Board of Adjustment Minutes

DATE: October 28 , 2004

PRESENT: Bruce Duckworth, Chair, Robert Roloff, Halsey Sprecher, Richard Vogt, Linda White

STAFF PRESENT: Gina Templin, Dave Lorenz

OTHERS PRESENT: See individual appeal files for registration appearance slips.

Duckworth called the session of the Sauk County Board of Adjustment (BOA) to order at approximately 9:00 A.M. He introduced the members of the Board, explained the procedures and the order of business for the day. The staff certified that the legally required notices had been provided for the scheduled public hearing. The certification of notice was accepted on a motion by Roloff, seconded by Sprecher. Motion carried 5-0.

The Board adopted the agenda for the October 28, 2004 session of the Board. on a motion by White, seconded by Vogt. Motion carried 5-0.

Motion by Vogt, seconded by White to adopt the September, 2004 minutes. Motion carried 5-0.

COMMUNICATIONS:

Sprecher stated he received a number of phone calls and advised all callers to appear and speak at the hearing or provide something in writing.

APPEALS:

A. Donald and Judith Himmel (SP-46-04) requesting a variance pursuant to s.8.05(1)(b)3 to authorize the construction of a stairway to the shore within the minimum side yard setback.

Chair Duckworth rules that the variance would be considered an area variance.

Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request. He then reviewed the photos and video of the site. Mr.. Lorenz concluded with the staff recommendation of conditions to be placed on the request if approved by the Board.

Duckworth asked if the stairs could be built anywhere else on the property. Lorenz stated he didn't see anywhere else the stairs could be built.

Duckworth referred to Exhibit II,4, and stated it looks like the applicant is proposing to move the stairs over a foot or 2. Lorenz stated it does view that way.

Donald Himmel, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that there isn't any other place on the property to place the steps and the proposed steps will be in the same location, as the rest of the frontage on the lot has a 30 foot high vertical stone wall. He also addressed the earlier question of the steps being adjusted, as the reasoning is for the steps to be sized a little differently as they are right now similar to that of a ladder.

Duckworth asked about unique property. Himmel stated that it is unique because of the limited access to the lake and the rocks. Duckworth asked how he will verify that they don't build over the lot line. Himmel stated because of the stake and the wires that are attached at the tree line.

Roloff asked if the steps were there when he bought the property. Himmel stated the steps were there since the late 1960's.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 9:19 a.m.

Duckworth reviewed the ordinance and the request. He stated that he feels this is unique and it looks like an unnecessary hardship and they could require a cable car to be run down the front, however he is worried about the steps being built on the neighboring property.

Vogt suggested that the property line be surveyed and staked before the steps are built, so that when the Planning & Zoning office views the site for compliance, it is located where it is suppose to be.

Roloff spoke of the surveying being done on adjacent properties and the groundwork for locating corners on this lot, so it wouldn't be very difficult for a surveyor to come in and establish the property line. He also stated he feels the request meets all 3 requirements for a variance.

Motion by Roloff, seconded by Vogt, to approve the request to build the steps within 1 foot of the property line, with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning and the added condition that the east property line be established so they don't go over. Motion carried 5-0.

B. The Kraemer Co., Weldon and Phyliss Polk (SP-47-04) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.7.05(2)(k)19 to authorize the continued operation of a mineral extraction site.

Duckworth asked about the Polk property and if it was included in the last request. Lorenz stated that he doesn't know for sure.

Duckworth asked if there have been any complaints received and if the reclamation plans needs to be changed. Lorenz stated he is not aware of any complaints and the contractor has to maintain and update the reclamation plan yearly if something changes and is comfortable with their plan.

Seamus Geoghegan, The Kraemer Co., Area Sales Superintendent, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the quarry has been operated since the late 50's, early 60's. The property was considered a grandfathered quarry, however the 1999 application did not include the Polk property because the property was tied up in a sale/transfer.

Duckworth asked if he has received any complaints on the quarry and verified that he would be involved in any complaints received on the quarry. Geoghegan stated he would be involved in any complaints and to his knowledge has never received any. He also spoke of an old dump on the property that they cleaned up and capped. He then spoke of an instance where they had blasted without calling the Planning & Zoning office, but rectified the situation.

Duckworth asked about the Town. Geoghegan stated they do have a letter from the town and have worked well with them.

Sprecher asked about road conditions. Geoghegan stated they haven't experienced any problems with the roads.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 9:35 a.m.

Duckworth reviewed the ordinance and the request.

Motion by Duckworth, seconded by Sprecher, to approve the special exception request for the renewal of the 1999 permit, with the inclusion of the Polk property and with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning. Motion carried 5-0.

C. John Oliver, Ethanol Production, Inc.. (SP-48-04) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.7.09(2)(b)8 to authorize the continued use of an ethanol plant under new operators.

Roloff spoke of his ordinance and numbers being different from the notices posted. The board reviewed the ordinance. Duckworth stated the ordinance should be 7.10(2)(b)7, and asked if it will cause any problems with the notification. The board asked if any comments were made on the problem trying to find the ordinance that related to this request. The Chair ruled that this is a non substantial error and the board can continue.

Duckworth asked if any complaints had been received. Lorenz stated the office had received no complaints.

Sprecher asked about the operations and changes. Lorenz explained.

Paul Sir, Applicant, Vice President of Operations, appearing in favor of the request, read and discussed the updated production plan. He also spoke of discussions with the DNR in reference to their waste disposal and/or other emissions.

Duckworth asked if there is a letter from the DNR stating such. Sir stated that another party will speak on that, but the company felt a letter would not be required.

White asked about the summary and trucking loads. Sir defers this question to Mr.. Aid and the production and supply lines and would ask him to address that.

Duckworth asked if they are already down there an improving the plant. Sir stated they've been working on it for a couple of years. Duckworth asked why they had not responded to questions from the Town. Sir stated that they had addressed a concerns of the Town with Mr.. Ruetten in a phone call, 3 different times, but because of logistics were not able to meet them in person to date.

Rod Aide, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the plant is just about ready for production, other than some automation of equipment to finalize, and as far as the trucks that come in and out - 1 semi will come in with product and then water is added to that product once it is there. He also spoke of the DNR and possible permits that may be required, but deemed those permits unneeded.

Duckworth asked who he spoke with at the DNR. Aide stated he spoke with Gordon Stevens out of the Dodgeville office. Duckworth asked about not receiving anything in writing. Aide stated they would provide it in writing if asked.

Duckworth asked if he has talked to the Town Board. Aide stated that he had called the Town 3 different times and left messages on an answering machine and his calls were never returned. At that time, he turned the phone calls over to Mr.. Sir.

White asked if he will be driving to the site to oversee the operations daily. Aide stated he would be.

White asked how many pounds of sugar will be needed. Aide stated without looking at figures, he wouldn't be able to answer the question.

White asked about corn usage. Aide explained. White asked exactly how many semi's would be coming in and out of the facility. Aide stated 3 loads a week would come into the facility and about a load and a half a week would be going out.

Vogt asked about the process of making alcohol and what is included in the waste product. Aide stated the yeast would be included with the water, and the yeast eats up all value of sugar in that, and the waste from the yeast eating the sugar is ethanol.

Vogt asked about the odors that come from the plant and asked if that has been resolved by technology. Aide stated that you get a lot of odor from corn ethanol, and because of the process they use, there is relatively low odor.

Vogt asked about the DNR's air quality, water quality and land treatment standards they call under any standards were requirements for permits would be needed. Aide stated that is correct.

Vogt asked if they don't have enough land to spread it would be contracted to have it picked up. Aide stated that was correct and the hauler would dispose of the waste under their permit.

White asked about storage for the materials and if that would be internal. Aide stated it would be interior, however they would need to construct a 10,000 gallon tank for waste water storage.

White asked about Aide's background in ethanol plants and asked if he had been involved in operations besides the equipment. Aide explained his background and verified that he has been involved in the operations as well as equipment.

Duckworth asked when he got reaffiliated with the plant in Spring Green. Aide stated in July of 2003.

Zenon Potoczny, appearing in favor of the request, spoke of the background of the company.

Duckworth asked when his company got involved with the plant. Potoczny stated they were involved with the plant for about 3 years and spoke of their disappointment of things as they were.

Duckworth asked if the permit was ready prior to taking over the plant and asked about condition D2 of the permit and why it was not followed. Potoczny stated that he is unaware of what D2 is, but the plant was not operational.

White asked who made the decision to put all the money into the investment prior to getting all permits and approvals. Potoczny stated that the permit was in existence at the time and when they took over the plant it was not operational.

Duckworth asked if his company is registered in Wisconsin. Potoczny stated it is registered in Canada and not in Wisconsin, but that is being worked on.

Vogt asked about Immgen, Inc., and how John Oliver fits into this. Potoczny stated Immgen is an investor and John Oliver is the owner of the property and the plant.

The Board continued to discuss with Potoczny the ownership and operators and the companies involved.

Duckworth asked if Ethanol Productions Inc is a public company. Potoczny stated it is a private company at this time.

Bruce Hirsche, appearing in favor of the request, stated he is legal counsel and secretary of Ethanol Productions Inc., and clarified the sequence of events on the operations of the plant, stating that it was originally built by Farm Energy, Inc., out of Canada, and in 2000 Dan Featherstone purchased the equipment out of receivership and then received the special exception permit from the board. Once the plant became operational, Featherstone was not able to operate the plant as required, he contact Ethanol Productions, Inc., for financing and support, which took place until the Spring of 2004. He stated the relationship between Featherstone and Ethanol Productions Inc., departed because of problems with deadlines not being met and operations not being handled as they should have and such that were not met with the plant. He also spoke of communications from the Town and Mr. Aide's dates provided, that he was employed with the plant in the Spring of 2004, and not in 2003. He also addressed not being registered in the State of Wisconsin and the requirements to do so. He then presented Exhibit VIII, 1, a letter from the Olivers regarding to the lease.

Duckworth asked how many ethanol plants they operate. Hirsche stated this is the only one.

Vogt asked when did Ethanol Productions actually take over the lease from Featherstone and clarified that he simply disappeared. Hirsche stated that the Olivers changed the names on the lease and Featherstone stayed with the operation and in 2002 Ethanol Productions purchased the equipment from Featherstone, and for many reasons fails to operate after that.

Vogt asked when the lease changed into Ethanol Production's name. Hirsche stated in 2002, as he didn't have the exact date with him.

Roloff asked how they will attempt to right things with the Town. Hirsche stated that Rod Aide was in charge of contacting the Town, and when his phone calls weren't returned, Paul Sir got involved and spoke in detail with Dan Ruetten and they felt all concerns were satisfied.

Duckworth asked about the requirement from the DNR and is concerned about not having anything put in writing. Hirsche stated that because of conversations with Mr.. Ruetten, the felt all matters were taken care of and they will put things in writing, they have no problems with that.

Roloff explained the order of things and how the board takes Town opinions into consideration.

White asked when the phone conversations took place. Hirsche referred the question to Paul Sir.

Paul Sir, reappearing, stated that he doesn't have the exact dates, but he spoke to him in July, August and September.

Duckworth asked if they spoke about attending a board meeting. Sir stated they spoke of the board meeting, but Mr.. Ruetten stated it was not a requirement for them to be at the meeting, but would be helpful.

White spoke of her being uncomfortable with things not being put in writing. Sir explained.

Duckworth stated they have a local manager here, and he doesn't seem to be involved with the Town Board. Sir stated that he will accept the responsibility for the Town as it was turned over to him and Mr. Aide's focus was in the retooling of the operation itself.

Joel Gaalswyk, appearing as interest may appear, Supervisor District 23, stated he frequently attends Town board meeting and also stated that he is not opposed to the plant and a member of RENEW. He spoke of the size of the plant in scale compared to what you see on the news and that it is an experimental type plant and feel they are lucky to have investors from Canada willing to put their time, effort and money into making the plant operational here. He also said he spoke with Dan Ruetten last night and feels that its possible things got sloppy.

Vogt asked about the phone calls that were made to Mr.. Ruetten. Gaalswyk stated that the phone calls were not discussed. He also stated that the letter from the Town Board to the Board of Adjustment and he himself could answer the questions to Mr. Ruetten for them because of his experience with the project.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:50 a.m.

Duckworth reviewed the ordinance and the request.

White stated she has a hard time believing that anyone can understand what is happening and what the operational statistics will be as well as the Town Board not having answers to these questions.

Roloff stated he doesn't like the position the board is in and doesn't want to throw up road blocks and feels the special exception permit could be granted, but for less than 5 years with the conditions that were listed and that it be contingent upon a document of support from the Spring Green Town Board to Planning & Zoning.

White stated she would prefer that the matter be tabled until the Spring Green Town Board can get the information.

Roloff doesn't want to have a do-over, but want them to have an opportunity to resolve communication problems.

Duckworth has difficulty with the things that are in writing versus what is verbally stated being different.

Sprecher spoke of the information submitted by the Town if the request is approved and suggest approving it for a period of 1 year and at that time the board would review.

Vogt stated he doesn't feel comfortable with the applicant getting approval from the Township because of how local politics work and would go along with Sprecher's suggestion.

Sprecher suggests the applicant working with the town board

Motion by Sprecher, seconded by Roloff, to approve the special exception request with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning, the conditions that the Town Board has listed 1-4, and the permit be good for a period of 1 year allowing time to work with the Town Board, and after a period of 1 year, they must come back infront of the board for renewal (Dan Featherston should be removed and Ethanol Productions should replace his name where appropriate - as applicant). Motion carried 4-1, with Duckworth in opposition.

D. Roger and Karen Foster and Hilman and Judy Schroeder (James Foster, Agent) (SP-49-04) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.7.05B(2)(b)2 to authorize the location of a new licensed game farm.

Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request, He then reviewed the photos and video of the site. Mr.. Lorenz concluded with the staff recommendation of conditions to be placed on the request if approved by the Board.

James Foster, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that he has raised pheasants for wholesale and he has had a lot of interest from people training their dogs. He has applied for a Class A Game Preserve from the DNR and has met with the Prairie du Sac Town board and has received approval from them. He also spoke of the closest residence being a mile which belongs to him and his parents. He then discussed boundaries, property that will be used for hunting and the property that will not be used, as well as seasons for hunts because of crops and such.

Duckworth asked if any kenneling of dogs will be done. Foster stated that it will not be done at this time and all dogs will be brought by their owners and taken home with the owners.

White spoke of letters signed by neighbors. Foster stated no neighbors had contacted him, but stated he had talked to the Millers and the only neighbor that expressed a concern with Mr.. Elsing who had concerns with shooting and no shooting will be done by Mr.. Elsings property.

White asked if the hunting lands will be fenced and how to avoid going onto the neighbors property. Foster stated that most of the birds will be hunted in the center of the field and there is a 40 foot perimeter around the field where there is a "no hunt" zone and the hunters will not be near adjacent owners land.

Roloff asked if this was marked. Foster said the no hunt area is marked and will be better marked if the permit is approved. Nothing has been done yet due to waiting to get the approval from this board.

Vogt asked about where the land owners are that wrote the letters. Foster stated they are all over in the Skunk Valley Road area. Foster continued to discuss boundaries with the Board.

White asked about operational hours. Foster stated hunting will not be allowed prior to 8:00 a.m. and will conclude at dark, which will depend on the season and most of the hunting will be done on Saturdays and Sunday, which is when he'll be on site and during the week his dad will be at the farm and there are notification standards, reservations and such that will be met.

White asked how many birds will be released. Foster stated that his class A license allows for 1,000+ birds a year, but he felt he would not be going through that many birds.

Duckworth asked how long the season is. Foster stated that it runs from September 1st through March 31st, which is the DNR law.

Duckworth asked if there are any other farms in the area and if he has talked to other game farmers. Foster listed other farmers in the area and his conversations with those.

Henry Elsing, appearing in opposition, stated he owns property on Highway 60 which surrounds much of the land the applicant is speaking of, and there is other game farms in the area and said that Reed Patterson's game farm is a nightmare and feel the dogs are going to ruin everyone's deer hunting.

White asked who put the letter together and who has been to other reserves. Elsing stated all the people that sent the letters have used hunting preserves.

Duckworth asked if anyone has talked to the Town Board. Elsing stated they did not.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the hearing at 11:30 a.m.

Sprecher stated he is the Chair of the Prairie du Sac Town Board and explained the conversations between Mr. Foster and the Town Board, and the Town did not see any problems with the request and the applicant should reappear before the board after the Board of Adjustment hearing, and took no formal action on the request.

Duckworth stated his concerns with the length of time the season is and if it is heavily used, that is a long season for that, but feels a well run farm can be good, but a poorly run farm could be a problem for the neighbors.

Duckworth reviewed the ordinance and the request. The board continued to discuss.

Vogt stated he feels this should be discussed more at the Town level before it comes before the Board.

Sprecher doesn't agree and feels it should either be approved or denied. He also said that he can speak based on other town boards that have had this come before them and it typically is not a problem.

The Board discussed a permit length as well as fencing and the natural barrier from the hunting activities.

White spoke of experience with her own land and trespassing by dogs and hunters.

Sprecher asked about hours of operation and the concerns about early morning shooting.

Motion by Vogt, seconded by Roloff to approve the request with the conditions listed by Planning and Zoning, for a 2 year period (versus 5 as listed in Planning & Zoning's conditions) and at that time, come back in front of the board. Motion carried 3-2 with White and Duckworth in opposition.

E. James and Pamela Curly (SP-50-04) requesting a variance pursuant to s.7.10(3)(e) to authorize construction of a storage shed within the minimum rear yard setback.

Duckworth asked what the rear yard setbacks were prior to the RC35 zoning. Lorenz stated it would have been a 25 foot rear yard setback.

Duckworth also asked about the other setbacks and the triangle on the far side would be the only allowable building spot, as most of the property is unbuildable.

Roloff asked about a temporary structure. Lorenz stated that all structures need to meet the setbacks whether or not they need a permit.

White asked if the building is allowed in the setback, that doesn't allow other structures to be placed within the setback. Lorenz explained the setbacks and the permit process that will include an affidavit stating that the owner will not inhabit the building and no running water will be allowed.

Mr. James Curly, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the uniqueness of the property is its size and shape and the building that is on there would be an improvement to either fix it up or replace what is there.

White asked what the use is for the property. Curly stated they use it for recreation and they camp up there.

Vogt asked what the shed will be used for. Curly stated that the shed will be used for the same purpose as the other one is used for such as mowers, bikes, camping equipment, etc.

Duckworth asked if the lot was advertised as a buildable lot. Curly stated it was not advertised as a buildable lot and had been listed for 2 years prior to them purchasing it.

Harold Dallman, Town Chair of Freedom, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the property used to be an eyesore and the Curly's have cleaned it up and don't feel that anyone could ever build a house in there and the Town Board is not in opposition to the variance.

Duckworth asked how many triangular lots in the Township. Dallmann stated he doesn't know if there are any and can't see any other use for the property than what they are using it for.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the meeting at 11:57 a.m.

White stated she sees the unique property limitations, but is not sure about the hardship.

Duckworth agrees there is a unique property limitation.

Roloff believes the setback set for the RC35 District was the intent of public interest.

Motion by Duckworth, seconded by Vogt, to approve the variance, because it is a unique piece of property, the public interest would be protected, as verified by the Town, to allow for a new shed to be built no closer than 20 feet to the rear property line, with 1 year to remove the old existing building. Motion carried 4-1, with Roloff in opposition.

F. Steve Blakeslee (SP-45-04) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.7.05(2)(k)2 and 7.05(2)(k)20 to authorize a contractor's storage yard and an agricultural related business.

Duckworth asked if the quarry activity is completed. Lorenz stated there is still some activity and Matt Bremer as well as the applicant can address that question.

Duckworth asked where on Exhibit II,3, the individual items will be located. Lorenz explained.

Steve Blakeslee, Applicant, appearing in favor of the request, gave history of the property and its uses, he then reviewed Exhibit II,3 and explained what the topography of each lot is. Lot 2 is what will be used for the contractor storage yard to store veneer logs, which is completely blocked and totally buffered which can not be seen from anywhere but an airplane. He stated he plans to end the mining there, which will take place in stages.

Duckworth stated the contractor storage yard will be where? Blakeslee stated it will be typically all on lot 2, but will also be on lot 1. Duckworth asked if equipment will be kept there and if maintenance will be done there. Blakeslee stated there will be no maintenance done on any equipment there, but it may be stored there occasionally. He also stated that sand, gravel and topsoil will be stored on-site, as what is considered part of his "contractor storage" business.

Duckworth asked about the ag related business and if there is any sawing, burning, debarking or firewood splitting. Blakeslee stated none of that will be done and are only of high quality and will be exported. Duckworth asked about the ones that don't meet specifications. Blakeslee stated they will be sorted out prior to them coming to the site and there will be no waste product associated at all with the log storage.

Duckworth asked how either one will have negative impacts on the neighbors. Blakeslee stated he met with representatives from the Town, Lance Gurney and Matt Bremer of Planning & Zoning, and many neighbors are ones to which he sold their property to. He informed adjacent landowners at the town meeting and their biggest concern was traffic coming onto Lake Virginia Road, which he stated will not be used.

Matt Bremer, appearing as interest may appear, spoke of the mining related issues and reclamation.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the meeting at 12:25 p.m.

Motion by Roloff, seconded by White, to approve the request to allow a contractor storage yard and an agricultural related business, along with the conditions of the Planning and Zoning Office. Motion carried 5-0.

The Board adjourned at 12:26 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Halsey Sprecher

Secretary

Respectfully submitted,

Halsey Sprecher, Secretary