Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustment 04-23-09 ST. CROIX COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Thursday, April 23, 2009 8:30 a.m. Government Center, Hudson, Wisconsin- County Board Room AGENDA A. CALL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL B. OPEN MEETING LAW STATEMENT C. ACTION ON PREVIOUS MINUTES D. DATE OF NEXT MEETING: May 28, 2009 E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Nancy Carlson - Andrew Murphy — Special ExceptionNariance- Tabled February 26, 2009 2. Murr Riverway Discussion F. PUBLIC HEARINGS — See Attached G NEW BUSINESS 1. Closed session pursuant to Wisconsin Statutes 19.85(1)(g) to confer with legal counsel concerning strategy to be adopted by the Board with respect to litigation in which it is involved. Reconvene in open session. * ** 2. Suspension of the Rules and By -Laws and reconsideration of the Board's revocation of the after - the -fact special exception permit for Gary Elert. (File SE0158) * ** H. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE I. ADJOURNMENT (Agenda not necessarily presented in this order.) SUBMITTED BY: St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Department DATE: April 17, 2009 COPIES TO: County Board Office County Clerk Board Members News Media/Notice Board *CANCELLATIONS /CHANGES /ADDITIONS PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Theme%. Croix County Board of Adjustment has scheduled a public hearing for Thursday, April 23, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. at the Government Center, 1101 Carmichael Road, Hudson, Wisconsin, to consider the following requests under the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The Board will view each site in question, after which the Board will deliberate and vote on the requests. SPECIAL EXCEPTION 1. APPLICANT: Tammec, LLC LOCATION: The SW ' / 4 and the NW ' / 4 of the NW ' / 4 and the south half of the NW ' / 4 of section 15. The SW ' / 4 of the SW 1 /4 of Section 10. The SE' /4 of the SW '/a and the NW '/4 of the SE' /4 and the SE' /4 of the NE' /4 and the SW '/4 of the NE ' / 4 and the NE ' / 4 of the SW ' / 4 and the NE 1 /4 of the NE 1 /4 and the NW 1 /4 of the NE ' / 4 and the SW ' /4 of the SE 1/4 and the East '' /z of the SE 1/4 of Section 16. The SE ' / 4 of the SE ' / 4 of Section 9, all in T30N, RI 8W, Town of Richmond ADDRESS: 1190 County Road G REQUEST: Special exception permit to renew a Non - Metallic Mining operation in the Town of Richmond pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(g) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 2. APPLICANT: Roger & Judith Kubera LOCATION: NW ' / 4 of the SE ' / 4 of Section 29, T29N, R18W, Town of Warren ADDRESS: 734 107'" Street REQUEST: After - the -fact special exception permit for filling and grading an area greater than 10,000 square feet in the Shoreland District of Twin Lakes in the Town of Warren pursuant to Section 17.28(2)(d) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. RECONSIDERATIONS 1. APPLICANT: Town of Warren LOCATION: Government Lot 6 of Section 28, T29N, R18W, Town of Warren ADDRESS: 720 112" Street REQUEST: Reconsideration of Condition #4, landscaping requirements, of the special exception permit for governmental use for a town park in the Ag- Residential District approved by the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment on November 20, 2008. 2. APPLICANT: Gary Elert LOCATION: Part of Government Lot 2, Section 27, T30N, R20W, Town of St. Joseph ADDRESS: 1378 Hilltop Ridge REQUEST: Reconsideration of the after - the -fact special exception permit for installation of a structural erosion control measure in the slope preservation zone in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District pursuant to Section 17.36(H)(4)(b) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and be heard. Additional information may be obtained from the St. Croix County Planning and Zoning Department, Hudson, Wisconsin at (715) 386 -4680. Clarence W. Malick, Chairperson St. Croix County Board of Adjustment ORIGINAL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING AND HEARING MINUTES April 23, 2009 The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Clarence "Buck" Malick at 8:30 a.m. A roll call was made. David Peterson, Joe Hurtgen, Jerry McAllister, and Sue Nelson were present. Staff included: Kevin Grabau, Code Administrator; David Fodroczi, Planning & Zoning Director; Pam Quinn, Zoning Specialist; Alex Blackburn, Zoning Specialist; Steve Olson, St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department; and Becky Eggen, Recorder. Staff confirmed to the Board that this was a properly noticed meeting. The next meeting for the Board is scheduled for Thursday, May 28, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. in the County Board Room of the Government Center in Hudson. Reconsideration Gary Elert — After - the -fact Special Exception The applicant requested reconsideration of an after - the -fact special exception permit that was denied by the Board of Adjustment for a recently constructed sidewalk, patio with fire pit and retaining walls in and within 40 feet of the slope preservation zone in the Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay District in the Town of St. Joseph. Staff presented the application and staff report. There were no additional comments from the Town of St. Joseph. St. Croix Land and Water Conservation Department and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources had no comments on the reconsideration. Adjoining property owners to the north submitted an additional email on April 6, 2009 opposing approval of the patio and stating concerns regarding the location of the patio to her property line, and that it is not in compliance with current county regulations regarding permanent structures. They also stated the patio lights have been on at all times both day and night, and consider the lighting to be a nuisance. Another concern was the location of the fire pit as it is close to the trees along the property line. Staff offered 12 findings of fact and conclusions of law with four comments if the Board allowed any of the structures to remain on the site and in their current location for consideration. Nick Vivian, applicant's attorney, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. He stated they are here before the Board to try and resolve the litigation that is in the courts currently. They feel there could be more harm done to the bluff line by removing the patio and fire pit. James "Louie" Filkins, engineer, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. Bob Baczyaski, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, signed an oath and poke in opposition of the request. He stated the department has concerns with the patio and fire pit that are located within the bluff line setback. He stated the department felt there was room to relocate the patio and that Elert had not sufficiently proven the need to use the patio for erosion control measures. He testified the DNR supports the original decision to deny the after - the -fact permit. He said the fire pit could be moved out of the bluffline setback, just not the same size as it currently is. Jackie Kemper, neighbor to the north, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the reconsideration. She testified they, also, have major erosion on their bluff line. She stated she understands Elerts needs to do something to protect the erosion issues and has no objections to the application. She said erosion is a yearly problem on their property and they have a much steeper grade. New Business Application #1: Tammec LLC — Special Exception The applicants requested renewal of a special exception permit for a non - metallic mining operation that was issued in October of 2004. The application is to operate sand and gravel pit and dolomite quarry in the Town of Richmond. Staff presented the application and staff report. The Town of Richmond recommended approval of the request. St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department reviewed the application and had no concerns. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources was sent a copy of the application for review, but did not submit any comments. Staff recommended approval of the request based on 12 findings of fact and conclusions of law with 13 conditions for consideration. Candy Anderson, geologist for Tammec, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. She testified they had a master plan approved back with the 2004 permit and does not want that to change. She was available for questions. No one testified in opposition. Reconsideration Town of Warren — Special Exception The applicants requested a reconsideration of Condition #4 of the November 20, 2008 findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the proposal for a tall grass prairie the landscape screening that was denied. Staff presented the staff report. The Town of Warren was the applicant that made the request. No comments were submitted from the Department of Natural Resources of St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department. Staff recommended approval of the requested based on eight findings of fact and conclusions of law with one condition. Keith Solimar, adjoining land owner, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the reconsideration. He stated he sold the 55 acres to the township and it was previously in CRP /prairie preservation. He testified he full- heartily supported the planting of tall prairie grass rather than a full vegetative buffer. 2 No one testified in opposition. Unfinished Business Andrew Murphy & Nancy Carlson — After - the -fact Special Exception & Variance — Tabled February 26, 2009 On February 26, 2009 the Board of Adjustment tabled its decision on the applicant's after - the -fact special exception request for construction of the stairway and an after -the- fact variance to reconstruct a nonconforming accessory structure (deck) attached to a nonconforming principal structure located on a 0.7 acre lot in the Ag Residential and Lower St. Croix Riverway District. Staff presented the application and staff report. The Town of Troy Plan Commission reviewed the application and agreed to recommend to the Troy Board of Appeals granting an after - the -fact conditional use permit for the stairs and landing, provided the landing be reduced in size to be in compliance with Troy Riverway ordinance and that the lighting be removed and replaced with downcast lights. The Troy Plan Commission recommended approval based on six facts. The St. Croix Land and Water Conservation Department reviewed the application and they did not object to the application with a condition the applicants file an affidavit describing the stormwater management and a maintenance plan for disclosure to future property owners. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources did not submit additional comments. Staff recommended approval of the application based on 15 findings of fact and conclusions of law with 10 conditions for consideration. Nancy Carlson signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. She stated they have already reduced the size of the landing and have reduced the lighting. She testified she did not disagree with the staff recommendations. Bob Baczyaski, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, signed an oath and spoke in favor of the request. He testified the department was in full support of the request. No one testified in opposition. New Business Application #2: Roger & Judith Kubera: After - the -fact Special Exception The applicants were unable to attend the hearing due to an emergency and requested to staff the hearing be postponed until the May meeting. Chair "Buck" Malick opened the floor for testimony for the application. Don Anderson, neighbor to the applicant, signed an oath and spoke in regard to the request. Don testified he was the owner of the easement and the Kuberas were the property owner. He stated he was not opposed to people using their land as long as they are within the state statutes and county ordinances. He said the law reads if there are 3 three lots on a private drive the drive needs to become a town road. He testified the civil issues are all in the courts presently. He testified there is some erosion on his property that is created from the work Kubera has done in the easement. Minutes Motion by McAllister, second by Peterson to approve the February 26, 2009 minutes as amended. Motion carried unanimously. The Board recessed for site visits and lunch at 10:36 a.m. The Board reconvened at 1:12 p.m. Decisions After hearing the testimony and reviewing the material in the record, the Board rendered the following decisions: Town of Warren — Special Exception- Reconsideration Motion by Peterson, second by Hurtgen to approve the reconsideration of Condition #4, regarding the landscaping based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicant is the Town of Warren, property owner. 2. The site is located at 720 112 Street government lot 6 of Section 28, T29N, R1 8W, Town of Warren, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 3. On November 20, 2008 the Board of Adjustment (Board) approved a special exception permit for a park in the Ag- Residential district on a 6- acre lot in the Town of Warren. 4. The applicant requests reconsideration of Condition #4 of the Board's approval. 5. Regarding Condition #4, some of the purposes of vegetative screening are to block out light and sound from the neighboring property. Vegetative screening also blocks the view if uses are considered unsightly. The Solimar property to the east is undeveloped and any lights or sounds coming from the park would not have any impact and a park is generally not considered unsightly. Given the tall grass prairie planted on the adjacent property to the east, staff finds it reasonable to allow the applicant to plant additional prairie as a vegetative screening. 6. Since there is no development to the east, this request would not be contrary to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the residents or 4 be substantially adverse to property values in the neighborhood affected. 7. There is no dust, smoke or odor sources on the site and the noise wouldn't affect anyone. Therefore, this request would not constitute a nuisance by reason of noise, dust, smoke, odor, or similar factor. With the following condition: Condition #4: Within 60 days of the decision for reconsideration, the applicant shall plant tall grass prairie along the east property line that abuts the Solimar property. The applicants shall strictly adhere to all other conditions of the Board's November 20, 2008 decision as worded. Motion carried 4 -0. Chairperson Malick recused himself from the discussion and vote because he said he had previously represented the Solimars when they sold the land to the Town. Andrew Murphy & Nancy Carlson — After - the -fact Special Exception & Variance Tabled February 26, 2009 Motion by Peterson, second by McAllister to approve the after - the -fact special exception and variance in the Riverway District in the Town of Troy based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: General Findings and Conclusions: The Board makes the following general findings of fact and conclusions of law pertinent to both requested items: 1. The applicants are Andrew Murphy and Nancy Carlson, property owners. Upon being notified, the applicants immediately attempted to comply with the county ordinances and cooperated fully with staff in submittal of their applications for after - the -fact special exception and variance. 2. The site is located at 326 N. Cove Rd. in part of Gov't Lot 3, Section 13, T28N, R20W, being Lot 5 Bomar Heights, Town of Troy, St. Croix County, WI 3. The Town of Troy Plan Commission reviewed the application for an after - the -fact permit for a variance /conditional use permit for reconstruction of a nonconforming accessory structure at their February 5, 2009 meeting. The Plan Commission agreed to recommend to the Troy Board of Appeals granting an after - the -fact conditional use permit for the stairs and landing, provided the landing be reduced in size to be in compliance with Troy Riverway ordinance and that the lighting be removed and replaced with downcast lights. A comment was made that a citation should be issued, which would be acted on by the Town board. The Plan Commission recommends approval of an after - the -fact variance for construction of a non - conforming accessory structure based on the facts that: • The deck is smaller than the original one; 5 • No vegetation was harmed during construction; • The public interest isn't harmed by granting the variance; • The core of the ordinance is met by granting the variance, it (the deck) will be inconspicuous from the river; • Best management practices were used in the deck construction and the engineering has been approved; • Property values were not affected 4. The Town of Troy Board of Appeals granted the variance at their March 19, 2009 hearing based on the above facts and Plan Commission recommendation. The Troy Town Board may issue a citation for the violation of town Riverway code. 5. The St. Croix County Land and Water Conservation Department has reviewed the special exception and variance application and the stormwater runoff calculations submitted by the applicant on March 26, 2009. With conditions that the applicants file an affidavit describing the stormwater management and maintenance plan for disclosure to future property owners, the LWCD does not object to the reconstruction of the deck or stairway. 6. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources staff has not submitted additional comments on the tabled matter. Item #1 (Special exception permit for construction of a stairway in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District) The Board finds the following facts and conclusions of law pertinent to the request labeled Item #1: 7. The applicants submitted an application to the St. Croix County Board of Adjustment for an after- the -fact special exception permit for a recently reconstructed wooden stairway in the Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay District pursuant to Section 17.36 F.3.a.3) and subject to the performance standards in Section 17.36 H.12 of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 8. According to the application and to staff on -site inspections, the stairway meets all but two of the design standards stipulated in Section 17.36.H.12 of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. The stairway is located on a steep, densely vegetated slope exceeding 20 percent and is required to provide pedestrian access to the river. The stair treads do not exceed 48 inches, but the landing does not comply with the maximum 40 sq. ft. required in Section 17.36.H.12.a.3). The stairway has a handrail stained the same earth -toned color as the stairs, but no canopies. The stairway and landing are anchored and supported above grade on footings. The stairway is not visible from the river. No trees or vegetation were removed to install the stairway. The old stairs and landing were removed and this will be the only stairway for this property. The new stairway has not caused accelerated erosion, but did not comply with the first part of Section 17.36 H.12.a.13) that states a registered professional engineer or architect must certify 6 construction drawings and plans that show the stairway components are securely anchored to prevent them from shifting. With conditions to reduce the size of the landing to a maximum 40 sq. ft. and to have the construction of the stairway certified by a professional engineer or architect, this request would be consistent with the requirements of the Ordinance. 9. According to the application and staff observations, the stairway meets all the provisions of Section 17.70 (7)(a). The stairway would not violate the spirit or general intent of the chapter and would not be contrary to the public health, safety, and welfare. This request would not be a nuisance by reason of noise, dust, smoke or odor and would not affect property values in the neighborhood. 10. According to the application and staff observations, the stairway would be consistent with Section 17.36 J.2.b.2)a) j). The stairway itself is not visible from the river. The construction method used existing footings and new concrete - filled Sonotube© post footings that required minimal vegetation disturbance and there was no apparent sediment or erosion damage. Terrestrial and aquatic habitat would be minimally impacted due to lack of soil or vegetation disturbance. With conditions for adjusting the lighting on handrails to be directed downward as requested by the Town of Troy, this request would be compatible with uses on adjacent land and will not have a negative impact on the scenic and recreational qualities of the Riverway District in regard to the view from and use of the river. Item #2 (Variance for reconstruction of a nonconforming accessory structure in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District) The Board finds the following facts and conclusions of law pertinent to the request labeled Item #2: 11. The applicants filed an application with the Board of Adjustment for an after -the- fact variance to reconstruct a nonconforming accessory structure within the bluffline setback area in the Lower St. Croix Riverway district pursuant to Section 17.36.I.3.b of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance. 12. The applicants stated that repair of the deck was considered, which is allowed pursuant to Section 17.36.I.3.a of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance, but this wasn't feasible due to extensive rotting of the substructures. 13. 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. The house and accessory structures were constructed within the bluffline setback prior to the Federal Lower St. Croix River Act of 1972 and are legal nonconforming structures, thus the hardship was not self - created by the property owners. Literal enforcement of the ordinance prohibiting the reconstruction of a nonconforming 7 accessory structure would limit the applicant's ability to maintain a safe, structurally -sound access for ingress and egress from the house on the riverward side due to the close proximity of steep slopes. 14. The applicants are requesting minimal relief from the standards in the Ordinance. The reconstruction did not expand the existing nonconforming accessory structure's foundation/footprint or increase its encroachment into the bluffline setback. Rather, it effectively reduced the surface area of the nonconforming structure within the bluffline setback from 1150 sq. ft. to —730 sq. ft. and moved the edge of the deck four feet further away from the bluffline. The stormwater management plan and runoff calculations demonstrate that the reconstructed accessory structure (deck and concrete patio) complies with the requirements and standards in Section 17.36.H.7. With conditions for recording an affidavit that describes the approved stormwater management plan and discloses its maintenance requirements pursuant to Section 17.36.H.7.g,1) & 2), the reconstructed deck/patio will meet the spirit and intent of the Ordinance and comply with mitigation requirements in Section 17.36.I.5.a., b., and c.3). 15. Substantial justice would be done by allowing the applicants continued use of the nonconforming accessory structure on the property, which is allowed in the Lower St. Croix Riverway District, and which has been reconstructed within the footprint of the original 1960's vintage deck. The deck is attached to the walk -out elevation of the principal structure and provides a stable, non - erosive surface for foot - traffic along the bluffline, reducing potential erosion of soils in the slope preservation zone and contribution of sediment to the St. Croix River. With the following conditions: 1. The special exception will allow the applicants continued use of the stairway for access to the existing lift and river frontage on the property in accordance with the plans submitted on December 29, 2008, and as provided in the conditions below. This approval does not include any additional structures, impervious coverage, filling and grading, or other activities. 2. The variance will allow the applicants continued use of the reconstructed deck in accordance with the plans submitted on December 29, 2008, and as provided in the conditions below. This approval does not include any additional structures, impervious coverage, filling and grading, or other activities. 3. The applicants shall secure all necessary permits and approvals from the Town of Troy and obtain any other required local, state, or federal permits and approvals. 4. Within 30 days of the Board's decision, the applicants shall reduce the size of the landing to a maximum 40 sq. ft. pursuant to Section 17.36.H.12.a.3 and have the construction of the stairway certified by a professional engineer or architect pursuant to Section 17.36 H.12.a.13. 8 �I i 5. Within 30 days of the Board's decision, all lights on the stairway handrails must be downward directed and shielded away from neighboring properties and /or the river as to be visually inconspicuous. 6. Within 30 days of the Board's decision, the applicants shall record an affidavit against the property referencing the decision and the approved stormwater management plan, including a long -term maintenance agreement for the infiltration structures. The applicants shall submit a recorded copy of the affidavit to the Zoning Administrator at that time. The intent is to make future owners aware of the limitations and responsibilities incurred as part of the Board of Adjustment's special exception and variance decision 7. Any minor change or addition to the project, including but not limited to design of the project, shall require 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 variance approval process. 8. The applicant shall have one (1) year from the approval of this special exception and variance to obtain the above permits and local, state, or federal approvals for the project. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval within the timeframes stipulated shall be grounds for revocation. If the special exception permit is revoked, the applicant will be required to secure a new special exception. 9. These conditions may be amended or additional 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 amended or added without proper notice to the applicants and an opportunity for a hearing. 10. 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. Application #2: Roger & Judith Kubera• After-the-fact Special Exception Motion by McAllister, second by Nelson to postpone the after - the -fact special exception request for filling and grading >10,000 square feet in the Shoreland Overlay District of Twin Lakes due to the inability of the applicant to attend the public hearing. The Board would like to have an opportunity to review any comments that may be submitted by the Town of Warren and the stormwater management plan recommended by the Land and Water Conservation Department. In addition, the WI Department of Natural Resources needs additional information to determine what, if any, state permits will be required for your proposed filling and grading project. You may wish to contact Steve Olson, Land & Water Conservation Dept., for guidance on developing the plan and stormwater 9 management requirements contained in the county ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. A_uplication #1: Tammec LLC — Special Exception Motion by McAllister, second by Nelson to approve the renewal of the special exception for a non - metallic mining operation based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. The applicants are Tammec L.L.C. property owner. 2. The site is located on County Highway G in sections 9, 10, 15 and 16, T30N, RI 8W, Town of Richmond, St. Croix County, Wisconsin. 3. The applicants filed with the Board of Adjustment an application to renew a special exception permit for a non - metallic mining operation pursuant to Section 17.15(6)(g) of the St. Croix County Zoning Ordinance and subject to Section 14.3 A.l.d. and the other provisions of the St. Croix County Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance. The applicants request to remove approximately 300,000 to 600,000 tons per year of sand, gravel and dolomite from extraction areas 1 and 2 on drawing number 2. 4. A performance bond for reclamation of the site for $240,000.00 has been on file since 5 -28 -2004. 5. This request would not violate the spirit or general intent of the Ordinance since nonmetallic mining is a permitted use in the Ag Residential District and is an industry that contributes to the County's economic well being, and the site will be returned to cropland upon final reclamation. 6. No mining is proposed below the groundwater table. All storm water will be managed on site. There is a 25 -foot high berm along with a 100 -foot buffer around the active mining area. This site will be returned to agricultural cropland upon reclamation. With conditions restricting any mining below the groundwater elevation, managing storm water runoff, maintaining the 25 -foot high berm and 100 -foot buffer, limiting hours of operation and implementing the reclamation plan. This request for continued mining operation would not be contrary to the public health, safety, or general welfare or be substantially adverse to property values in the surrounding neighborhood. 7. There is a 25 -foot high berm and 100 -foot buffer around the active mining area. There is no smoke or odors generated. Dust control measures will be implemented. With conditions to maintain the 25 foot berm and 100 foot buffer along with implementing dust control measures. This request for continued mining operation would not constitute a nuisance by reason of noise, dust, smoke or odor. 10 r 8. Extended hours of operation have been approved in the past with no complaints. 9. The proposed operation and reclamation plans comply with the provisions of Chapter 14, the St. Croix County Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance. 10. The Town of Richmond has reviewed the request and has recommended approval. 11. The Land and Water Conservation Department has reviewed the application and had no comments. 12. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has been sent a copy of the application and did not submit any comments. With the following conditions: 1. This special exception approval allows applicants to mine approximately 300,000 to 600,000 tons of sand, gravel and dolomite from extraction areas 1 and 2 from drawing number 2 submitted with the renewal application. Approval does not include any change or expansion i g p n area or operations. This approval is valid for a period of five years and expires in April 2014, after which time it must be renewed pursuant to Section 14.3 A.6.a -b of the St. Croix County Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance. 2. The mining operation shall not extend into the groundwater 3. Storm water shall be managed on -site. 4. The 100 -foot buffer and 25 foot high berm around the actively mined area shall be maintained. 5. Hours of operation shall be 6:00 am to 10:00 pm Monday through Friday and 6:00 am to 8:00 pm on Saturday. Blasting will only be conducted between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. 6. Reclamation plans shall be followed to reclaim areas once mining operations are complete. 7. Dust control measures shall be implemented. 8. Upon complaints of regularly occurring, excessively loud noise or complaints of dust at any time, the applicants shall work with the Zoning Administrator to abate the problem. In the event that the matter cannot be resolved administratively, the matter shall be taken before the Board of Adjustment at a public hearing. 9. Any request to extend hours of operation must be submitted in writing and approved by the Zoning Administrator. 11 1 10. The applicants shall be responsible for adhering to all local, state, and federal rules, regulations, and permits during the life of the operation. 11. Upon any change in ownership or operation of the mine, the applicants shall submit to the Zoning Administrator the name and contact information of the owner and primary mine operator. The operator shall comply with all of the general requirements and conditions listed in the nonmetallic mining and reclamation standards in Chapter 14 — Nonmetallic Mining Ordinance (unless varied per conditions). 12. Any minor change (or addition) in area or use beyond what is shown or indicated in the plans shall require prior review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. Major changes shall require the special exception approval process, as stated in the Ordinance. 13. These conditions may be amended or additional 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 amended or added without notice to the applicant and an opportunity for a hearing. 14. 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. Gary Elert — After - the -fact Special Exception Reconsideration Motion by Peterson, second by McAllister to deny the reconsideration. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned by the Chair at 2:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -'-� L eca &Wo Sue Nelson, Secretary Becky Egg &, RecUOng Secretary 12