APPROVED                                PLAN COMMISSION

May 7, 2009

Troy Town Hall @ 7:00 p.m.

Hudson Wisconsin 54016

 

 

Members Present: Jan Cuccia, David Wolf, Bob Rolle, Mark Mitchell,

                                 Paul Mahler, Joe Duerre, Dan Pearson

Members Absent:  Ray Knapp (excused)

 

Staff Present:         Rob Jones, Cedar Corp. 

 

Recording Secretary:     Becky Lopez    

 

Others Present:    Andrew Walton, Connie Ruppert, Peg Heaver, Donna Murr, Tom Murr,

                               Steve Murr, Dave Simpson, Don LeFever, Bob Baczynski, Trent Farago,

                               Charlie Macdonell, and unidentified others.

 

 

Call to Order

Jan Cuccia called the meeting of the Town of Troy Planning Commission to order at 7:04 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

AGENDA: 

1.       Approve Minutes; 

2.       Acknowledgement of applications for action as regulated by SDO;

3.       St. Croix County special exception for limited commercial recreational activity and for number of animal units allowed per acre – Donald & Teresa LeFever, 389 CTH F (O’leary property);

4.       Riverway review/public hearing for a conditionally approved activity (erosion control) – YMCA, 532 CTH F;

5.       Review & recommend Letter of Understanding for vegetation removal in Lower St. Croix Riverway District for St. Croix Electric;

6.       Riverway concept review/public hearing for construction in a conforming area and a variance/conditional use permit to reconstruct a residential cabin , fill & grading in a slope preservation zone and/or floodway/flood fringe area, retaining walls, stairs, patio, deck and lot split – Donna Murr, 202 Cove Ct.;

7.       Discuss sub-division landscaping standards;

8.       Building Permits/Utility Permits;

9.       Committee Reports & correspondence;

10.   Adjourn;

 

1.             Approve Minutes;

             Minutes of the April 2, 2009 Plan Commission were reviewed.

       

             Bob Rolle moved to approve the minutes of the April 2, 2009 Plan

             Commission. David Wolf seconded. Motion passed, all in favor.

 

2.            Acknowledgement of applications for action as regulated by SDO;

There were none.

 

 

 

3.          St. Croix County special exception for limited commercial recreational activity and

      for number of animal units allowed per acre – Donald & Teresa LeFever,

      389 CTH F (O’leary property);

 

Jan Cuccia, gave a brief introduction of the agenda item and noted that the Plan Commission did a site review at this property. It was noted that there are now potential buyers of the property who are seeking approval for a special exception by the County to allow more horses than would typically be allowed. Jan explained that the town can only make a recommendation to the County, and the County will take action, and make the final decision.

 

Rob Jones noted that the applicants are proposing to accommodate horses in 32 stalls on a 3.5 acre lot and an adjacent 4.3 acre outlot. The outlot has a deed restriction which sets certain restrictions on the use of that outlot, and that some of those restrictions may be in opposition to the planned use of the outlot. He said that if we recommend approval to St. Croix County we may want to recommend the lifting of the deed restrictions.

 

Donald LeFever came up to address the Plan Commission. He said that their plan is to restore the property to what it was originally built for, other than the extra land that they had before it was sold to English Estates, and that it was originally built to hold and work and condition in excess of 25 horses. For the Arabian horse business that they do, they do not do any stockyards, pasture boards, etc.  The horses are valuable show horses, all indoors, carefully kept to prevent injuries, maximize health and nutrition, with very limited time outdoors. They would probably put an exercise paddock where the house originally stood. They propose an aggressive manure removal program, which includes a new non-chemical fly predator system which would involve the spreading of a fly predator around the area where the manure will be stored until it is hauled away, which will be weekly, unless it is found to be necessary more frequently.

 

Mr. LeFever said that they plan to restore the property back to a showplace, which they would aggressively work on through the summer, to move into in the fall.  He also stated that web cams would be used to monitor the horses and property. They also plan to put a fence around the entire property with a nice gate system, and put the fences in the proper surveyed areas-which they are not now. He also said that he had talked to Kernon Bast who explained that the use of the outlot was determined by the vote of the Association members.

 

The Plan Commission members asked several questions of Mr LeFever including questions about the number of visitors and available parking; the specifics of management of the proposed manure system, and the need and likelihood of reaching an agreement on the outlot.

 

Jan stated that the Plan Commission did receive a letter from Kathy O’Leary in support of this project. She then stated that this is not a public hearing, but that if there was anyone in the audience that would like to come up and speak to this matter, they should do so now.

 

Paul Ruppert came up. He is the owner of Lot 2, English Estates, but does not currently live there. Lot 2 is adjacent to the outlot and the O’Leary property. He has concerns about the manure removal plan, and the consequences of any problems that may come up with the disposal of the manure. He also questioned the removal of the manure in the exercise and outlot areas.

Connie Ruppert, Lot 9 English Estates came forward. She stated that she believes that the LeFevers will restore the property, and that she knows that he has a good reputation as a horse trainer. She has concerns about the number of animals and the manure, and also about any possibility of run-off into the Association owned ponds, and resulting pollution issues.

 

Trent Farago, 875 Alex Lane, Hudson stated that his daughter rides horse at Mr. LeFever’s other facility, and that they have had a very good experience there. He keeps a very clean barn, and he feels that this is a very beneficial program for kids and families.

 

Andrew Walton, lives in the neighborhood. He stated that the property cannot be the same as it was formerly because there are people living there now, and that 25 horses on 3.5 acres seems excessive to him.

 

After comment from people in the audience the Plan Commission began their deliberations. Although there was general support by Plan Commission members for seeing an improvement to this property there were many concerns stated including the high density of animals for this size lot, especially with the use of the outlot in question; the concern of the amount of manure an operation this size would generate and if the manure removal system proposed would be adequate and failsafe, and concerns over the volume of traffic the business would generate and parking availability.  

 

The consensus of the Plan Commission is that they are generally in favor of the project, but have enough concerns that they preferred to not make a recommendation to approval or denial, but instead to send a letter to the county indicating general support for improvement of the property but listing the several concerns that the town has with the proposed operation. 

 

Bob Rolle motioned to recommend to the town board, to send a letter to the county indicating that while the town is in favor of improving the former O’Leary property, there is concern in allowing animal unit density far beyond that normally permitted. We urge the county to carefully consider the design, monitoring and enforcement of appropriate manure control standards for this proposal. The county should also note that the 4.3 acre outlot in English Estates may not be available as pasture land under this proposal without additional approval by the English Estates Association. Paul Mahler seconded. All in favor. Motion carries.

 

   4.      Riverway review/public hearing for a conditionally approved activity (erosion

            control) – YMCA, 532 CTH F;

 

Jan Cuccia gave a brief introduction of the agenda item and reminded the Plan Commission members that this was before the Plan Commission before. At that time the Plan Commission decided to let the DNR and the county come up with a plan for erosion control and as long as there were no major errors in that, it would be acceptable to the town.

 

Rob Jones stated that this was before the Plan Commission for a concept review last July. The proposed project includes filling and grading to create a small storm water detention pond with an earthen embankment, outlet structure, and outfall directed to a ravine. The project also proposes to install riprap-lined channel along the ravine flow line. The applicant has provided plans prepared by the NRCS, photos of the existing vegetation, and a letter from the Executive Director of Camp St. Croix stating that the YMCA will be responsible for continuing maintenance of the erosion control measures. Rob stated that he would like to see an amendment made to the construction plan to include a protected overflow weir on the earthen embankment, to control the water flow into the ravine.

 

Jan asked if a representative from the YMCA would like to speak on this agenda item.  Dave Simpson, property manager at the YMCA Camp St. Croix addressed the Plan Commission. Dave indicated his agreement with adding the overflow weir and requested Rob talk to Gary Zappa to update him. Dave also stated that they are now in a very tight time frame, and need to get the project done before Troy beach opens.  

 

Jan then opened the public hearing at 8:45 PM. for a conditionally approved activity (erosion control) – YMCA, 532 CTH F; She asked if there was anyone from the public who wished to speak to this matter. There were none, so she closed the public hearing.

 

Joe Duerre moved that the Plan Commission recommend approval of this application for a conditionally permitted structure and activity. To construct and maintain structural erosion control measures in a slope preservation zone within the lower St. Croix Riverway District, with the addition of the improvements from Cedar Corporation-adding a protective overflow weir installed at the approximate outlet structure, and based on the plans submitted. Mark Mitchell seconded. All in favor. Motion carried.

             

        

   5.      Review & recommend Letter of Understanding for vegetation removal in Lower St.

            Croix Riverway District for St. Croix Electric;

 

Jan stated that that this item was not ready to be addressed and asked for a motion to table till next month.  

 

Dan Pearson moved to table this item until the June meeting. David Wolf seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion passed.     

        

6.      Riverway concept review/public hearing for construction in a conforming area and a variance/conditional use permit to reconstruct a residential cabin , fill & grading in a slope preservation zone and/or floodway/flood fringe area, retaining walls, stairs, patio, deck and lot split – Donna Murr, 202 Cove Ct.;

 

Jan Cuccia gave an introduction of the agenda item and explained that the Murrs have been before the Plan Commission before (in 2005 and 2006). She noted the Murrs have provided some background information on their history with the County Board of Adjustment and a Circuit Court decision on this property. She noted that this is a new concept for review by the Murrs and that the Plan Commission’s job is to review the concept and offer feedback on it. She went on to explain that this is not a process that will lead to a decision or a recommendation by the town this evening and that the Plan Commission needs to identify the requirements of our Riverway Ordinance that apply to their plan. She noted when the Murrs make full application under our Town’s Riverway Ordinance, the Plan Commission will again review and deliberate on the application, make a recommendation to the Town Board, Board of Appeals, or both, depending on what their application is and the appropriate way to move forward.  Jan also noted that while the application by the Murrs states that it concerns a conforming area in the Riverway District, and that is how the matter was noticed because that is what the application said, in speaking with the town’s engineer it is the town’s belief that this is actually a non-conforming area under our Riverway Ordinance.

She also noted that this application contains two separate issues for review by the Plan Commission: one concerns the proposed reconstruction of the cabin, and the second is the proposed lot split.

 

Rob referred to Section 171-M.1.(d) which requires that the following information be provided, if requested during concept review, to review a Riverway Permit or Variance application. 

 

1.       A scale drawing showing all pertinent information

2.       A recent aerial photograph

3.       Proposed alterations of vegetation and topography

4.       A mitigation plan for nonconforming structure expansion

5.       Photos of the site taken from the middle of the river, slightly upstream and downstream of the property

6.       An erosion control plan

7.       A vegetation management plan

8.       Any other information requested by the Town:

9.       Location of proposed on-site wastewater treatment system and private water supply information.

10.   A plan showing the proposed construction of structural erosion control measures.

11.   Specifications for Transmission services

12.   A construction plan for stairways and lifts

 

Rob noted the Plan Commission should consider requiring any materials needed to make a determination variance and recommended the Plan Commission request a verification of compliance with the St. Croix County Floodplain Zoning Ordinance as part of the town variance application.  Rob noted the proposed plans move the existing porch back about 18’ and that the Applicants intend to bring in fill to raise the cabin out of the floodplain.  He also noted that wherever this cabin is moved to, it will be within 200’of the ordinary high water mark, which makes it non-conforming under our Riverway Ordinance.

 

Donna Murr, Peg Heaver, Steve Murr, and Tom Murr came up to speak. They explained that this new plan is at the base of the slope, but backs up to it without infringing on the slope preservation area. This new plan is slightly larger, but still within size guidelines. It requires a new well and septic. They noted that this new plan will be saving trees; they will need to install a retaining wall reducing the amount of fill needed; that the new plan is farther from the neighbor’s driveway and that the overall plan is to flood proof the cabin, save trees, and be inconspicuous from the river.

 

There was discussion and disagreement by some members of the Plan Commission that the proposed plan would save trees. There was discussion on the proposed location of the cabin and the amount of fill it would require and the pro’s and con’s of the suggested location. There was discussion on the information the town would require for a Riverway Permit or Variance application on this property.  The Plan Commission reviewed the items contained in Section 171-M.1. (d) and noted all information would be required except numbers 11 (specifications for transmission services)  & 12 (a construction plan for stairways and lifts) and that a verification of compliance with the St. Croix Country Floodplain Zoning Ordinance would be included in number 8 (any other information requested by the town).

 

 Rob wanted to clarify that there are now two existing lots under common ownership, lengthwise, and they are proposing to re-divide those lots with one building site. To allow two non-conforming sub-standard lots under common ownership to have the lot lines changed, would require another variance. These are two separate proposals, which would require a variance. Peg Heaver asked for different terminology because she felt they are not sub-dividing the property, they are re-drawing the lot lines, which would not require a variance. It was explained that under our Town’s Riverway Ordinance the town believes the lot split does require a variance as was stated by our town engineer.

 

Jan then opened up the public hearing for construction in a conforming area and a variance/conditional use permit to reconstruct a residential cabin, fill & grading in a slope preservation zone and/or floodway/flood fringe area, retaining walls, stairs, patio, deck and lot split – Donna Murr, 202 Cove Ct.; at 9;28 PM. She requested to hear comments from Bob Baczynski from the DNR, specifically the DNR’s position on the lot split and also whether the DNR has reviewed these reconstruction plans and has any comments on them.

 

Bob Baczynski then came up to speak. He said that the DNR supported the County Board of Adjustment decision to not allow the splitting of the lots, the re-drawing of the lot lines. The DNR also supports the Circuit Court decision, and if a decision were to be granted by the County or the town for a variance on the lot split, the DNR would appeal that decision.  He added that the DNR’s recourse in a conflict with the county or town is to take them to court. He also noted the department strives to work cooperatively with the municipalities, when that’s possible.

 

As for the specific plans for the location and reconstruction of the cabin, he indicated that he does not believe that these new plans have been reviewed by anyone in the DNR.

 

The Murrs then came forward to speak in favor of their proposal during the public hearing. They felt that their proposal was in line with the spirit and intent of St. Croix Cove area and noted that they have two lots, pay two property tax bills, and that the lots were purchased at two different times.  They felt they could have the lot lines redrawn and that other properties in the area were not likely to do that and that they were different situations.

 

Jan asked if anyone else wanted to speak on this issue, when no one else stepped forward, she thanked the Murrs and the DNR for commenting and closed the Public Hearing at 9:55 PM.

         

         The Plan Commission then began its deliberations and continued to ask the Murrs some clarifying questions. During these deliberations it became apparent that the lot line goes through the proposed cabin.  Rob Jones explained that the lots are in common ownership and it might be possible for them to locate the cabin on the lot line, but he would need to do some research.  Some members of the Plan Commission disagreed that could be done. At this point, it was determined that the Plan Commission needed to determine the issue of the lot split first. Discussion held and all members on the Plan Commission were in agreement that they were not supportive of a lot split.

 

Jan then asked for the Plan Commission member’s thoughts on the proposed cabin plan. All agreed the proposed location on the lot line was a complicating factor in considering the proposed location.  Many members favored the cabin location of the original plan, with a slight shift of the house to the east and back into the SPZ. Others were more open to location of the house nearer to what was being proposed if it could be done without a lot split. Two members appeared open to the town working cooperatively with the county to see if a compromise plan could be reached that both municipalities, the Murrs, and the DNR could support.

 

Jan then asked the Plan Commission members if they had any other comments, hearing none, she summarized for the Murrs the general feedback from the Plan Commission on the proposals, reminded the Murrs that this was a concept review only and that they should work with our town engineer and town Plan Commission chair in submitting an application for a Riverway permit after they determine how they want to move forward and noted that she hoped the input they heard would help them in their decision making process.

         

7.       Discuss sub-division landscaping standards;

 

          Paul Mahler motioned to table this item. Bob Rolle seconded the motion. All in

          favor. Motion passed.

 

8.      Building Permits/Utility Permits;

 

         There were two utility permits. The Plan Commission reviewed the permits. Rob Jones said that

 Cedar Corp. would recommend approval of the utility permits as long as the town had received the appropriate fees.

 

9.      Committee Reports & correspondence;

 

Bob Rolle gave a report on the CZCC committee’s work. He requested the Town Chair put that item on next month’s agenda so the Plan Commission could give some feedback to the CZCC committee.

 

 Dan Pearson gave an update on the Highway 35 project, saying that the scheduled overpass on Coulee and CTY FF may be moved up from 2010 because of the stimulus package. As well, the Radio Road intersection project, which was scheduled for 2015, may possibly be moved up to 2013.

 

   10.     Adjourn;

 

David Wolf moved to adjourn. Mark Mitchell seconded. All in favor.  Motion passed, meeting adjourned at 10:35 PM.