Board of Adjustment


DATE: July 27, 2006

PRESENT: Bruce Duckworth, Chair, Halsey Sprecher, Richard Vogt, Robert Roloff, Linda White, Dave Werneke (for Communication item only)

ABSENT: None

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 9:04 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 Roloff.
Motion carried 5-0.

The Board adopted the agenda for the July 27, 2006, session of the Board on a Motion by Roloff, seconded by Vogt.
Motion carried 5-0.

 Motion by White, seconded by Vogt to adopt the June 2006 minutes.
Motion carried 4-0 (Roloff abstaining).

 COMMUNICATIONS:

Lorenz spoke of the request to have the appeal of SP-21-06. Duckworth asked what the grounds were for the appeal to be reheard. Lorenz stated he was not sure of the grounds. Duckworth asked if the applicant can reapply. Lorenz stated they could reapply and that they also could appeal the boards decision to Sauk County Circuit Courts.

Duckworth asked about the amendment to Chapter 7 by the Sauk County Board in May, 2006. Duckworth stated that his interpretation of the letter is that the appeal was made after the ordinance was amended.

Vogt asked about the difference in the ordinance where it states that the approval must be made in writing by the Board of Adjustment.

Lance Gurney appeared and explained that the ordinance was updated to clear up the writing but that the ordinance has been interpreted the same way for over a decade and the process itself did not change. The standards did not change, how the Board makes a decision did not change and how the decision is administered did not change. The ordinance was just changed for clarification purposes.

Gurney also stated that the reason why this request is in front of the Board now is because both the Department and Corporation Counsel met and confirmed that the Department, nor counsel can make that decision, only the Board can.

Gurney and the Board continued to discuss.

White stated her vote would stay the same and she believes the Board used the ordinances and felt they followed the standards that they are required to follow.

Vogt stated he voted to approve the request and he feels he would still go with that, but does not feel the 4 word addition to the ordinance would not constitute a rehearing. The word addition does not change anything in the appeal and does not feel that it would change the outcome of the vote.

Roloff stated that he has no comment because he was not present at the hearing.

Sprecher stated he does not feel he could bring it back.

Duckworth stated that he believes that to bring it back, the majority vote from the previous hearing would have to make a motion to have the appeal heard over.

Dave Werneke joins the board for the decision on whether SP-23-06 should be reheard due to the changes in the ordinance.

White chooses to decline the option to make motion to rehear SP-23-06.

Werneke chooses to decline the option to make motion to rehear SP-23-06.

Duckworth chooses to decline the option to make motion to rehear SP-23-06. No motion made. Board decides that rehearing of appeal will not take place. Werneke leaves the Board.

The Board chooses to move the election of Board members to the end of the meeting.

APPEALS:

Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request and the property. He then reviewed the photos of the site and concluded with the staff recommendation.

Vogt asked about the letter from Ramaker about the distance from the slopes to the creek. Lorenz explained.

White asked if the department staff could see any runoff into the creek. Lorenz stated that it is very heavily vegetated and is very flat and does not see where there would be any runoff or issues with the creek.

Duckworth stated he doesn’t understand the difference in measurements between Planning & Zoning and the surveyor.

Roloff asked about the solid rock formation that Ramaker refers to is behind the shed and further away from the creek than the shed. Lorenz stated that the question is has there been filling and grading within 300 feet of Skillet Creek.

The Board tried to determine the distance between the creek and site using Exhibit IV,1 and felt it is within the 300 foot measurement.

Vogt asked about the measurement from Ramaker and that the measurement was taken from a stake in a field.

The Board then discussed the Township not hearing the appeal yet.

Brian Farr, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the process has been confusing and that when Dave Tremble was onsite and staked out the building, nothing was mentioned about the slopes. He also spoke of work that has been done on the property and that he has complied with all the standards that the office has asked for. He then stated that the only part of the property that was/is 20% slopes is the far north corner, which is outside of the 300 foot measurement. He also clarified that the measurement was taken from the creek to the slope, not to the building.

Roloff asked about the slopes not exceeding 20%. Farr stated that the slope was not over 20%.

White asked about the rock formation. Farr explained the process and what had all been done as part of the construction project.

White asked if you look at the top of the rock, was the angle coming off the rock about the same angle or was it different. Farr stated that there was exposed rock there before and explained the slope.

Duckworth asked about why the Town doesn’t know what is being done. Farr stated that he took the form that was given to him for the Township to sign and gave it to Darlene Hill, Chairperson for the Town of Baraboo.

Duckworth stated that the Town typically hears about the appeals prior to them coming to the Board. Farr stated he did talk to Darlene Hill.

Roloff asked if he hand delivered the letter prior to July 21, 2006. Farr stated it was well before that date.

Vogt, referring to Exhibit IV,1, asked about a small existing shed that sits up against the slope and where that might be located on the map. Farr explained.

White asked what the dimensions are on the old barn. Farr wasn’t positive but thought about 30x30.

Roloff asked what the dimensions on the new structure are. Farr stated it was 40x88.

Duckworth verified that there is 2 old barns. Farr stated there is an old barn and a grainery, there is not 2 old barns.

Duckworth asked if Planning & Zoning measured. Lorenz stated he paced it and had approximately 60 paces between where the filling started and the toe of the creek, but it was not taped.

Duckworth stated though that where he started from was not 20% grade. Lorenz stated he does not know what the slope was before it was started.

Duckworth verified that at 60 paces, around 3 feet a pace. Lorenz stated that is correct.

Suzanne Dohner, appearing in opposition, stated that she is a supervisor for the Town of Baraboo and is showing in opposition because the applicant did not apply to the Planning Commission for his request. She did verify that the applicant did give the form to the Town Chair.

Darlene Hill, appearing as interest may appear, stated she is the Chair for the Town of Baraboo and stated that she did receive the paper from the applicant, but choose not to sign it until the Town could hear the appeal, so it was not forwarded onto the Board of Adjustment.

Duckworth explained to Ms. Hill that the form is only a signature confirming that they have been notified that the appeal was being made, not an approval for the permit.

White asked if the applicant got a building permit from the Town of Baraboo. Hill stated she does not know.

Brian Farr, reappearing in favor, stated that there has been some communication problems and is unfamiliar with the procedures and was told to deliver the form to Ms. Hill and that is what he did. He also explained that because the survey showed that it was over 300 feet, he was told he would not need to apply, which is why he did not follow through with the Town Planning Commission. He also explained the measurement.

White asked if he would be ok if the appeal was tabled until the Planning Commission could hear the appeal. Farr stated he would be happy to work with the Planning Commission.

Duckworth stated that since a stop work order has not been issued and the work has been pretty much done, it isn’t an issue with a permit, but more of following through. Farr explained all the work that has been done and completed and stabilized to show that he has complied with all of Planning & Zoning’s request.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, acting Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:02 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation.

Duckworth stated he doesn’t know where the 20% started or where that is in relation to the water and differences in the map distance and what the surveyor states is the difference.

Vogt stated that he feels it is within the 300 feet and it appears he would need the special exception permit.

Motion by White, seconded by Roloff, to table the request until the Town has had an opportunity to hear the request.
Motion carried 3-2, with Sprecher and Vogt in opposition.

Dave Lorenz, Environmental and Zoning Specialist, appeared and gave the history and background of the request. He then reviewed the photos 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 any feedback was given from the Town. Lorenz stated that we have received the acknowledgement form, but nothing else.

White asked if they have received their privy permit. Lorenz stated they have not received permits yet, that will come after the approval.

John Yoder, appearing in favor of the request, stated that the project is for a private school for the Amish children in the area.

Duckworth asked if he would retain ownership of the property and if there was another school located near there. Yoder stated that he would retain the property and there is another school, but it is on the other side of Ironton.

Duckworth asked how this would impact the neighborhood. Yoder stated that the neighbor is a member of the school board.

Roloff stated that there is a town acknowledgement form that the Town would hear the appeal on July 10 th.

White asked what direction the students would be coming from. Yoder stated they would be coming from the south and from the north. White stated she believes there is 4 or 5 schools already placed in the Town of Ironton. Yoder stated that this would be the 5 th school.

Eli Borntrager, appearing in favor of the request, stated that he is a member of the school board and he has talked to the Ironton Town Board and they said that they don’t need to be on the agenda for this meeting and that the County provided the form for the Town to sign.

Duckworth confirmed that he did not go the Town Board meeting in July. Borntrager stated he was told he didn’t need to.

Duckworth asked if he has talked to the neighbors. Borntrager stated he has not talked to anyone.

Duckworth asked where the closest residence is located that is not one of the members. Borntrager stated north on Highway G would be the closest residence.

White asked how far the students would be coming from. Borntrager stated about 2 miles out from the Carr Valley area.

Duckworth asked what kind of building this will be. Borntrager stated it will be poured on a slab, one story building.

Vogt confirmed the dimensions of the building and the privies.

Dave Lorenz, reappearing.

Duckworth asked if there have been any complaints from the schools that the Board has approved in the past. Lorenz stated that the department has received no complaints that he is aware of.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:20 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation.

Motion by Roloff, seconded by Vogt to approve the request with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning.
Motion carried 5-0.

The Board took a brief recess.

Chair Duckworth ruled that the variance is an area variance.

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

Duckworth confirmed that the new building is further away from the existing building. Lorenz stated that is correct.

Duckworth also confirmed that the neighbors that the ordinance is designed to protect has signed a waiver to the setback distances and is in favor of the request. Lorenz stated that is correct.

Duckworth asked if staff feels a new variance is needed instead of just being an expansion of the original variance. Lorenz stated that was correct.

Sprecher asked about the previous appeal and if the approval included the sale of materials and supplies as part of the operation of the kennel. Lorenz confirmed that it did.

Ron Rabuck, applicant, appearing in favor of the request, explained the project and stated that he has spoken to all the neighbors and they are all in favor of the request, even though they are all more than 1000 feet away. He also spoke of the recommendation from the Town Board.

Duckworth asked if he appeared at the town board. Rabuck stated he did and there were no complaints.

Duckworth asked how he keeps the dogs from barking all night. Rabuck stated they can be closed inside at night and can wear bark collars if need be.

Rabuck also explained that the business is expanding and the public interest is there for their service.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Duckworth closed the public portion of the hearing at 10:40 a.m. and the Board went into deliberation.

Duckworth stated that the variance requirements is there to protect the neighbor that is located within 1000 feet and the neighbor has waived the requirement in writing. He also stated that it is the only location the building can be built because of the wetland/floodplain location on the property. He feels the standards for the variance have been met.

Roloff stated that this request is the same as the request we granted the variance for in 2003 so we can use the same conditions.

Motion by Vogt, seconded by Duckworth, to approve the variance, as the applicant has met all the requirements for a variance, with the conditions listed by Planning & Zoning.
Motion carried 5-0.

The Board then discussed town land use plans in regard to variance appeals.

Gurney spoke of the comprehensive planning process with the County and the municipalities. He also spoke of working with Town’s on how the planning commission and board should review their plan and determine if the proposal is consistent with their plan and the rationale they use in that determination. He stated that the department could provide portions of the local plans that are associated with the request if the Board would like. However he believes that it is the Town’s policy and they should provide the Board with some information on how they came to their determination.

Duckworth asked what the Board of Adjustment is to do if they have an applicant from a Town and has gotten the ok and then there is a member from the audience that comes up and says it is not in agreement with that local town plan. Does the Board put weight on the local plan or the county ordinances.

Gurney stated he would like the Townships to provide information on why they feel the proposal meets the town plan or does not meet the town plan. The continued to discuss local plans and who interprets the town plans and such, as well as local citizens that disagree with the interpretation of the town plan by their boards/commissions.

Roloff stated he does see how members of the Board of Adjustment can be expected to know what is in all of the local town plans and if the request fits those plans or not.

Sprecher stated he feels that if the Town boards or planning commissions don’t provide information to the Board of Adjustment, they still have to decide at the meeting on an appeal with the testimony that is given.

Vogt stated that he feels it would help if the department staff would tell the applicant that the request is not completed until they have met with the Town Board and they have provided the Board of Adjustment with a recommendation.

Gurney explained that the departments process with applicants and getting a complete application and reviewed what the Town Acknowledgement form is and what it is meant to do.

White asked if the appeal meets the criteria of the Town plan are they to rubber stamp the request. Gurney stated that the Board is there to make their determination based on the criteria of the County ordinances. There is no rubber-stamping.

The Board then discussed the request from the Planning, Zoning and Land Records Committee and the need for clarification on small lots that don’t provide much opportunity to do anything with them.

Gurney stated that there seems to be a lot of request for projects on non-conforming lots, some that existing 20-100 years ago, such as lots in Blackhawk and Merrimac where the requests were denied. He stated he feels that the ordinance does not differentiate between lots that were created 100 years ago versus ones that were created within the last 10 years and leaves little chance to doing anything with those properties. He stated he feels there is a dramatic difference between a side yard setback compared to a setback from a town road, from public safety and welfare standpoint.

The Board continued to talk about the ordinances, amendments and variances.

Duckworth stated he would write up something and will present it to the Board and see if they can get discussions going and possibly provide recommendations for changes.

The Board then held elections for Board officers.

Nomination by Sprecher, seconded by White, for Duckworth for Board Chair. Request by Sprecher to close nominations. Nomination carried 4-1 with Duckworth in opposition.

Nomination by White, seconded by Roloff, for Vogt as Vice Chair. Request by Roloff to close nominations. Nomination carried 5-0.

Nomination by Sprecher, seconded by Vogt for Roloff for Secretary. Request by Vogt to close nominations. Nomination carried 5-0.

Darlene Hill spoke about the Baraboo Town Board and her disappointment with the Board decision on the Blum/Hill appeal.

The Board adjourned at 11:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted: Halsey Sprecher, Secretary