December 15, 2005 Session of the Board
PRESENT: Bruce Duckworth, Chair
Robert Roloff
Halsey Sprecher
Linda White
Ben Malin
STAFF PRESENT: Dave Lorenz
Mary White
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 White, seconded by Sprecher. Motion carried 5-0.
The Board adopted the agenda for the December 15, 2005 session of the Board on a motion by Roloff, seconded by Malin. Motion carried 5-0.
Motion by White, seconded by Sprecher to adopt the November 2005 minutes. Motion carried 4-0, with Malin abstaining.
COMMUNICATIONS:
None to report.
APPEALS:
A. Raymond and Judith Veloff, Ron and Nancy McFarland agents, (SP-47-05) requesting a variance pursuant to s. 8.05(3)(c) to authorize the construction of improvements on a lot less than 65 feet in width and less than 10,000 square feet of area and a special exception permit pursuant to s.8.08(3)(a)1 for filling and grading on slopes of more than 20%.
Mr. 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 how big the lot was. Lorenz responded that it contained 8,832 square feet and was 57 feet at the building line. Setback distances were discussed.
Malin asked if the Town of Merrimac had completed their review. Lorenz stated that Merrimac indicated it was on their agenda but no formal response had been received.
Mr. Ron McFarland, agent, appeared in favor. He explained that he has not purchased the property yet, but has made an offer to buy with the contingency that a 3 bedroom house could be built on the lot. This lot was platted as a building lot in 1929 before current ordinances were in effect. Duckworth asked Mr. McFarland to show how this will not be harmful to the public interest. Mr. McFarland indicated that a survey and topographical study was done and they were trying to protect the water and neighboring properties during construction. Duckworth asked about the unique physical characteristics of the lot. Mr. McFarland responded the lot was the right size and they could build the house they wanted within the building envelope. Setbacks were the problem. Duckworth asked about any unnecessary hardship. Mr. McFarland stated that they had already spent the money to have the lot surveyed and to find if it was buildable. The hardship was that they wouldn’t be able to build.
White asked what was the current use of this property. Mr. McFarland responded it was just a vacant lot.
Roloff asked about ownership of adjacent lots. White asked how their house compared to adjoining structures. Mr. McFarland responded it would be similar.
Duckworth asked about the proposed filling and grading. Mr. McFarland stated that the grading would bring the property to equal to or less than 20%, as close to 20% as possible. They were not proposing any beach area and wanted to protect the shoreline.
Malin stated that it looked like the existing houses were set back almost in a line, but the proposed house would be closer to the road. Mr. McFarland stated that was where the building envelope was.
Malin asked where the well would be. Mr. McFarland stated it would possibly be a shared well, those decisions haven’t been made yet.
White asked about existing trees. Mr. McFarland stated that they would be removing five trees.
Roloff asked if the Town of Merrimac had approved this. Mr. McFarland said they would go along with whatever the BOA decision was.
White asked if McFarland had spoken to any of the neighbors. Mr. McFarland indicated that he had.
Mr. Rob Crothers appeared in favor. He stated that they had relied on professionals to walk them through the proper procedures. He stated this was similar to other lots that had recently been built on. When asked about the physical limitations he responded that there was no excessive grade, but the lot was just too small.
White asked if there were other boathouses in the area. Mr. Crothers responded there was one. He also stated that he had contacted the Town of Merrimac and they would agree with the BOA decision.
Mr. Ray Veloff, property owner, appeared in favor. Mr. Veloff gave a brief history of the property. He stated that Mr. Dick Grant, Town of Merrimac Chair, told him that the town had signed off on the project. Mr. Veloff stated his intention was to build on lot 9 and he would not sell lot 8 if that was not possible. He was looking for an assurance that he would be able to build on lot 9.
Building across a lot line was discussed.
Ms. Judy Veloff, property owner, appeared in favor. She also gave a history on the property. She stated that a new residence would be good for the neighborhood and would improve the lakeshore and adjoining land.
Ms. Nancy McFarland, agent, appeared in favor. She stated that they have been working on this project for some time and the owner was all for selling it.
Duckworth asked about building across a lot line. Mr. Lorenz responded that building across a lot line was not allowed, but the lots could be combined into one and then built upon.
Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:00 A.M. and the Board went into deliberation.
Mr. Roloff complimented the McFarlands. He said that the ordinance, while acknowledging that there were substandard lots in existence, stated that if abutting substandard lots are owned by the same owner, the substandard lot shall not be sold. Lots 8 and 9 are both owned by the Veloffs
White stated this was to minimize the number of substandard lots and she didn’t see a real hardship.
Malin stated that this was not the only use for the property.
White stated that making the lot unbuildable would only be a hardship to the new owner, not the existing owner.
Duckworth stated the applicant did not meet the three requirements listed in the ordinance for the board to grant a variance, as no hardship, except financial, existed, the property was not unique in any way and the public interest would not be served by approving this request.
Motion by White, seconded by Malin to deny the request as the three requirements for granting a variance had not been met. Motion carried 5-0.
Discussion followed regarding the request for a special exception permit by these same applicants.
Motion by White, seconded by Sprecher to not consider the special exception permit request. Motion carried 5-0.
B. MMC Portage Investments, LLC (SP-48-05) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s. 8.08(3)(a)1 to authorize filling and grading on slopes of more than 20% within 300 feet of Lake Wisconsin.
Mr. 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.
White asked if this was going to be a lot consolidation. Mr. Lorenz responded this was one large lot.
Malin asked if we have heard from the Town of Merrimac. Mr. Lorenz stated we had not.
Duckworth noted that the application stated this was an unrecorded CSM. Lorenz stated that it will need to be recorded before permits can be issued.
Mr. Mathew Lund, owner, appeared in favor. He explained that due to a slope in the area they wanted to do filling and grading to level lot off.
Duckworth asked how close to the lake they would be. Mr. Lund said there would not be any grading along the shoreline and they would be 40 feet away from the water. They were proposing three grassy steps with rock in between.
Duckworth asked about the proposed path way. Mr. Lund stated that would not need filling and grading and stones would be used.
Mr. Michael Lee, owner, appeared in favor. They are doing this to share with their families with filling and grading to address current codes.
Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:30 A.M. and the Board went into deliberation.
Motion by Rolof, seconded by Malin to approve the special exception with conditions as listed by Planning and Zoning. Motion carried 5-0.
C. Carol and Steve Demler, (SP-49-05) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s. 7.03(3)(e) to authorize the location of a two family dwelling.
Mr. 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.
Ms. Carol Demler, owner, appeared in favor. She stated that she never requested a two family home. This would be a single family house as her mother is part of her family. She said that the home had been designed with her mother in mind.
Duckworth asked how this is a single family house instead of a two family. Ms. Demler stated that there would only be one furnace and utilities would be shared.
Mr. Malin asked why she was applying for a two family home. Mr. Demler replied they weren’t, they simply wanted a “mother in law” quarters.
Duckworth asked if there was a separate outside door. Ms. Demler responded that there was but it would only be used by her mother to access the back yard.
Roloff asked where the main entrance was for her mother. Ms. Demler stated that as long as she could use stairs they would be using the same entrance.
Malin asked if there was anything on the outside of the house to indicate that there was two separate living quarters. Ms. Demler responded, no.
White stated that typically if there is a separate kitchen, bathroom and separate access it is considered a two family home and the Board is concerned about the use the next owner may have.
Duckworth said the residence layout looks like two separate living quarters.
White asked why she needed her own kitchen and what they would do if this request was denied. Ms. Demler responded that her mother would have to use the stairs a lot and she wouldn’t feel as independent. They would need to look elsewhere if this request was denied.
Mr. Jack Roller, contractor, appeared in favor. Mr. Roller drew up the plans. What defines or separates a single family home from a two family home was discussed.
Malin asked if this was denied and you were told to build a single family home what would be different from the exterior. Mr. Roller stated it would look the same.
Duckworth asked if “mothers in laws” areas where usually this extensive. Mr. Roller responded, no. White asked if the contractor had built other residences like this and he responded, no. Roloff asked if he had built ones with bars, sinks, refrigerators, etc. on the lower level and he responded, yes.
Mr. Chuck Whitsell, Christmas Mountain Golf Estates Property Owners, appeared in opposition. He stated he was not opposed to what the Demler’s were trying to do, but there has been at least one other request similar to this that was denied. They are in opposition to granting the exception. The Demlers would have a common entrance and there were many residences with nice amenities in the basement. He wants to see it denied because if you grant this exception you will make way for other exceptions. What the Demlers are trying to do is not objectionable.
White asked if the Property Owners had anything that would disallow two kitchens in one house. Mr. Whitsell responded, no.
Malin asked if Mr. Whitsell had reviewed the plans, he had not. Malin also asked if there were any objections to the exterior of the structure. Mr. Whitsell said no.
Mr. Whitsell stated there were many times that original plans get changed during construction and he didn’t understand why this was coming before the Board. He said that duplexes have two separate entrances and two garages, so this didn’t qualify as a two family residence.
Duckworth asked then you are against allowing them to have a duplex but not a “mother in law” apartment. Mr. Whitsell stated yes, because a single family dwelling could contain this area without making it a duplex. His concern was that a future owner could rent this out.
White asked if other homes with kitchens in the basement showed this on the original plans. Mr. Whitsell said not necessarily, if could have been added later. Mr. Whitsell stated that duplexes could have an adverse effect on surrounding homes.
Mr. Roloff stated that if this request is denied by the Board, the owners still have a permit to build a single family dwelling and can do so. After the building is built they can remodel the downstairs by obtaining a building permit from the Town of Dellona. This would not set a precident for requests for multiple family dwellings in areas zoned for single
family dwellings.
Covenants and contracts were discussed.
Mr. Gary Cooper, Christmas Mountain Golf Estates, appeared in opposition. He is a member of the Architectural Control Committee. He stated that covenants are rigidly enforced from the beginning. They have restrictions against short term rental. He stated that there were other structures being use in a similar manner and didn’t feel this was a matter for the Board.
Duckworth asked when does this become a two family dwelling. Mr. Cooper responded that a two family dwelling would have separate garages and entrances.
White asked if this use was against the property owners covenants. Mr. Cooper responded, no.
Mr. Ron Hedrich appeared in opposition. He is also on the Architectural Control Committee. He stated that they had no problem with these plans.
Mr. John Holmes appeared in opposition. He purchased property in the area because all the homes are single family. Duplexes cause property values to decrease.
Mr. Lorenz reappeared. A single family permit had been issued, but this structure contained separate living quarters, therefore a special exception permit was necessary. The property will still be zoned single family.
Duckworth asked if the Board could advise that this is not a duplex and that Planning and Zoning should issue the permit. Mr. Lorenz stated that this lower level could be rented out.
Duckworth asked if applicant could just appeal the decision of the Planning and Zoning Office.
He asked if the owners where given that option. Mr. Lorenz responded that he didn’t know. Interior remodeling would only require town approval.
Sprecher was in favor of the mother living there and if they granted a special exception permit it was only for this situation. It would not be transferable and the zoning would not change.
Malin asked if this was disapproved, could the owners build their house and submit a plan for an unfinished basement. Mr. Lorenz stated, yes.
White questioned why this was brought before the Board. Mr. Lorenz responded that the department determination was that there were enough features there that a public hearing was required.
Mr. Jack Roller reappeared. He stated that the Demlers had paid for this hearing, they could stop this request and just go to the municipality for remodeling permits.
Mr. Ron Hedrich reappeared in opposition. He stated that a duplex doesn’t have an open stairway between the units.
Mr. Gary Cooper reappeared in opposition. He again stated that this was not a duplex.
Ms. Carol Demling reappeared.
Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 11:45 A.M. and the Board went into deliberation.
White stated that it would set a bad precedent to approve the special exception. She stated this could be tabled and returned challenging the Planning and Zoning decision.
Malin made a motion, seconded by White to disapprove the request with no further permits required as they were not applicable in this situation.
Duckworth had two problems, first is if we deny the duplex and Planning and Zoning still maintains its position they cannot remodel the basement and secondly he questioned this appeal being presented this way. He was for approving the appeal, but only for the present owner.
Special exceptions run with the property and are hard to enforce.
Malin reworded the original motion to say just to disapprove the request, seconded by White. Motion carried 3-2, with Sprecher and Duckworth in opposition.
The Board adjourned at 12:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Halsey Sprecher
Secretary