9:00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "9:00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT"

Dustin Webb
5 years ago
Views:

2 September 22, :00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 210 River Drive, Wausau WI Members present: Richard Lawson, Karen Piel, Arnold Schlei Members not present: Roger Zimmermann, Cheryl Ploeckelman, Alternate Gerald Hoffman (all excused) Also present: Lane Loveland, Dean Johnson, Rebecca Frisch, Paul Nelson Conservation, Planning and Zoning; Linda Kamke, Chuck Krueger, Chris Krueger, Steve Brost, Brian Haupt, Josh and Kelly Mullins, Marlene Hodgdon, Michelle Berger, Heide Maxwell, Amy Thorstenson, Mary Danner, Heidi Hahner, David Maxwell, Eric Budleski, Gene Wenzel, Melanie Strand, Brian Sodke, Mark Plunkett Called to order at 9:02 a.m., 210 River Drive, Wausau by Chairman Lawson, who explained the rules of the hearing and the reason for the establishment of the Board of Adjustment. Approve July 28, 2016 minutes Motion / second by Piel / Schlei to approve July 28, 2016 minutes as distributed. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent. Lawson appointed Schlei as Acting Secretary. The testimony of the first two applications (Maxwell) is likely to be similar or identical. Consensus of the Board to hear both the variance and conditional use permit applications simultaneously, with the understanding that they are separate issues and will require separate motions. The application of David and Heide Maxwell for a conditional use permit per of the 2016 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code for a kennel and pet boarding facility in the R-E Rural Estate district. The parcel is described as part of the SE¼ SE¼, Lot, Lot 5 CSM Vol 8 Pg 41 (#1957) Document #744255, Section 4, T27N, R9E, Town of Reid +/ acres, PIN #s , and The application of David and Heide Maxwell for a variance from the terms of B.1. and 3. of the 2016 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code for a kennel and pet boarding facility in the R-E Rural Estate district. The parcel is described as part of the SE¼ SE¼, Lot, Lot 5 CSM Vol 8 Pg 41 (#1957) Document #744255, Section 4, T27N, R9E, Town of Reid +/ acres, PIN #s Lane Loveland was sworn in, asked the Board to use the distributed determination worksheets in their decisions, and cited the provisions of law which apply for each application. Conditional Use exhibits (& PowerPoint): Exhibit 1 Staff report: Property is not in shoreland, floodplain or wetland. Permits were not acquired for structures on the property. Pet boarding facility/kennel has been operating for approximately 5 years. Town Chair notified CPZ of activity. Exhibit 2 Application for a kennel/pet boarding facility. Exhibit 3 Location map of site. Exhibit 4 Plot plan of general layout of existing site conditions. Exhibit 5 Plot plan of structural setbacks to property lines. Exhibit 6 Aerial photo showing surrounding parcels. Exhibit 7 Aerial photo showing screening on parcel. Exhibits 8 & 9 Eight photos. Exhibit 10 Town of Reid future land use map showing site as single family residential. Exhibit 11 No resolution received from the Town of Reid. Variance exhibits (& PowerPoint): Exhibit 1 Staff report: Same as above. Exhibits 2 & 3 Application for the variance and additional information from applicant. Exhibit 4 Location map of site. Exhibit 5 Topographical map of property showing structures lower than surrounding area. Exhibit 6 Plot plan of general layout of existing site conditions. Exhibit 7 Plot plan of structural setbacks to property lines. Loveland stated that the parcel is less than the required 5 acres and it appears that the pens and cages do not meet the 200 required setback to property lines. Parcel acreage is similar/comparable to surrounding properties. Board agrees to first address the variance and then the conditional use. Heide Maxwell was sworn in. She agrees with the setback measurements except from the kennel to east property line, which she thought was 152 ft. (still less than required setback). Has been operating a dog day care and boarding facility for approximately 5 years, 2-3 days/wk, +/- 12 dogs, and has about 4-8 cars/day. Limits the number of pets, and is particular about the pets she accepts. She has day care an average of 13 days/month, and boards between 4-6 dogs an average of 4 days/month. Has a regular schedule of exercise, feeding, training, and exercising. Was not aware of adoption of the new zoning ordinance by the town or would have come forward sooner. Town of Reid chairman has visited the property. She does not have a business permit. A complaint to the town brought the issue forward. She met with Loveland and is willing to work/compromise with the Board. Loveland: Several structures were constructed without permits. Structures less than 100 square feet do not require permits but must still meet setbacks. Runs are not considered structures. Under the previous zoning code this activity was not allowed, even as a special exception. If a violation is older than 10 years it is considered non-compliant, but cannot be enforced. 1

3 September 22, :00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 210 River Drive, Wausau WI Piel: The parcel is less than 5 acres and setbacks are less than 200 feet. Unnecessary hardship must be determined to grant a variance, i.e. the property is not usable for any other permitted purpose. The parcel is a residential property. The focus must be on whether conforming with the restrictions would be unnecessarily burdensome. H. Maxwell: May be able to purchase 1½ acres from neighbor to the north, but won t change the other setbacks. Dogs behave and get along with each other. She is respectful of neighbors. She operates the business on a higher level than many and asks the Board to consider that in their decision. It s a small facility. Buildings cannot be re-located to meet setbacks. Loveland read letters into the record from surrounding landowners as well as those who use the kennel facility. In favor comments include, but are not limited to, Maxwells run a quiet, well run, and good facility, good care, clean & tidy, pet manners are enforced, little barking, emphasis on animal safety, are particular about what dogs are accepted into the facility. Opposed Zoning regulations are in place to restrict small parcels and businesses, there is increase in traffic, excess speed, barking. Disregard for regulations, did not obtain permits, and are now requesting after-the-fact forgiveness. Piel re-stated the minimum lot area of 5 acres and setbacks of 200 feet, and addressed unnecessary hardship for a variance. Maxwell repeated that adding acreage to the north changes nothing, the setback numbers are arbitrary, and hardship would be to move the concrete slabs which, even if moved, cannot meet setbacks. Sworn in were Gene Wenzel, Marlene Hodgdon, Heidi Hahner, Amy Thortenson, Mary Danner, Michelle Berger and, David Maxwell in favor of the application(s). Comments received included that Maxwell tries to control sound/barking, issues safety reminders about speed, monitors the kennel with a baby monitor, rarely hear barking, not heavy traffic, always on site when there are dogs, clean, no odor, runs a tight ship, requires orientation before accepting dogs, less traffic than when there were young children in the neighborhood. Sworn in, opposed, were Eric Budleski and Brian Haupt. Comments were disregard of county regulations, clean business is not relevant; trees buffer noise on east and south; what happens upon sale of the property if this kennel, established without permits, is allowed; how many dogs are allowed; how many dogs can be walked on the road at a time. Town of Reid should have informed neighbors. In response to Lawson, Maxwell said she has a maximum of 13 dogs for day care, and up to 6 for boarding, and reducing the day care numbers to less than 11 would not be profitable. Lawson questioned how this was not a self-created hardship. Piel said there are distinct requirements to be followed. Parcel is being used as residential, so there is a permitted use. Conformity with restrictions would be unnecessarily burdensome. Maxwell said it would be a financial hardship, purchase of additional property would not help. The current requirements cannot be met at the current location. Testimony portion of the hearing closed at 11:00 a.m. The variance will be addressed first, as a variance is required to allow a conditional use. Motion / second by Piel / Schlei to deny the variance for a kennel and pet boarding facility in the R-E Rural Estate district. Unnecessary hardship is not found. The landowner cannot plead ignorance of regulations and must follow existing ordinance. The only physical limitation is not being able to meet requirements of 5 acre minimum and 200 setbacks from property lines for this use. Hardship is self-created. Establishment of a business on the property was previously not permitted at all. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. Motion / second by Piel / Schlei to deny the conditional use permit for a kennel and pet boarding facility in the R-E Rural Estate district. Parcel is less than 5 acres, pens/cages/buildings are less than 200 feet from property lines. Without the variance the conditional use cannot be granted. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. The application of Brian Sodke for a conditional use permit per of the 2016 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code for a public or self-storage facility in the G-A General Agriculture district. The parcel is described as part of the SE¼ NE¼, described as Lot 1 CSM Vol 33 Pg 72 (#8504) document # , Section 6, T28N, R4E, Town of Wien, +/ acres. Address: W4810 Pioneer Dr., Edgar. Parcel ID# Lane Loveland asked the Board to use the distributed determination worksheet in their decision, and cited the provisions of law which apply. Exhibit 1 Staff report: Property is not in shoreland, floodplain or wetland. Exhibit 2 Application for public or self-storage facility. Exhibit 3 Location map of site. Exhibit 4 Aerial photo of property showing proposed driveway and fence locations. Fence will be 3 feet high in the front, and 6 feet high in the rear and side yards. Exhibit 5 Aerial photo with contours. Exhibit 6 Description of layout plan. No lighting being proposed at this time. Exhibit 7 Applicant addressing Chapter regarding conditional use permits standards. Exhibit 8 Applicant addresses , the standards for public or self-storage. Exhibit 9 - Town resolution recommending approval. Loveland stated that the lighting plan can be separate from the CUP application. Frisch was sworn in and said that the Board may require a lighting plan if they so choose. Brian Sodke was sworn in. Because the lighting plan requirements are lengthy he chose to not include them with this 2

4 September 22, :00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 210 River Drive, Wausau WI application. He would like to have the units open by November and expects only light traffic. Adjacent properties will be unaffected. The existing house is uninhabitable and is being used for storage. There will be electronic surveillance on site. There was no additional testimony in favor, opposed, or as interest may appear. Testimony portion of the hearing closed at 11:37 a.m. Motion / second by Piel / Schlei to grant the conditional use permit for a public or self-storage facility in the G-A General Agriculture district. Review of the decision sheet determined that electronic surveillance will be installed as security; lot coverage will be less than 80% of the lot area; circulation, fencing, and wall requirements are to be met. No other conditions are placed on the permit by the Board. Granting the permit is not contrary with the purpose and intent of the General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code (2016). Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. The appeal of Joshua and Kelly Mullins alleging an error in an order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative official in the enforcement of Sections &.02, and &.04of the 2016 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 22 Shoreland, Shoreland-Wetland, and Floodplain Code. The property is located in part of Gov. Lot 4 in Section 19, and part of the NW¼ NW¼, Section 20, all located in T26N, R7E, Town of Knowlton, a/d/a Lot 13 CSM Vol 21 Pg 24 (#5706) Document # Address: 1365 Vallie Ln, Mosinee. Parcel ID# Joshua and Kelly Mullins were sworn in. They are appealing the re-location of the fire pit located in the Shoreland area and the requirement to re-vegetate the existing grass shoreline into natural vegetation. The fire pit is within the 35 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). The definition of structure was not defined at that time and feel they were caught in poor timing as their fire pit project was complete in June 2015 and the Act 55 definition of structure in July They had a permit for a sand beach above the OHWM, with timbers to prevent erosion of sand into the water. The fire pit was an add-on, and not included in the permit. The Mullins said they were told by staff a fire pit needed to be above the OHWM and within the viewing area. They installed the fire pit ring, and then added a paved sitting area. They feel this was a miscommunication/misunderstanding and asked that they not be required to re-vegetate their shoreline. About 2/3 of the patio/pit is within the 35 area. Dean Johnson was sworn in with a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit #1). The presentation defined who can appeal, how to appeal, and what can be appealed, as well as the basis of the Board s decision. The property is zoned L-D-R Low Density Residential, is in the Shoreland and floodplain, and not in a wetland. An air photo showed the site along Lake DuBay. The July 28, 2016 order being appealed states that the patio and fire ring are not permitted structures and must be a minimum of 75 feet from the OWHM, and the Mullins were provided 3 options for correction of the violation. Compliance is removal of the patio and fire ring and re-vegetation of the shoreline to standards. The appeal of the order was received on August 22, Johnson reviewed the provisions of the law. Definition of structure includes fire pit, as defined by the Wisconsin legislature as part of Act 55 in July Mullins appeal letter stated verbal permission was received from staff to have a fire ring anywhere on the property. A structure is allowed between the 35 foot & 75 foot setback if it is a minimum of 35 feet from the OHWM, less than 200 square feet, and a plan is provided to preserve or re-vegetate the 35 foot buffer zone along the property s entire shoreline. Shoreland grading permit was issued April 3, 2015 with accompanying photo. Staff photos of the finished shoreline work, patio, and fire pit were provided. Piel said her understanding of the July 28, 2016 letter options is that the Mullins cannot keep fire pit/patio in its current location unless the appeal is successful. Responding to Lawson, K. Mullins stated that she feels that zoning staff erroneously interpreted the ordinance, that the brochure (Exhibit #2) received with their permit did not detail a fire pit as a structure, and according to Johnson s slide specifically including a fire pit as a structure (by the State) was done in July 2015, when their project was already complete. Permit issued to Mullins had no reference to a fire pit or patio. Materials of a fire pit were not discussed. K. Mullins said that erroneous interpretation of the law would be that the county provided wrong information. The pamphlet (exhibit #2) did not go into specifics of what could/could not be put in the area. Structure was not defined. In response to Lawson, Mullins said that even though the brochure notes only a 4 (paved) walkway is allowed, she did not find that inconsistent with putting in additional paving stone, as the walkway is separate and goes right to shoreline. She understood that the pit/paved area would be okay if within view corridor and above OHWM, which it is. They did not identify installing pavers to staff. J. Mullins said they now understand, but are hoping they can keep the grass and not have to restore the entire shoreline to natural habitat, and will agree to move the pit/patio. There is no erosion problem along the shoreline. Because of the location of the violation, re-vegetation is ordered along remaining shoreline outside of the 35% view corridor area. Loveland worked with Mullins and does not recall a conversation about extra walkway, pavers, or fire pit. Loveland said that had the Mullins explained this proposed project, it would not have been allowed within 35 buffer, 3

5 September 22, :00 a.m. MINUTES MARATHON COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 210 River Drive, Wausau WI but possibly allowed between 35 & 75 if certain conditions/standards were met. In response to Piel, Johnson read of the zoning code, on action by BOA relative to their decision. There was no additional testimony in favor, opposed, or as interest may appear. Testimony portion of the hearing closed at 12:37 p.m. Motion / second by Piel / Schlei to affirm the order of July 28, 2016 as to the removal of the fire pit and patio/paver area, and reverse the order as to the revegetation requirements. Appears to be unintentional mis-communication by all parties. The appeal was timely by the persons aggrieved. Determination is not an erroneous interpretation of code by staff. Applicant shall work with staff as to removal of the fire pit and paved area. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. Re-open the public hearings of James Griesbach, Marathon County Highway Department Director for a variance per 17.80(2)(a) of the 2015 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code, for placement of signs in Section 22 Town of Knowlton, and in Section 12 Town of Elderon. Motion / second by Schlei / Piel to bring the applications off the table. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent. On November 19, 2015 both of the above applications were tabled for up to one year by the Board. These two applications for variance are no longer necessary because of revisions in the 2016 General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code, which both the towns of Knowlton and Elderon have adopted. There was no additional testimony in favor, opposed, or as interest may appear. Testimony portion of the hearing closed at 12:46 p.m. Motion / second by Schlei / Piel to dismiss both Highway Department variance requests for placement of signs in the Town of Knowlton and Town of Elderon. Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. Board education and training A. Application language regarding applicant attendance at public hearings. Discussion: Move item to the November meeting. Announcements and Requests None Next meeting date November 17, 2016 at 9:00 a.m., 210 River Drive, Wausau Meeting adjourned Motion / second by Schlei / Piel to adjourn at 12:48 p.m. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent. Respectfully submitted, Arnold Schlei, Acting Secretary Marathon County Board of Adjustment cc: Board of Adjustment (6), County Board, County Clerk, Corporation Counsel, County Administrator, DNR Wausau, Eau Claire & WI Rapids, DOT, USACOE, County Highway Dept., Town Clerks, BOA binder, case files, CPZ Land Use Specialist, Director, and Secretary O:\CPZ\ZONING\BOA\Minutes\2016\BOAD_ _Minutes.doc AS/lm 4

NOTICE FOR PUBLIC HEARING. Richard Lawson / cek Richard Lawson, Chairman Board of Adjustment

NOTICE FOR PUBLIC HEARING. Richard Lawson / cek Richard Lawson, Chairman Board of Adjustment NOTICE FOR PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing as required by the General Code of Ordinances for Marathon County Chapter 17 Zoning Code will be held by the Marathon County Board of Adjustment at 9:00 a.m.,