reconstructed but unfortunately in the wrong area. Bob Mudge , Attorney representing Oakley, stated that this violation was not the fault of the owner or the contractors but rather a surveying error done by Johnson Surveying Inc. Harvey Johnson testified and agreed there had been an error in interpreting the bluffline. 1 NEW BUSINESS The hearing was called to order at 9:00 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. 26, 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. ARTICLE: 17.15(6) (a) Duplex APPELLANT: Jeffrey C. Lauck LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 29, T29N-R18W, Town of Richmond 2. ARTICLE: 17.18(1) (r) Rental storage space APPELLANT: Lloyd & Carol Olson LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NW1/4 of Sec. 29, T29N-R18W, Town of Springfield 3. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (c) Setback from road APPELLANT: Gary & Gail Maier LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 29, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren 4. ARTICLE: 17.64(1) (c) Setback from road APPELLANT: Jerome & Lolita Johnson LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 OF Sec. 3 , T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 5. ARTICLE: 15.03(3) Solid Waste Disposal/Recycling Center APPELLANT: Town of Stanton Board LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 30, T31N-R18W, Town of Stanton 6. ARTICLE: 17.18(1) (r) Body Shop APPELLANT: Greg DeRosier LOCATION: S 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 32, T31N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 7. ARTICLE: 17.29 Filling & Grading APPELLANT: Cedar Corporation/Glen Malcein LOCATION: NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 2, T28N-R16W, Town of Eau Galle 8. ARTICLE: 17.18(1)9r) Rental storage space APPELLANT: John M. Johnston LOCATION: SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 29, T31N-R16W, Town of Cylon 2 9. ARTICLE: 17.14(1) (a) Setback APPELLANT: Ronald Baillargeon LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec. 23, T31N-R19W, Town of Somerset 10. ARTICLE: 17.64(5) (3) Driveway separation APPELLANT: American Precious Metals, Inc./Dale Durand LOCATION: S 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 25, T28N-R29W, Town of Troy 11. ARTICLE: 17. 29 Filling and grading APPELLANT: Warren Wood LOCATION: NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 32, T29N-R18W, Town of Star Prairie 12. ARTICLE: 229(89) Non-metallic mining APPELLANT: Beverly L. Anderson LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec. 32, T29N-R18W, Town of Warren JEFFREY LAUCK Jim Moe, realtor representing the property, stated that this had been a duplex since 1975. However, since it did not have the proper permits, lending institutions are now requiring the proper zoning. Therefore, they are now requesting this special exception approval . The township of Richmond supports this proposal. GARY & GAIL MAIER Gail presented a request to build an addition onto their existing residence. This addition would be set back the same distance as the existing residence of 71 feet from the center of the road. The town of Warren supports this proposal. JEROME & LOLITA JOHNSON Lolita presented a request to construct a 40'x36' garage 65' from a township road. The topography of the property is such that a garage cannot be built elsewhere. The township of Star Prairie supports the proposal. TOWN OF STANTON Richard Hesslink presented a request to build a 241x30' pole shed 65' from the town road for a recycling and storage shed. The existing township hall is currently this close and because of the lot dimensions it cannot be placed elsewhere on the property. GREG DEROSIER Tom Scumacher, Attorney for DeRosier presented a facility plan for an Auto Body Shop. The plan included screening and parking. No junk will be stored on the property. The township of Star Prairie supports the proposal. Dennis Dabler and Roger Sorenson were opposed to the operation since it was a nuisance to the neighborhood. This has been in 3 violation since 1987 and been operated like a junk yard. There has been no consideration for how the operation looks or hours of operation. There was also discussion on sanitary facilities and the fumes from the paint booth. CEDAR CORPORATION/GLEN MALCEIN Richard Hefti from Cedar Corporation presented a plan for rip rap on an unnamed tributory. This fill is to be used to stabilize flood plain storm water run off. The township of Eau Galle supports this proposal. JOHN JOHNSTON Vern Orf presented a request to build commercial storage buildings on property owned by John Johnston. The building will be used by Domain Industries for cold storage. There was a discussion by the Board of Adjustment in that during the rezoning hearing it had been proposed as a Mini Storage facility. RON BAILLARGEON Ron presented a request to be 16 feet from a side yard line for a building to shelter livestock (horses) . The ordinance requires 100 feet, but because of the difficult topography it cannot be sited elsewhere. The township of Somerset supports this proposal. AMERICAN PRECIOUS METALS, INC./DALE DURAND Dale presented a request to place a driveway 130 feet from another driveway or STH 35 . The location of the existing driveway does not make it possible for easy truck access. The township of Troy supports the proposal. WARREN WOOD Warren presented a rip rap and drainage plan for property located on Cedar Lake. Neighbors, the township and Star Prairie and the DNR all support the request. After visiting the properties the following decisions were rendered for old business: JOHN BROWN Stephens made a motion to grant a variance of 90 feet from CTH E. This would place the structure more in line with the residences on either side. Motion seconded by Sinclear. Motion carried. THOMAS OCKULY Stephens made a motion to grant the variance of 21 feet from the bluffline allowing the structure to remain in the present location. The non-conforming placement was not due to owner error but rather due to error done by a professional surveyor. The residence must be completed, including the septic system, before a cerfificate of occupancy can be obtained. A letter is also to be sent to Harvey Johnson condemning his 4 error and suggest he not work in the Riverway District for a one year period. Motion seconded by Bradley. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted Robert Stepheri6, Sec ry TCN:cj Decisions attached 5