Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes

DATE: June 23, 2005 Session of the Board

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

ABSENT: Robert Roloff

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 ahd been provided for the scheduled public hearing. The certification of notice was accepted on a motion by White, seconded by Vogt.
Motion carried 4-0.

The Board adopted the agenda for the June 23, 2005 session of the Board on a Motion by Vogt, seconded by Sprecher.
Motion carried 4-0.

Motion by White, seconded by Vogt to adopt the May 2005 minutes.
Motion carried 4-0.

COMMUNICATIONS:

None to report

APPEALS:

A. Ron Silverthorn (SP-27-05) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.8.08(3)(a) to authorize filling and grading within 300 feet of a navigable waterway.

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.

Vogt asked about the 1997 permit that was referred to by Lorenz during the history of the request. Lorenz stated that the permit from 1997 had expired.

White asked if this was to distribute the spoil on the site or if more dredging would be done. Lorenz stated the dredging has been completed, that this was for distributing the spoil.

Vogt asked where the navigable water was. Lorenz stated DNR's interpretation was that the pond was navigable.

Mr. Ron Silverthorn , applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated this was an extension of what was done in 1997, and had never achieved the results they wanted and ended up with marsh, but would like to redo it.

White asked where the piles came from now. Silverthorn stated the spoils are from dredging out the pond another 8 feet last October.

White asked if this appearance is done in hindsight. Silverthorn stated yes, he had a contractor that did it for him as a favor and told him he didn't need a permit.

Vogt asked if the area used to be a wetland area. Silverthorn stated it was and was about ½ acre and the DNR stated that it was a navigable body of water.

White asked if the water was a natural accumulation of water. Silverthorn stated it was. He also spoke of the seeding requirement of August 1st because of the contractor's schedule and the dryness.

White asked when the contractor could get in there. Silverthorn stated that the contractor should be able to get there by the end of the month.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 9:20 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation.

White stated her concern with the applicant getting a permit the first time in 1997 and then not getting one last October when he did the project again.

Vogt spoke of the contractor and it doesn't matter which county your from because of the DNR's ruling of being navigable and the shoreline protection.

White stated she isn't sure the contractor misled him when he understood that the property needed a permit in the past.

Sprecher asked what the alternatives were if they denied the request.

White stated its not a hind-site permit for dredging its for filling and grading.White asked for Zoning to provide answers to the questions.

Lorenz, reappearing, stated that he believes the applicant did receive a citation for the dredging without a permit, but the request here is for the disbursement of the spoils.

White asked if that comes from the DNR. Lorenz stated that he believes it could come from our office and/or the DNR.

Motion by Vogt, seconded by White to approve the request with the conditions listed by Planning and Zoning. Motion carried 4-0. B. SWS LLC (SP-28-05) requesting a variance pursuant to s.8.06(1)(c)2 to authorize the location of a proposed sign within the minimum road setback.

Duckworth ruled that the request will be for an area variance.

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

Duckworth advised the applicant of the variance requirements that must be shown for the Board to approve his request.

Richard Jacobson, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the original sign that is already at the end of the subdivision, is a temporary sign and feels that they need visibility for the subdivision and need to stay 10 feet away from the tower where they want to locate the sign. Their hardship is that people don't know that the subdivision is there because of a hill. They also feel that it will enhance the area, it is a natural sign with a tasteful look that won't burden anyone's visibility. He then stated that the unique limitations of the property is because there is a hill there and described the lighting around the sign, the appearance and materials used to make the sign.

Duckworth asked what is unique about the property. Jacobson stated if they meet the requirements of the setback, the sign won't be seen from the road in their opinion and is not worth putting there.

Duckworth asked about compliance from the setback would prevent the owner from using the property or would be unnecessarily burdensome. Jacobson stated it should have been addressed initially in the plan review, though not really a hardship, their investment is hardship and feel additional hardship is in identifying that a subdivision exists.

Duckworth asked if the sign can't be placed here the hardship is what? Jacobson stated it's a hardship because they wouldn't have a sign identifying the subdivision.

White stated this is on a dead end road so there are no other subdivisions on the road. Jacobson stated that was correct, they are the only subdivision.

Duckworth asked what unnecessary hardship the board would be imposing if they denied the request. Jacobson stated that he feels the hardship would be in the investment that SWS has in the property.

Duckworth asked how it will hurt their investment? Jacobson didn't know.

White asked if owners have a hard time to find their property. Jacobson stated they do not have a problem finding the subdivision.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 9:41 a.m.

Duckworth reviewed the request and the ordinance and stated the board needs to discuss the 3 areas needed to be shown. He then stated he does not see where the request is in the best interest of the area, the property is not unique and has nothing from the Town of Merrimac.

Vogt and White stated they do not feel it is unique but simply a preference and their request is awful close to the road.

Duckworth stated from the testimony he does not see where the applicant met any of the requirements.

Motion to deny by White, stating that applicant did not meet any of the three requirements listed in the ordinance for the board to grant a variance, as no hardship was proven because the request was a matter of convenience, the property was not unique in any way, shape or form, and public interest could be harmed because of the distance from the side of the road that the sign was requested to be located.Seconded by Vogt.
Motion carried 4-0.

C. Kevin and Sandy Meise, (SP-29-05) requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.7.05(2)(a) and s.7.03(2)(n)1 to authorize the operation of a bed and breakfast.

Kevin Meise, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that he had called Planning & Zoning in 2000 and was told that the County did not have any regulations on B&B's and got licensed from the State and inquires when the zoning went into effect. He then stated that 3 rooms are licensed, and rent out 2, and provide the rural experience and a quiet place to relax.

Duckworth asked about conversations with the Town Board about issues. Meise stated the Town has not stated anything has come to them and no neighbors have had any problems.

Duckworth asked if he was operating under the standards of the state law since 2000. Meise stated that was correct. Sprecher asked if there are any unique attractions that he offers. Meise stated that just being in the country, the atmosphere of the rural character.

Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the hearing at 9:50 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation. Duckworth reviewed the request and the ordinance.

Sprecher stated this appears to be a "house cleaning" issues.

Motion by Sprecher, seconded by White, to approve the request with the conditions listed by Planning and Zoning.
Motion carried 4-0.

D. Harold Schlieckau, (SP-30-05), requesting a special exception permit pursuant to s.8.07(5) to allow clearing in excess of 25% of a shoreline. Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request. Mr. Lorenz concluded with the staff recommendation of conditions to be placed on the request if approved by the Board. Duckworth asked if Lorenz has walked the stream. Lorenz stated he has not and that no filling has been done, but simply the sever cutting and clearing. Vogt asked if all the bare ground shown in the photos is ag fields. Lorenz stated that is correct. Duckworth asked about the mowing or planting plans. Lorenz stated he did not submit any plans. Vogt asked about the replanting plan subject to approval. Lorenz explained. The Board continued to discuss the conditions of the stream bank, vegetation and work that had been done. Sprecher asked if he had come in for a Special Exception permit before the work was done. Lorenz stated he would have had to get approval from the board to do that amount of clearing, however he could have removed the dead and dying vegetation without a special exception permit. White asked if this is another case where woody stuff was anything down to an inch? Lorenz stated everything. Mr. Harold Schlickau, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that he was referred to the DNR and when he got the notice from Planning & Zoning found the letter from the DNR that was addressed to someone else so he didn't think he had a problem. He stated he wanted to clear the stream out because of a storm and erosion created from the storm. He also spoke of work that the county did a long time ago and didn't finish the job they started. Duckworth asked if he had any photos of how the stream looked prior to the cutting. Schlickau stated he did not. Duckworth asked what he planned to do with the stream now. Schlickau stated he plans to hire someone to come in there once a year and cut and remove all the big vegetation that is still left. Duckworth asked how wide of an area do you plan to reseed. Schlickau stated the entire area is seeded. Duckworth asked how close to the stream are you going to plow or plant crops. Schlickau stated that probably not anymore after he seen the erosion. Right now it is alfalfa and roam grasses and also had 3 truckloads of lime put on the area. Vogt asked how many acres of crop field is there. Schlickau stated it is approximately 11 acres total. Schlickau also stated that if they are going to make him do anything else with it, he is going to sell it to the county and make them deal with it and should have been taken care of when the county put the road in. Sprecher asked about the 35 foot strip.Schlickau stated that on the east side is a bank and doesn't see why you would need a 35 foot strip. Vogt asked if there was a lot of bare ground or erosion in the creek. Schlickau stated there wasn't, but there was some sediment from when they redid the road. Lester Wiese, appearing in favor of the request, stated he is the county board supervisor for the area of the request, and felt that cleaning of the ditch was a good thing and typically unless there is a good rain, there is no water in the ditch. Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the hearing at 10:25 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation. Sprecher stated that if this was mowed and trimmed the entire time, it would be addressed and feels that he has improved the property. Motion by Sprecher, seconded by Vogt, to grant the special exception request with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning, altering condition D to state that a 35 foot total buffer strip along the stream left at the discretion of Planning and Zoning to verify where it is needed the most and removed the requirement for revegetation.
Motion carried 3-0, with White abstaining. E. Harvey Schmucker (SP-31-05) requesting special exception permits pursuant to s.7.05(2)(k)9 and 20 to authorize the operation of a sawmill on the same premises for more than 10 days and an agricultural related business. Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request. Mr. Lorenz concluded with the staff recommendation of conditions to be placed on the request if approved by the Board. Duckworth asked about Exhibit II,3. Lorenz stated that is a copy of the floodplain map and the intention is to show that the buildings will be located outside of the flood zone. Duckworth asked what a change of use permit is. Lorenz explained. Sprecher asked if a farmer had a large combine and did custom work, would he need a permit. Lorenz explained. Mr. Harvey Schmucker, appearing in favor of the request, stated that he does own a sawmill and purchased the farm and would like to transport the mill to this farm to continue cutting for log cabin materials and pallet stock. Duckworth asked what kind of sawmill is it. Schmucker stated it is a diesel circular saw which will be in a pole shed building and everything will be inside. Sprecher asked what type of wood is use for the log homes. Schmucker stated they use white pine. Duckworth asked what is done with the waste material. Schmucker stated the slabs are used for fire wood and the sawdust is use for bedding for farmers. Duckworth asked how noisy the saw is. Schmucker stated it is not real noisy and the newer diesel engines have mufflers on them, so there is little noise. Duckworth asked about truck traffic. Schmucker stated right now it is every 10 days, however if they do pallet stock, there may be more trucking, but it will not be a large operation. Duckworth asked about the agricultural related business. Schmucker stated that people come into the property to view what can be built. White asked if they will be sawing for uses other than for their own use, such as outside cutting. Schmucker stated if they have time, they would, however right now, they are just doing their own. White asked about the logs coming in on a semi, how do they go out? Schmucker stated they go out on a semi, trucks or trailers, depending on the size of the load. White asked how far from this location is the next neighbor. Schmucker stated that is approximately about across a 40 acre parcel and he was at the town board meeting. Duckworth asked if they have talked to the Town Board. Schmucker stated they have and the Town has supported it. Seeing as no one wished to appear, Duckworth closed this portion of the hearing at 10:45 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation. Lorenz, reappearing, spoke of the ag related type of business and is up to the determination and interpretation of the Director. Duckworth reviewed the request and the ordinance. Motion by White, seconded by Sprecher, to approve the request with the conditions listed by Planning and Zoning.
Motion carried 4-0.

The Board adjourned at 10:47 a.m.

Respectfully submitted: Halsey Sprecher, Secretary