Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout026-1163-13-000 (2) CROIX COUN- A- PLANNING & ZONING October 26, 2007 File Ref: SE0141 Oranzo Oevering Oevering Homes, LLC PO Box 179 New Richmond, WI 54017 Re: St. Croix County After-the-Fact Special Exception Request Code Administratie 715-386-4680 Parcel#: 25.30.18.1263,Town of Richmond Land Information Dear Mr. Oevering: Planning Pp 715-386-4674 .P.-; The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment (Board) has reviewed your after-the-fact special Real Prry exception application for a contractor's storage yard in the Ag Residential District in the 715 -4677 Town of Richmond. After the hearing on October 25, 2007, the Board voted to deny the request. The enclosed document is the formal decision regarding the application. R cling -386-4675 Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, x ennifer Shillcox Land Use Specialist/Zoning Administrator Eric: Decision .: Cc: Clerk, Town of Richmond Kenneth Oevering,property owner Came Stoltz, St. Croix County Code Enforcement Specialist _M; "��` ' x+2 ST.CRO/X COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1 101 CARmIcHAEL ROAD,HUDSON, WI 54016 7153864686 FAx POPCO.SAINT-CROIX.WI.US VM1VV.CO.SAI NT-C ROIX.WI.U S 8. The Town of Richmond Town Board recommended approval of this request. 9. According to testimony and evidence provided by the owners of two lots within the Hollow Pond subdivision at the hearing on October 25,2007, property values have been adversely impacted by activities on the applicants' lot; children and pets have been put at risk by equipment being driven on the residential streets; restrictive covenants are in place prohibiting heavy equipment and on July 9, 2007 Oranzo Oevering drafted and signed new proposed covenants that would have continued this prohibition; and noise from heavy equipment routinely awakens them as early as 6:30 AM. The applicants did not appear at the hearing to oppose or contradict any of the testimony. DECISION On the basis of the above Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law,and the record herein, the Board denied the applicant's after-the-fact special exception request. The following vote was taken on the motion to deny: Chairperson Malick, yes;Nelson,yes; Struemke, yes. Luckey and McAllister were not present. Motion carried. APPEAL RIGHTS Any person aggrieved by this decision may file an appeal in St. Croix County circuit court within 30 days after the filing date shown below,pursuant to§59.694(10),Wisconsin Statutes. St.Croix County assumes no responsibility for action taken in reliance on this decision prior to the expiration of the appeal period. St. Croix County does not certify that the identity of all persons legally entitled to notice of the Board of Adjustment proceedings,which resulted in this decision,was provided to the County. If an appeal is taken of this decision, it is the responsibility of the appellant to submit at his/her expense a transcript of the Board of Adjustment proceedings to the circuit court.The Planning and Zoning Department can be contacted for information on how to obtain a transcript. It is the responsibility of the Board of Adjustment to submit its record(file)of this matter to the circuit court. According to Article VIII, Section 6 of the St.Croix County Board of Adjustment Rules and By-Laws,the Board may also entertain a request for reconsideration by a party interested in a decision provided the request is in writing and new written evidence is submitted with the request. On receipt of a properly filed request to reconsider,the Secretary shall place the matter on the next agenda under"Other Business"for consideration at the next regular meeting. A request for reconsideration must be filed with the Secretary at least 15 days prior to the next regular meeting date,which is scheduled for November 29,2007. A decision of the Board may be reconsidered by motion to reconsider made no later than the following regular meeting, in which event the matter shall be placed on the agenda for a subsequent hearing and a new notice given without additional fee. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed: Clarence W.Malick, airperson Date Filed: 10/26/2007 2 FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS,AND DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY,WISCONSIN File: SE0141 Applicants: Kenneth Oevering,property owner Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes, LLC,business operator Parcel#: 25.30.18.1263 Complete Application Received: September 4,2007 Hearing Notice Publication: Weeks of October 8 and 15, 2007 Hearing Date: October 25,2007 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Having heard all the testimony,considered the entire record herein, and reviewed the site,the St.Croix County Board of Adjustment makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicants are Kenneth Oevering, property owner, and Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes, LLC, business operator. 2. The site is located at 1406 130t"Avenue in the Hollow Pond Subdivision in the SW '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 25, T3 ON, RI 8W,Town of Richmond St. Croix County,Wisconsin. 3. The applicant filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.77-acre lot within Hollow Pond, a 16-lot major subdivision,pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(d)of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 4. This request violates the spirit and intent of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. Although a contractor's storage yard is an allowed use in the Ag Residential District,which the property is currently zoned, it would not be appropriate on this site and within this subdivision. The site features a model home and a pole shed, which over the past year the applicants have used to store lawn care equipment used to service the Hollow Pond Subdivision and eight other subdivisions owned by Oevering Construction and Real Estate, Inc. in St. Croix,Polk, and Dunn counties. Access to the site is from a shared driveway with the adjacent residential property to the west. past year have occurring on the site within the v Property owners within the subdivision testified that the activities occ g p been a problem(see Finding#s 5, 6 and 9 below). 5. This request would be contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents within the subdivision.Property owners within the subdivision testified that children and pets have been put at risk by contractor equipment being improperly operated on the residential streets and across lots within the subdivision. 6. This request would affect the residential character of the Hollow Pond subdivision and has the potential to be substantially adverse to property values in the surrounding neighborhood. The Hollow Pond major subdivision constitutes a distinct residential neighborhood. The applicants' lot is a small lot of less than two acres in size, which is less than the required minimum average lot size for lots within a major subdivision.The minimal lot size does not provide adequate space to sufficiently buffer the proposed contractor storage yard from neighboring residential lots. 7. This request would constitute a nuisance by reason of noise or odor, which could not be effectively minimized by a vegetative buffer due to the small lot size.Additionally, such vegetative buffer would be out of character with existing landscaping within the subdivision. In the application,the applicant stated that hours during which equipment is accessed and used are between 8:00 AM—5:00 PM once to three times per month. Property owners within the subdivision testified that the applicants were accessing and using equipment and holding noisy parties on the site for their employees and others outside of these hours, although they do not live at the site. The Board determines the testimony to be more credible. Staff recommended approval of the request based on 17 findings of fact and conclusions of law. Bonnie Tennessen,property owner, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. There is an 8-acre parcel to the North where the dog waste could be spread. The 8-acres is not currently being used for anything. In 1994-1995 she had spoken with someone at the courthouse to inquire if any permits were needed and apparently had been misinformed. It is impossible to regulate how many puppies are on the property at any given time. Puppies are ready to be off the property at two months of age. There is always someone on the site. She currently has a few dogs that can't breed any longer and they will be given up for adoption. No one spoke in opposition to the request.. The Board recessed for a break at 9:35 a.m. The Board reconvened at 9:45 a.m. Application# 1 Gary Elert—Special Exception The applicant requested an after-the-fact special exception for a limestone stairway that he installed on his lot in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District in the Town of St. Joseph. Staff presented the application and the staff report. The St. Joseph Town Board recommended approval of the request and noted that the applicant has made a significant improvement to the overall appearance of the property. The St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department reviewed the application and visited the site and found the stairway not to be causing any unnecessary erosion and to be visually screened from the river. They had no objections to the application. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources reviewed the application and visited the site, and found the stairway to be well hidden from the river, and the construction methods to be appropriate to not cause continued erosion. They also noted appurtenances along the stairway that were not included in the application(patios, landings, and outcroppings) that should be removed or have permits applied for separately. Staff recommended tabling the request to receive additional information from the applicant. David Magnuson, attorney for the applicant and the City of Stillwater, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. The adjacent property was donated to the City of Stillwater to keep it commercial free. He agreed with staff s recommendation of getting more information on the survey. Elerts have the property looking very nice compared to the previous owners. No one testified in opposition to the request. 2 I BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING MINUTES October 25,2007 The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Malick at 8:35 a.m. A roll call was made. Sue Nelson, Chuck Struemke, Chairperson Malick, and Linda Luckey were present. Jerry McAllister was absent and excused. Staff included: Jenny Shillcox, Zoning Specialist; Kevin Grabau, Code Administrator; David Fodroczi, Director; Steve Olson, Land and Water Conservation Department and Becky Eggen, Recorder. Staff confirmed to the Board that this was a properly advertised meeting. The next meeting for the Board is scheduled for Thursday,November 29, 2007 at 8:30 a.m. in the County Board Room of the Government Center in Hudson. Chairman Malick opened the meeting. Testimony was taken and recorded by Laurel S. Dean, court reporter from Q &A Court Reporters. Unfmished Business: Micabren Acres—Reconsideration At the applicant's request, the Board tabled the request for reconsideration of the revocation on the horse boarding facility. Nicholas Vivan, the applicant's attorney, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. The applicant has hired JEO to draft a CSM combining lots 18, 19, and 20. A land contract to separate the residential subdivision and the horse boarding facility has been written but cannot be recorded until the CSM has been signed and recorded. An affidavit has been drafted and will be recorded if and when the permits are reinstated. The applicant has submitted an irrevocable letter of credit of$10,000. Application #5 Bonnie and Dorie Tennessen—Special Exception and Variance The applicants requested an after-the-fact special exception approval to continue operating a dog kennel on a 48-acre parcel in the Ag Residential District in the Town of Glenwood. They also requested an after-the-fact variance to the 700-foot setback to continue operating the kennel on their property. Staff presented the application and the staff report. The Town of Glenwood has left the matter up to the County Board of Adjustment. St. Croix Land and Water Conservation department recommended that the applicants haul the dog waste off-site or sample the waste and generate a 590 nutrient management plan, which would address application rates and setbacks. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources informed staff that the DNR does not have water quality data on file for Blue Creek, which is also referred to as Ryan Creek,but that fish surveys were done in 1994 and 2003 in which substantial numbers of brook trout were found, as well as mottled sculpin, brook stickleback, and western blacknose dace. They recommended that NR 243 standards could be applied for managing the dog waste to help protect the creek. Application#3 Kenneth Oevering& Oranzo Oeverina, Oeverin2 Homes,LLC- Special Exception The applicants requested an after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.77-acre lot in the Ag Residential District in the Town of Richmond. Staff presented the application and the staff report. The Town Board of the Town of Richmond recommended approval. Staff recommended approval of the request based on eight findings of fact and conclusions of law. Speakers from the previous application(Rickard) agreed that their testimony should apply to this application as well. No one testified in favor of the request. Jeff Bailey, a neighbor, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. He had a scientist come to his home and tested thoroughly for mold. The report said there was mold growing due to faulty materials. The landscaping business for which the applicants are requesting a contractor's storage yard is something that Mr. Bailey has never heard of before. He has never seen any landscaping equipment in the area. Steve Walton, a neighbor, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. Behind the house on the property there are materials, trusses, shingles, etc. The shed was built on the property this year. Janis Bailey, a neighbor, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. She does not want the permits approved. The applicants have already created enough havoc. She did not sign a covenant and that has turned the applicant and other neighbors against the Baileys. No one lives in the model home. The shed has a big light on it that lights up neighbors' property. She feels the applicants must have been notified before staff came out for a site visit since the property has looked the best it ever has. Application # 4—Brian Johnson—Special Exception The applicant requested a special exception permit to construct a lift in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District in the Town of St. Joseph to safely access the St. Croix River. Staff presented the application and the staff report. The St. Joseph Town Board recommended approval of this request. St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department reviewed the plans and recommended that the applicant verify that there is an alternative site for the replacement septic trenches; verify that electrical components for the Iower base of the lift are elevated above the 100-year flood elevation and that the structure can withstand flood pressures, uplift, and other flood factors, and seed all disturbed areas with native vegetation upon completion of the project. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources reviewed the application and stated that if the standards i I I I 4 I Motion by Struemke, second by Nelson to table the request and not to exceed three meeting dates. Motion carried unanimously. Application#2—Jennifer Rickard& Travis David—Special Exception The applicants requested an after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.87-acre lot in the Ag Residential District in the Town of Richmond. Staff presented the application and staff report. The Town Board of Richmond recommended approval. Staff recommended approval of the request with nine findings of fact and conclusions of law. I Steve Walton,neighbor to the applicant, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. He is concerned for the safety and welfare of his family. There is a lot of traffic coming and going from the property including big, loud equipment. The applicants sub- contract for Oevering Homes. Bonnie Pearson, neighbor to the applicant, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. She bought a lot in a residential area,not a lot in a commercial district. She has concerns about the hazardous materials that are stored in the shed. She also has another concern for her grandkids' safety. The noise of the equipment wakes her up in the morning around 6:30 a.m. If the permit is approved, there is a chance that her property value may go down. She is very opposed to the business. Janis Bailey, a neighbor, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. She is opposed to the business they are conducting. Thursday and Friday nights the applicants are partying until 10:00— 11:00 p.m. drinking beer and driving the bob cat drunk. Mrs. Bailey has lived in her home for two years and has not met the neighbors since they are not part of the Oevering's or the Rickard's businesses; the Baileys feel like the outsiders. There are police reports to show the calls that have been made against the applicants. Jeff Bailey, a neighbor, signed an oath and spoke in opposition to the request. There was a covenant with signatures stating no heavy equipment in the subdivision which is not valued by the applicants. A major home business should not be allowed in a residential subdivision; it belongs in a business area. The bob cat that the applicants drive around is through homeowners' yards not on the roads. vegetation to be planted to stabilize the disturbed areas and screen all components of the lift within five years. The plan should also indicate proposed new vegetation to restore the area along the top and within 40 feet of the bluffline in accordance with the vegetation management standards in Section 17.36 H.8 of the Ordinance. The Board recessed for the day at 4:50 p.m. The Board reconvened on Friday,October 26, 2007 at 8:37 a.m. A roll call was made. Sue Nelson, Chuck Struemke, Chairperson Malick were present. Jerry McAllister and Linda Luckey were absent and excused. Staff included: Jenny Shillcox, Zoning Specialist; Kevin Grabau, Code Administrator; David Fodroczi,Director. Application #2 Jennifer Rickard and Travis David- Special Exception Motion by Struemke, second by Nelson to deny the after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard in the Town of Richmond based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicants are Jennifer Rickard,property owner, and Travis David, Concrete Design Construction, LLC,business operator. 2. The site is located at 1407 131"Avenue in the Hollow Pond Subdivision in the SW '/ of the SW '/ of Section 25,T30N, RI 8W,Town of Richmond St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 3. The applicant filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after-the- fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.87-acre lot within Hollow Pond, a 16-lot major subdivision,pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(d) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 4. This request violates the spirit and intent of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. Although a contractor's storage yard is an allowed use in the Ag Residential District, which the property is currently zoned, it would not be appropriate on this site and within this subdivision. The site currently features a single-family residence and the applicants propose to add a pole shed with an office and fenced-in outdoor storage area in the future. Access to the site is from a single, gravel driveway access. The applicants live on the site and have operated their concrete business, Concrete Design Construction, LLC, from it for approximately one year. Property owners within the subdivision testified that the activities occurring on the site within the past year have been a problem (see Findings#5, 6 and 9 below). 5. This request would be contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents within the subdivision. Property owners within the subdivision testified that children and pets have been put at risk by contractor equipment being improperly operated on the residential streets. 6 of Section 17.36H.13 of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance can be met,then the Department has no additional comments. Staff recommended approval of the request based on eleven findings of fact and conclusion of law. No one testified in favor or in opposition to the request. The Chair closed the hearing at 11:50 a.m. and the Board recessed for lunch and site visits. The Board reconvened at 3:30 p.m. Minutes Motion by Nelson to adopt the minutes, second by Struemke. Luckey abstained. Motion carried. Decisions After hearing the testimony and reviewing the material in the record,the Board rendered the following decisions: Unfinished Business: Micabren Acres—Reconsideration Motion by Nelson, second by Struemke to reconsider the horse boarding facility with conditions of$10,000 cash surety and an unambiguous letter of commitment from the lender to be received by staff no later than Wednesday,November 14, 2007; in the event that these items are not submitted by the deadline, the Board's revocation of the special exception permit will stand and the public hearing will be canceled. Motion carried unanimously. Application #4 Brian Johnson—Special Exception Motion by Struemke, second by Malick to table the special exception for a lift in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District in the Town of St. Joseph with the following information still needed: 1. A revised site plan showing the location of the replacement sanitary system, the lift, and access from the house to the top of the lift including any proposed stairs and/or structural erosion control measures. The revised site plan must also show the lower landing relocated above the floodplain elevation, OR you may submit a land use permit to construct the landing within the floodplain, along with verification from a registered professional engineer that it will be constructed and floodproofed in compliance with Section 17.40 G.3.c of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 2. A vegetation management plan showing all existing trees and shrubs to be removed for the lift(including the diameter at breast height and species), as well as proposed new 5 within Hollow Pond, a 16-lot major subdivision,pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(d) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 4. This request violates the spirit and intent of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. Although a contractor's storage yard is an allowed use in the Ag Residential District, which the property is currently zoned, it would not be appropriate on this site and within this subdivision. The site features a model home and a pole shed,which over the past year the applicants have used to store lawn care equipment used to service the Hollow Pond Subdivision and eight other subdivisions owned by Oevering Construction and Real Estate, Inc. in St. Croix, Polk, and Dunn counties. Access to the site is from a shared driveway with the adjacent residential property to the west. Property owners within the subdivision testified that the activities occurring on the site within the past year have been a problem (see Finding#s 5, 6 and 9 below). 5. This request would be contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents within the subdivision. Property owners within the subdivision testified that children and pets have been put at risk by contractor equipment being improperly operated on the residential streets and across lots within the subdivision. 6. This request would affect the residential character of the Hollow Pond subdivision and has the potential to be substantially adverse to property values in the surrounding neighborhood. The Hollow Pond major subdivision constitutes a distinct residential neighborhood. The applicants' lot is a small lot of less than two acres in size,which is less than the required minimum average lot size for lots within a major subdivision. The minimal lot size does not provide adequate space to sufficiently buffer the proposed contractor storage yard from neighboring residential lots. 7. This request would constitute a nuisance by reason of noise or odor, which could not be effectively minimized by a vegetative buffer due to the small lot size. Additionally, such vegetative buffer would be out of character with existing landscaping within the subdivision. In the application, the applicant stated that hours during which equipment is accessed and used are between 8:00 AM— 5:00 PM once to three times per month. Property owners within the subdivision testified that the applicants were accessing and using equipment and holding noisy parties on the site for their employees and others outside of these hours, although they do not live at the site. The Board determines the testimony to be more credible. 8. The Town of Richmond Town Board recommended approval of this request. 9. According to testimony and evidence provided by the owners of two lots within the Hollow Pond subdivision at the hearing on October 25, 2007, property values have been adversely impacted by activities on the applicants' lot; children and 8 6. This request would affect the residential character of the Hollow Pond subdivision and has the potential to be substantially adverse to property values in the surrounding neighborhood. The Hollow Pond major subdivision constitutes a distinct residential neighborhood. The applicants' lot is a small lot of less than two acres in size, which is less than the required minimum average lot size for lots within a major subdivision. The minimal lot size does not provide adequate space to sufficiently buffer the proposed contractor storage yard from neighboring residential lots. 7. This request would constitute a nuisance by reason of noise, odor, or dust, which could not be effectively minimized by a vegetative buffer due to the small lot size. Additionally, such vegetative buffer would be out of character with existing landscaping within the subdivision. 8. The Town of Richmond Town Board recommended approval of this request. 9. According to testimony and evidence provided by the owners of two lots within the Hollow Pond subdivision at the hearing on October 25, 2007,property values have been adversely impacted by activities on the applicants' lot; children and pets have been put at risk by equipment being driven on the residential streets; restrictive covenants are in place prohibiting heavy equipment and the applicants gave their signed approval on July 9, 2007 to new proposed covenants that would have continued this prohibition; and noise from heavy equipment routinely awakens them as early as 6:30 AM. The applicants did not appear at the hearing to oppose or contradict any of the testimony. Motion carried unanimously. The Board recessed for a break at 9:20 a.m. The Board reconvened at 9:30 a.m. Application #3: Kenneth Oevering& Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes, LLC— Special Exception Motion by Malick, second by Nelson to deny the after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard in the Town of Richmond based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicants are Kenneth Oevering, property owner, and Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes, LLC, business operator. 2. The site is located at 1406 130`h Avenue in the Hollow Pond Subdivision in the SW 1/4 of the SW '/ of Section 25, T30N, RI 8W, Town of Richmond St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 3. The applicant filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after-the- fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.77-acre lot 7 The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to the after-the-fact special exception permit for a dog kennel: 7. The applicants filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after-the-fact special exception permit to continue operating an existing dog kennel in the Ag Residential District pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(f) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 8. The applicants currently live on the parcel and have operated a dog kennel on the property for the past ten years. Staff from the St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Department recently notified the applicants that they needed a special exception permit and variance to continue operating the kennel on their property. The kennel operation occupies two adjoining barns on the property, and a portion of the basement of the applicants' residence.As part of the operation, the applicants breed and sell several small breeds of dogs including Miniature Pinschers, Yorkies, Boston Terriers, Papillions, Italian Greyhounds, and Chihuahuas. According to the applicants,no more than 70 puppies have been raised per year. The applicants sell puppies retail directly to potential pet owners, not wholesale to pet shops. 9. The majority of litters raised on the site are registered with the American Kennel Club (AKC), and the applicants' facilities are subject to regular inspections and reports by the AKC. The most recent compliance report issued by the AKC in April 2007 found the applicants to be in compliance with AKC rules and regulations. The St. Croix County Sheriff s Department also recently conducted a site visit in August 2007 and issued an incident report on animal welfare, and concluded that the conditions for dogs appeared to be fine. 10. Breeding adults housed in the adjoining barns currently have no outside access for sun and exercise. The applicants intend to construct fenced-in, outdoor runs along the north and east sides of the existing barns. 11. This request would not violate the spirit or general intent of the St. Croix County Zoning rdinance. Kennels are allowed in the A Residential ential District with a special g p exception permit provided all standards can be met. The kennel is secondary to the principal use of the property as the applicants' residence. The surrounding area features primarily agricultural use with limited, low-density residential development, none of which is in close proximity to the existing kennel. With conditions limiting the number of adult dogs one year of age and older on the site to no more than 60 at any given time, and ensuring that the future outdoor run areas are buffered by vegetation to reduce noise and visibility, the rural character of the area would be preserved and the kennel would not be substantially adverse to property values in the surrounding neighborhood. 12. The applicants currently stockpile dog waste and cedar bedding n a concrete ad g p located approximately 150 feet from Blue Creek, a small trout stream that bisects the property. The waste is spread in horse pastures on the property that directly abut and 10 I pets have been put at risk by equipment being driven on the residential streets; restrictive covenants are in place prohibiting heavy equipment and on July 9, 2007 Oranzo Oevering drafted and signed new proposed covenants that would have continued this prohibition; and noise from heavy equipment routinely awakens them as early as 6:30 AM. The applicants did not appear at the hearing to oppose or contradict any of the testimony. Motion carried unanimously. The Board oa d recessed for a break at 11:00 a.m. The Board reconvened at 11:10 a.m. Application#5: Bonnie & Dorie Tennessen—Special Exception & Variance Motion by Struemke, second by Nelson to approve the after-the-fact special exception and variance applications to continue operating a dog kennel in the Ag Residential District in the Town of Glenwood based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: I 1. The applicants are Bonnie and Dorie Tennessen,property owners and kennel operators. 2. The site is located at 3070 130th Avenue in the NW t/ of the NE % of Section 34, T3 ON, R15W,Town of Glenwood, St. Croix County, WI. 3. The site is zoned Ag Residential District and is within the Shoreland and Floodplain Districts of Blue Creek (also known as "Ryan Creek"), which bisects the property. The kennel facilities are located outside of the these districts,but dog waste from the facilities is applied on land within these districts and within a primary environmental corridor as identified by the St. Croix County Development Management Plan 2000- 2020 (see Finding#12 below). 4. According to the Town Clerk, the Town of Glenwood Town Board is leaving this matter up to the County and has not submitted any recommendations for the Board's consideration. 5. The St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department recommends that the applicants haul the dog waste off-site or sample the waste and generate a 590 nutrient management plan, which would address application rates and setbacks. 6. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources does not have water quality data on file for BIue Creek, which is also referred to as Ryan Creek,but that fish surveys were done in 1994 and 2003 in which substantial numbers of brook trout were found, as well as mottled sculpin, brook stickleback, and western blacknose dace (the latter only in the 1994 survey). The Department recommends that NR 243 standards could be applied for managing the dog waste to help protect the creek. 9 located within 1000 feet of the kennel facilities as measured from the County's aerial photos. With the conditions listed in Finding#12 above, negative impacts to adjacent properties and potential nuisance factors would be minimized. 18. When determining whether an unnecessary hardship exists,the Board of Adjustment must identify unique physical characteristics of the property that would otherwise prohibit the applicant from using the property for a permitted purpose, and then weigh the burden placed on the applicant in meeting the requirements of the Ordinance against the public interests being protected. In this case, literal enforcement of the Ordinance would not allow the applicants to be able to use their property for a permitted purpose.The dimensions and unique physical characteristics of the 48.27- acre lot,including the floodplain of Blue Creek to the south and steep slopes over 25 percent to the north, severely limit the placement of a kennel on the property in a manner that would meet the 700-foot setback on all sides. The existing kennel facilities are currently located in the only buildable area on the parcel. With the following conditions: 1. This special exception permit and variance allows the applicants to continue breeding, raising and selling puppies on the site as indicated in the plans submitted for the existing kennel operation, and as provided in the conditions below. As part of this approval, the applicants cannot have more than 60 adult dogs one year of age and older on the site at any given time. The applicants shall reduce the current number of adult dogs to 60 by no later than December 31,2007, and shall notify the Zoning Administrator when this has been done. Approval for this special exception permit does not include any additional dogs,pets, structures, services, or other activities. 2. The applicants shall be responsible for complying with any other local, state, or federal permit requirements, licenses and approvals. 3. Within 30 days of this approval, the applicants shall submit to and have approved by the Zoning Administrator a management plan for all dog waste and bedding. As part of the plan, the applicants shall either agree to store all dog waste and bedding in enclosed containers and provide documentation to verify that it will be hauled off-site to an appropriate facility OR store the waste on an impervious surface and apply the waste on the eight acres of fallow fields located above the slope along the northern portion of the property upon approval from the Land and Water Conservation that the field is suitable for utilizing the waste. 4. Normal hours of operation shall be limited to 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM M—F, and 10:00 AM to 8:00 PM Saturdays and Sundays. No dogs and puppies shall be in outside enclosures beyond dawn to dusk. 5. Upon complaints of regularly occurring, excessively loud noise at any time, the applicant shall work with the Zoning Administrator to abate the noise problem. In the 12 drain to the creek. With conditions requiring the applicants to store all dog waste and bedding in enclosed containers and have it hauled off-site to an appropriate facility OR store all dog waste and bedding on an impervious surface and spread and incorporated on the eight acres of fallow fields located above the slope along the northern portion of the property, this request would not be contrary to the health, safety or general welfare of the public. Negative impacts to the water quality and ecology of Blue Creek would be minimized consistent with the Shoreland and Floodplain Districts and the County's goals and objectives for protecting primary environmental corridors. 13. With conditions to limit the number of adult dogs one year of age and older on the site to no more than 60 at any given time, and ensure that the future outdoor run areas are buffered by vegetation to reduce noise and visibility for adjacent properties, negative impacts and potential nuisance factors would be minimized. 14. At the hearing on October 25, 2007, the applicant testified that she had approximately 61 adult dogs, including breeding females,breeding males, and non-breeding adults. She also testified that eight acres of fallow fields located above the slope along the northern portion of the property could be used for spreading the dog waste. The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to the after-the-fact variance request for a dog kennel to encroach within the required setback: 15. The applicants filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after-the-fact variance to the 700-foot setback required for kennels in the Ag-Residential District pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(f) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 16. The existing kennel facilities meet the 700-foot setback from the property lines to the west and to the south,but not to the north and east. The barns housing the breeding pairs are located approximately 67 feet from the closest neighboring property line to the east and approximately 400 feet to the property line to the north. The residential walkout housing the birthing mothers and puppies is located approximately 500 feet from the closest property line to the north and approximately 400 feet from the closest property line to the east. The proposed outdoor run areas for the breeding adults will encroach approximately 10-20 further into the required setbacks to the north and east. 17. Granting the variance to the 700-foot setback would not violate the spirit and intent of the Ordinance, the primary purpose of which is to protect neighboring properties from negative impacts and nuisance factors such as noise, smell, and visibility of dogs on the site. The kennel operation has existed on the site for approximately 10 years with no complaints from neighboring property owners until this year. The applicants' property is well screened and buffered from adjacent properties to the north by a limestone cliff and steep slopes that are heavily wooded with mature evergreens. The property to the east features cattle pastures with similar site characteristics and physical limitations that would appear to limit future residential development on the property, and no existing residences. No neighboring existing residences appear to be 11 f Todd Domino—Modifications to vegetation plan were submitted to staff. The Board allowed staff to administratively review the changes. Mackmiller—Applied for a land use permit to remove a berm that was approved at an earlier date by the Board of Adjustment. The Board had no concerns; staff can process the land use permit. B &L Liquor—A question came in regarding a meat counter in the store. The Board reviewed and agreed with staff that the applicant would have to apply for an amendment to the existing special exception. Lindquist—Modifications to Condition#4 was submitted to staff regarding the septic tank area. The Board agreed that staff could address the modifications administratively. The meeting was adjourned at 12:35 p.m.by Chairperson Malick. Respectfully submitted, Sue Nelson, Secretary Becky Egge(JRecoAi4 Secretary 14 event that the matter cannot be resolved administratively, the applicant shall take the matter before the Board of Adjustment at a public hearing. 6. The applicants shall have no more than one employee in addition to themselves. 7. The applicants shall be responsible for keeping the property in a neat and orderly manner. 8. All lighting associated with the kennel shall be downward directed and shielded away from neighboring properties to prevent glare. Only lights on the building or building overhangs at a level not to exceed the height of the lowest eaves may be left on overnight for security purposes. 9. No additional signs are approved as part of this permit. Any future signage shall require prior review and approval by the Zoning Administrator pursuant to the St. Croix County Sign Ordinance. 10. The applicants shall be responsible for contacting the Zoning Administrator to review this special exception permit in two years from the approval date for compliance (October 2009). These conditions may be amended or more conditions may be added if unanticipated circumstances arise that would affect the health and/or safety of citizens or degrade the natural resources of St. Croix County. Conditions will not be changed without notice to the applicant and opportunity for a hearing. 11. Any minor change or addition to the kennel operations, including but not limited to a change in use or facilities, or the addition of services or staff shall require prior review and approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to making the change or addition. Any major change or addition to the originally approved plan will have to go through the special exception approval process. 12. Accepting this decision means that the applicants and all property owners have read, understand, and agree to all conditions of this decision. Motion carried unanimously. New Business The Board previously directed staff to provide status updates on staff actions regarding modifications on permit previously approved by the Board. Modifications were submitted on the following: Kopp/Calleja—A complaint was sent by an adjoining property owner regarding a sign that is creating safety issues. The Board tabled the matter to allow Mr. Calleja to provide an update to the Board at the November hearing. 13 CROIX COUNrl A. PLANNING &. ZONING January 7, 2008 Filc Rcl: SE0141 »> Oranzo Oevering Y " Oevering Homes LLC PO Box 179 <` New Richmond, WI 54017 Code Ad Re: Reconsideration of St. Croix County After-the-Fact Special Exception Decision minis tratif 715-386-4680 Parcel#: 25.30.18.1263,Town of Richmond Land lnfonnar on&0' Dear Mr. Oevering: Planning 715-386-4674: The St. Croix County Board of Adjustment (Board) has reconsidered it October 25, 2007 Real Pr rry decision to deny your after-the-fact special exception application for a contractor's storage 715 -4677 yard in the Ag Residential District in the Town of Richmond. After the hearing on January 3, 2008, the Board voted to reaffinn its denial. The enclosed document is the forinal decision R cLng -386-4675 regarding the reconsideration. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, fil eiulifer Shillcox Land Use Specialist/Zoning Administrator . Eric: Decision c:{R 4 Cc: Cleric, Town of Richmond a< Kenneth Oevering,property owner Ryan Cari, attorney m rc: Carrie Stoltz, St. Croix County Code Enforcement Specialist :t t.:t ST.CROIX COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1 101 CARMICHAEL ROAD,HUDSON, W/ 54016 7153864686 FAX P��CO.SA/NT CROIX.WLUS WWW.CO.SAINT-CROIX.WI.US has been made in this chapter for the determination of such cases by the Board ofAdjustment as special exceptions. Special exceptions shall only be granted subject to the following provisions: a. General Standards: 1. No grant of a special exception shall violate the spirit or general intent of this chapter. 2. No special exception shall be allowed which would be contrary to the public health, safety, or general welfare or which would be substantially adverse to property values in the neighborhood affected. 3. No use shall be permitted by special exception that would constitute a nuisance by reason of noise, dust, smoke, odor, or other similar factors. 4. The Board shall also apply standards set forth in other sections of this chapter which apply to particular classes of special exceptions. " 8. The applicants state that the proposed use of the property is consistent with the spirit and intent of the neighborhood. The applicants have submitted photos of six properties within the Hollow Pond and the neighboring area featuring other residences with large pole sheds. From the information provided, staff has been unable to verify the addresses or zoning of these properties, or whether or not the pole sheds on these properties are used for personal or business-related storage. If any are used as contractor's storage yards, then they would require special exception permits approved by the Board in order to be operating legally. According to the records on file at the St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Department, the Board has processed only three special exception applications for contractor's storage yards in the Town of Richmond from 1989 -Present, including the applicants', Travis David's(which is operating illegally without a special exception permit), and a new application for New Richmond Tree Service to be heard at the January 3,2007 meeting.No permits have been approved for GTK Towing or DC Roofing Company,two of the companies listed in the photographs provided. 9. As part of its October 25, 2007 decision,the Board found that this request violates the spirit and intent of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance and would negatively affect the residential character of the Hollow Pond subdivision. A contractor's storage yard would not be appropriate on the applicants' lot and \-within the Hollow Pond subdivision. The Hollow Pond subdivision constitutes a distinct residential neighborhood with residential uses existing in close proximity to each other. In reviewing the final plat, staff has verified that the Hollow Pond subdivision is the maximum density that a subdivision can be in the Ag Residential District with an average lot size of 2.01 acres. The smallest lot size is 1.50 acres. The applicants' lot is a small lot less than two acres in size, which is less than the required minimum average lot size. The applicants' minimal lot size and the small size of other lots within the subdivision do not provide adequate space to sufficiently buffer noise from and views of the applicants' business activities from neighboring residential lots. These circumstances have not changed since the Board's October 25, 2007 decision. 10. The Board has never approved a special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a lot under two acres in size within a major subdivision. According to the records on file at the St. C1_01X County Planning and Zoning Department, the Board has processed 33 special exception applications for contractor's storage yards in the Ag Residential District from 1989—Present. Of these, one was annexed into the Village of Roberts,two were denied (one of which was the applicants') and three are recent applications pending decisions at the January 3, 2008 hearings. Of the 27 that the Board approved: • One was within a major residential subdivision but featured a lot size of 3.97 acres. The subdivision featured 1 1 lots with an average lot size of 4.02 acres. The smallest lot size was three acres. • All but one were on lots/parcels of two acres or more.Approved parcel sizes ranged as follows: ➢ 1 permit<2 acres(1.84 acres, not within a major subdivision) ➢ 18 permits>2— 10 acres ➢ 3 permits>10—20 acres ➢ 3 permits>20—30 acres y 2 permits>30—40 acres 2 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS,AND DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ST. CROIX COUNTY,WISCONSIN File: SE0141 Applicants: Kenneth Oevering,property owner Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes,LLC,business operator Parcel#: 25.30.18.1263 Complete Original Application Received: September 4,2007 Request for Reconsideration Received: November 14,2007 Hearing Notice Publication: Weeks of October 8 and 15, 2007 and December 17 and 24, 2007 Hearing Dates: October 25,2007 and January 3,2008 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Having heard all the testimony,considered the entire record herein,and reviewed the site,the St.Croix County Board of Adjustment makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicants are Kenneth Oevering,property owner, and Oranzo Oevering, Oevering Homes, LLC, business operator. 2. The site is located at 1406 130"'Avenue in the Hollow Pond Subdivision in the SW '/4 of the SW '/, ol'Section 25, T30N,R18W, Town of Richmond St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 3. The applicant filed an application with the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment(Board) for an after-the-fact special exception permit for a contractor's storage yard on a 1.77-acre lot within Hollow Pond, a 16-lot major subdivision,pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(d) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The lot features a model home and a pole shed,which the applicants have used over the past year to store lawn care equipment used to service the Hollow Pond Subdivision and eight other subdivisions owned by Oevering Construction and Real Estate, Inc. in St. Croix,Polk, and Dunn counties. No one resides on the site,but the home is being used as a model home and office for the applicants' business. Contrary to the information provided as part of the original application, the applicants testified at the January 3, 2008 hearing that the equipment will only be used to service three unsold lots in the Hollow Pond Subdivision while stored on the site. When the three lots are sold, the equipment will be moved to a commercial site located at 201 Packer Drive, Suite H, Roberts, WI. Access to the lot is from a shared driveway with the adjacent residential property to the west. 4. At a public hearing held on October 25,2007, the Board voted to deny the application based on nine Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. 5. The applicants requested a reconsideration of the Board's decision pursuant to Article VIII, Section 6 of the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment Rules and By-Laws. At a regularly scheduled meeting held on November 29, 2007, the Board voted to reconsider its decision at a subsequent hearing. The applicants provided new testimony at the meeting and have submitted new evidence for the Board's consideration. 6. Despite testimony provided by the applicants on January 3, 2008 that all vehicles and equipment will be stored inside a building, the proposed use still constitutes a contractor's storage yard. Among other factors, the Board heard at all three hearings that vehicles and large equipment will be operated on the site while being loaded and unloaded, and people engaged in the business will be visiting the site. 7. According to a written analysis provided by the applicants, the proposed contractor's storage yard is expressly allowed as a special exception under the Ordinance. However, Section 17.15(6)(d)of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance, a contractor's storage yard "may be allowed in the Ag Residential District as a special exception upon approval of the Board of'Adjustment as provided in Subchapter VII."Subchapter VII, Section 17.70(7)further provides that "certain uses and situations are of such a special nature or their effect is so dependent upon actual contemporat),circumstances as to make impractical the determination in advance of'permissibility. Provision on how to obtain a transcript. It is the responsibility of the Board of Adjustment to submit its record (file) of this matter to tlic. circuit court. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Signed: Clarence W.Malick,Chairp son Date Filed: 01/07/2008 4 11. It is uncertain whether or not this request would be contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents within the subdivision, or substantially adverse to property values in the neighborhood affected. According to testimony and evidence provided by the owners of two lots within the Hollow Pond subdivision at the hearing on October 25, 2007, property values have been adversely impacted by activities on the applicants' lot; children and pets have been put at risk by equipment being improperly operated on the residential streets and across lots within the subdivision; restrictive covenants are in place prohibiting heavy equipment and on July 9, 2007 Oranzo Oevering drafted and signed new proposed covenants that would have continued this prohibition; and noise from heavy equipment routinely awakens them as early as 6:30 AM. The applicants have stated that this testimony is untrue and have questioned the credibility and motives of these property owners. The applicants have submitted a copy of a restraining order filed against one of the property owners who testified in opposition, as well as a property listing for the other property owner indicating that his property in the subdivision has increased in value over the last two years despite his testimony that it has decreased. The Board was not persuaded by evidence of an asking price for the Walton property that property values would not be adversely affected. The applicants also submitted affidavits from four other property owners within the Hollow Pond subdivision in support of their application.All testimony from neighbors in opposition and in support was provided under oath. 12. The Board finds that this proposed use would constitute a nuisance by reason of noise. In the application, the applicants stated that hours during which equipment is accessed and used are between 8:00 AM - 5:00 I'M once to three times per month. Property owners within the subdivision testified at the October 25, 2007 hearing that the applicants were accessing and using equipment and holding noisy parties on the site for their employees and others outside of these hours, although they do not live at the site. The applicants have stated that this testimony is untrue. The applicants have also submitted affidavits from four other neighboring property owners within the Hollow Pond subdivision in support of their application. All testimony from neighbors in opposition and in support was provided under oath. As part of its October 25, 2007 decision, the Board found that a nuisance could not be effectively minimized by vegetative buffer as required by the Ordinance due to the small lot size. Additionally,y, vegetative buffer would be out of character with existing landscaping within the subdivision. 13. The Town of Richmond Town Board recommended approval of the original request for an after-the-fact special exception permit, but has not submitted a formal recommendation regarding the applicants' request for reconsideration. On January 3, 2008, one Town Board member testified in favor of the application. DECISION On the basis of the above Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and the record herein, the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment reaffirmed its denial of the applicants' after-the-fact special exception permit. The following vote was taken on the motion to reaffirm: Chairperson Malick,yes; Luckey, yes; Struemke, yes; McAllister,yes.Nelson was not present. Motion carried. APPEAL RIGHTS Any person aggrieved by this decision may file an appeal in St. Croix County circuit court within 30 clay s alier the f ilin�, date shown below, pursuant to §59.694(10), Wisconsin Statutes. St. Croix County assumes no responsibility for action taken in reliance on this decision prior to the expiration of the appeal period. St. Croix County does not certify that the identity of all persons legally entitled to notice of the Board of Adjustment proceedings,which re r J p g , s rlted in this decision, was provided to the County. if an appeal is taken of this decision, it is the responsibility of the appellant to submit at his/her expense a transcript of the Board of Adjustment proceedings to the circuit court. The Planning and Zoning Department can be contacted for information 3