HomeMy WebLinkAbout026-1089-90-000 o a�i °
ry
03 °�
�: ao o
a 0. 0
� I
° o
H L
Mi O
~ c I
Z;
I
0
C I
a a I
I
N N 7E!a) O 0
z
C _
LL C N E
O = N
3 Qn
0o
a m z
0
� I
z
ao 0
0
Z N d d
° a m
M F- Z
0 Z
v o W
o
N
N
H
H
•� N N
IV
i
t
a
I
c O
o Q Q
O Z Z Z
I
N
H
I
o ..
ad —
,atS � C. ate+ C
O W N
C CL m C
H H H c
`0 3 3 3 a
•N Eaaa a.
FL I;
0 0
M J U j Z Z
O _O
O
= Q
T � d �
m C
U a N Q
m
Z to m
It
O — Q
o N U1
t v O O\ �.CC Apy O r O °
'7 O 0 Cl)O _0 ON 0(p N V -6 0 E E c
co ?2 ' C N d C j - N 0 N
C ° o E ! C m aD v v c o co
M L
O U
•O O cr) l m O Z y z z g (A
O at L L: a
0 CL
rn E > 0
A U a O U)
Parcel #: 026-1089-90-000 08/06/2009 01:50 PM
PAGE 1 OF 1
Alt. Parcel#: 30.30.18.469C 026-TOWN OF RICHMOND
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
0- BRENNAN, GERALD& DONNA
GERALD& DONNA BRENNAN
1341 CTY RD A
NEW RICHMOND WI 54017
Districts: SC =School SP=Special Property Address(es): "=Primary
Type Dist# Description ' 1341 CTY RD A
SC 3962 NEW RICHMOND
SP 8020 UPPER WILLOW REHAB DIST
SP 1700 WITC
Legal Description: Acres: 4.000 Plat: N/A-NOT AVAILABLE
SEC 30 T30N R18W PT NW SE COM INT N LN Block/Condo Bldg:
SE 1/4&CL HWY A TH E 812.5'TH S 52DEG
W 353'TO POB S 52DEG W 96'S 58DEG W Tract(s): (Sec-Twn-Rng 40 1/4 160 1/4)
3215S 34DEG W 141.6' N 64DEG W 399.7' 30-30N-18W
TO CL HWY A TH N 33DEG E ALG CL 235.4'
TH S 88DEG E 663.26'TO POB
Notes: Parcel History:
Date Doc# Vol/Page Type
2009 SUMMARY Bill M Fair Market Value: Assessed with:
0
Valuations: Last Changed: 09/09/2008
Description Class Acres Land Improve Total State Reason
RESIDENTIAL G1 3.750 58,800 94,000 152,800 NO
UNDEVELOPED G5 0.250 100 0 100 NO
Totals for 2009:
General Property 4.000 58,900 94,000 152,900
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Totals for 2008:
General Property 4.000 58,900 94,000 152,900
Woodland 0.000 0 0
Lottery Credit: Claim Count: 1 Certification Date: Batch#: 221
Specials:
User Special Code Category Amount
Special Assessments Special Charges Delinquent Charges
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
DECISION
Based on the finding of fact and conclusions of law, the
application of Gerald Brennan for a variance permit is granted.
NAME YES/NO
Voting: John Bradley yes
Bernard Kinney yes
George Menter yes
Robert Stephens yes
Jerome Neuman yes
This decision expires after one year from the date of the decision.
If the proposal is not commenced within that time, a new
application must be submitted and approved before proceeding with
the proposal. If the proposal is not completed within that time,
an extension of the decision must be obtained.
This decision may be revoked by the Board after notice and hearing
if any condition of the decision is violated.
This decision may be appealed by any person aggrieved by the
decision by filing with the St. Croix County Circuit Court an
action for certiorari within thirty (30) days of the date of filing
this decision. Applicant assumes all risk of relying on this
decision within the thirty (30) day appeal period.
John Bradley Cha' an Filed: L
DATE: Jan. 12, 1993
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT COP
ST. CROIX COUNTY, WISCONSIN
The Application of: DECISION
Gerald Brennan File No. 77-92
A hearing was held in the above referenced matter on Dec. 29, 1992
before the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment, Chairperson John
Bradley and members, Jerome Neuman, Robert Stephens, Bernard
Kinney, and George Menter.
The applicant, Gerald Brennan, whose address is 1341 Co. Rd. A, New
Richmond, WI 54017 requests a variance permit pursuant to section
17.64(1)c of the St. Croix County zoning ordinance for the
following described parcel of land, which applicant owns located in
the N 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 30, T30N-R18W, Town of Richmond,
St. Croix County, Wisconsin.
The applicant proposes to construct a garage addition ninety (90)
feet from the centerline of Co. Rd. A. The dimensions of the
addition are twenty-four by twenty (24x20) feet long and will be no
closer than the existing garage.
The undue hardship applicant claims as a basis for the variance is
the property is located such that topographic limitations, location
of the existing house, drainfield and well provide no other area in
which to build the additional garage space.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1) There is an existing garage ninety (90) feet set back from the
centerline of the road;
2) Site limitations restrict the placement of a new structure;
3) The town board of Richmond supports the proposal.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant variance permits
as per 17.70(5) (c)3 the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance.
� T
ST. CROIX CO. ZONING OFFICE
911 4th St.
Hudson, WI
(715) 386-4680
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION
NO: FEE: $150.00
DATE
APPLICANT OR AGENT: -
�!/i 6 PHONE: S
ADDRESS: /
? OWNER•
o
ADDRESS•
. e A.,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT, SUBDIVISION:
1/4., Sec. _, TN, RW, Town of
PARCEL NO:
VARIANCE_& SPECIAL EXCEPTION
This property is currently used for llceand has been used 2m id
continuously since 47'Z
SPECIAL EXCEPTION ("), (p���C - ,drw'nat �,ol
NOTE: Special exception use permits are granted inn the
discretion of the _ Board of Adjustment Committee. The are made
available to validate uses which, while not approved within the
zoning district in question, are deemed to be compatiAle with
approved uses and/or not found to be hazardous , harmful ,
offensive or otherwise adverse to other uses, subject to review
by the circumstances and the imposition of conditions, subject to
the provisions of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance.
If it is your belief that a special exception use permit should
be granted to you for the above-described property, please set
forth, in detail, the intended use of the property and your
justification in applying for such a permit:
1
a r =Iv
a
�i
to OL --�`.
-Z,� EXHIBIT
we
VARIANCE
NOTE: Variances from the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may
be applied for only where, owing to special conditions, a literal
enforcement of the Ordinance will result in an "unnecessary
hardship" which is defined, in the Zoning Ordinance as meaning
"an unusual or extreme decrease in the adaptability of the
property to the uses permitted by the zoning district, which is
caused by facts, such as rough terrain or good soil conditions,
uniquely applicable to the particular piece of property as
distinguished from those applicable to most or all property in
the same zoning district" . If you believe that under the facts
and circumstances unique to your property a variance could be
granted to you, under the definition cited above, please set for
both the type of variance which you are requesting and the
reasons that you have for making the request.
o � v / /
� 6
The section below is to be completed by the Zoning Office.
A ' Variance/Special Exception use permit is requested as
authorized' by Section
OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES:
THE APPLICANT, AS WITNESSED BY HIS SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION,
HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE HAS READ AND THAT HE UNDERSTANDS THE
FOLLOWING:
1. Go to Township for approval and have Township send letter to
the Zoning Office stating their position on your request.
2. Applicants must submit a site plan showing distances from
property lines, roads, and/or water.
3 . Applicants are to submit a list of adjoining property owners
including those directly across the road and their addresses.
2
0 Q
�.lasn eS
d
14
a Jp� �GA/,K e /2LLLCCC i
�4P
it Oro.
0
d
1,2 i ler
� r y
4 . Applicants will be heard by the Board of Adjustment
committee. After a public hearing on the application, at which
time `testimony and arguments will be received, the Committee will
adjourn to view the sites in question after which time they will
reconvene to render decisions. However, the applicant should not
consider the decision to be final until written notice of the
decision has been presented to him.
5. At the public hearing the applicant may appear in person or
through an agent or an attorney of his choice. The
applicant/agent/attorney may present testimony and evidence and
arguments in support of his application.
6. The fact that an application for a permit has been filed does
not automatically mean that a permit is granted. If you are
uncertain as to how to present your case you may want to consider
the advise of legal counsel.
7. The fee assessed for this application is nonrefundable.
8. All site plans, pictures, and etc. become property of the
Zoning Office and will remain in your file.
9. Statements of representatives of the Board of Adjustment made
to you concerning matters of whether the Committee can, will, or
will not grant the permits you seek are understood to constitute
the opinions of those representatives. Staff are not empowered
to act on behalf or instead of the Board of Adjustment Committee.
10. Applications must be returned to the Zoning Office by the end
of the month prior to the month of the next regular meeting.
Board of Adjustment meetings are held the fourth Thursday of
every month.
Any assistance in the filling out of this application will be
provided you by a representative of the St. Croix County Zoning
Office at your request.
DATE:
SIGNED:
Applicant/Agent
Owner
8/90 cj
3
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
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 ront of the room. their names and addresses on
the sheet In the
Supervisors Kinney, Stephens,
Tom Nelson,nZoning Admi
i nistrator and
in attendance. Staff
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 the mining of clay.. new
nonmetallic mining application
information included a two (2) year limit on the mining and
restoration activities.
The total depth of the excavation thousand (25000)e c b than ten c yards 1of
feet, taking about twenty-five
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 of Rush river
Keith Rodli, attorney representin g the township
expressed concerns for a hospital barn that was recently
constructed.
Nelson stated that the hospital barn had n permitted reflection tion on the
decision of number of animal units
operation.
ti
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:
Georg Menter, secre a y
TCN:cj
GARY DUCLOS/DUCLOS FARMS
Nelson read a letter from Gary Duclos stating that he was
withdrawing his application and that he would operate his farm in
accordance to the St. Croix County Zoning ordinance.
Discussion.
LAVERNE & ROSELLA KATTRE
Nelson stated that this proposal was for a duplex in the Ag.-
Residential district of Richmond Township. He outlined the
standards that should be considered when reviewing this
application.
Rosella presented her request stating that they were selling the
residence and the new owners wanted to make sure it had the proper
permits.
Discussion on the existing construction.
WALTER & DEBORAH BRISKIE
Walter presented a request for special exception to expand his
grinding business by adding onto the existing building.
The current structure is also too close to the town road and
requires a setback variance.
Discussion on lot size, septic system, and commercial code
requirements.
,-GMMD =MAN .
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
ceive DNR recommendations.
delayed until the next month so as to re
LAVERNE & ROSELLA KATTRE radley to conditionally app rove the
Motion by Stephens seconded by B
duplex use providing the lower bedroom has a safe egress window and
smoke detectors are installed on both levels. Motion carried.
WALTER & DEBORAH BRISKIE rove the
Motion by Menter seconded by Kinney to conditionally app
expansion of the grinding shop. All commercial building codes must
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: 17.36(5) (c)l Setback from bluff
17.31(5) (1) Filling & grading
APPELLANT: Dr. John Foker/Marc Putman
LOCATION: Gov't lot 1, Sec. 36, T28N-R20W,
Town of Troy
2. ARTICLE: 17.64(i) (c) Setback from Co. Rd.
APPELLANT: Gerald Brennan
LOCATION: N 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 30, T30N-R18W,
Town of Richmond
3. ARTICLE: 17.64(5) (c)2 Maximum width of driveway
APPELLANT: Alan Biglow
LOCATION: SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec. 24, T30N-R20W,
Town of St. Joseph
DR. JOHN FOKER/MARC PUTMAN
Nelson stated that this request was being delayed because there had
been no response from DNR. Discussion. Nelson is to contact DNR
and applicant informing them that the January Board of Adjustment
will be the last chance to review this application. After January
there will be the. need for new submittal including fees.
C .
Nelson stated ° iat this was a variance request to construct an
addition onto his existing garage. This addition would be ninety
(90) feet from the centerline rather than one hundred thirty-three
(133) feet as required by ordinance.
Brennan shared a site plan with the Board showing a twenty by
twenty-four (20x24) foot addition being added onto a twenty-four by
twenty-four (24x24) foot garage. The existing garage is only a
ninety (90) foot setback and the space is need for storage. There
are topographical as well as septic system, well and house location
problems that restrict this site.
ALAN BIGLOW
Nelson stated that his is a variance request to exceed the twenty-
four (24) foot width allowed by ordinance of a residential
driveway.
Biglow shared a site plan with the Board showing the relationship
of his shared driveway and C.T.H. "V". The hardship requiring this
variance is the dangerous curve on C.T.H. 11V11.
OLD BUSINESS
, ,�
NQ 1A,
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING
December 29, 1992
(The meeting was recorded by a Court Reporter)
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bradley at 9:00 A.M.
Chairman Bradley explained the procedures of the hearing requesting
that individuals wishing to testify sign their names in the front
of the room.
Supervisors Bradley, Kinney, Menter, Neuman and Stephens were all
in attendance. Staff included Tom Nelson, Zoning Administrator and
Greg Timmerman, Corporation Counsel.
Stephens made a motion to approve the agenda as published.
Bradley made a motion, seconded by Neuman to approve the November
minutes as amended. Motion carried.
The next regular meeting will be January 28, 1993.
Bradley made a motion, seconded by Neuman to correct the decision
for the Richard Marzolf and Richard Mueller appeals.
appeal should have reflected Bradley and Neuman voting no while the
Richard Marzolf decision should have reflected Bradley voting no.
Role call vote: Neuman, yes; Menter, no; Stephens, no; Bradley,
yes; Kinney, yes. Motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
JOHN BETTENDORF
It was agreed to wait until Corporation Counsel arrived to discuss
the legal issues that prompted this matter to come back before the
Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES AND BYLAWS
After some discussion and several corrections, a motion was made by
the Rules and Bylaws. Role
Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve
call vote: Neuman, yes; Menter, yes; Stephens, yes; Bradley, yes;
Kinney, yes. Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
The hearing was called to order at 9:45 A.M. Nelson read the
notice of the hearing as published:
The St. Croix County Board of992 -
7at 9 30 A.M. in scheduled a public Board
hearing for Tuesday, Dec. 29, 1
Room of the St. Croix County Courthouse, Hudsono Wisconsin to
After the arrival of Corporation Counsel Timmerman, the
appeal for the questioned if there could be a rehearing
recently heard for driveway variances.
New information has surfaced in the form of a driveway permit from
the County Highway Department that shows an order to remove a
driveway in 1981.
Stephens indicated that there is also new testimony from Ben George
who sat on the Board of Adjustment back in 1981 that should be
presented. Discussion.
Bradley made a motion, seconded by Stephens to rehear this appeal
at the March Board of Adjustment meeting. Previous actions
requiring the removal of the driveway should be suspended until
that time.
Roll call vote: Neuman, yes; Menter, no; Stephens, yes; Kinney,
yes; Bradley, yes. Motion carried 4:1
At the conclusion of the hearings the Board visited the sites in
question. Upon returning, the Board of Adjustment rendered the
following decisions:
"
Motion by Stephens, seconded by Menter to approve the ninety (90)
foot variance request of a twenty-four by twenty (24x20) foot
garage addition. Motion carried.
ALAN BIGLOW
Motion by Kinney, seconded by Bradley to postpone a decision until
additional information can be obtained help identify some of the
problems that were discovered by the site visit. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
ZA
Georg enter, secre ary
TCN:cj