APPROVED
PLAN COMMISSION
December 4, 2008
Members Present: Ray Knapp, Jan Cuccia, Joe Duerre, David Wolf, Bob Rolle, Mark Mitchell
Members Absent: Paul Mahler (excused)
Staff Present: Rob Jones, Cedar Corp.
Recording Secretary: Sharon Weide
Others present: John and Mary Delaney, Ron Carlson, Becky Lopez, Mark Moelter, Greg Moelter, Carol Hardin, Paul Steiner, Nancy Carlson. Others were present who did not sign in.
Call to Order
Ray Knapp called the meeting of the Town of
AGENDA:
1. Approve Minutes;
Members of the Plan Commission reviewed the minutes
of the November 6 Plan Commission meeting.
Jan Cuccia
moved to approve the minutes of the November 6, 2008, Plan Commission
meeting. David Wolf seconded. Motion passed, all in favor.
2. Acknowledgement of applications for action as regulated by SDO;
There were none.
3. Concept review – L & I, J & G Moelter Family Trust, Hwy 35
&
Mark Moelter represented the L & I, J & G
Moelter Family Trust. He explained that the
Trust is interested in general feedback from the Plan Commission on how their
property would be affected once the overpass at
Mr. Moelter’s first concern was with the parcel on
the west side of the freeway. He stated
that once the southbound exit is built this parcel will be landlocked. Ray Knapp mentioned that in the past the DOT
has been supportive of land swaps amongst land owners and this is probably what
the Town would encourage, since it has responsibility for this off-ramp. There was additional discussion around
potential future commercial development in that area and possible access via a
frontage road from the south. Ray
wrapped up the discussion by saying that this may be a 15 to 20 year project
and that at this point no one knows if the land will be zoned Ag, Res, or
Commercial. He went on to say that once
the DOT has mapped this out there will be no building allowed in the defined
road way.
From there the Plan Commission turned their
attention to the two parcels to the east of Hwy. 35. Mark Moelter said that in discussions with
the DOT they indicated they would most likely buy the northernmost parcel. Ray encouraged Mark to get back to the DOT
and press them to make sure they purchase that parcel as it will not be a
buildable lot due to parcel size. The
southernmost parcel will also be landlocked due to the northbound entrance to
Hwy. 35 which would be built by the Town.
Ray stated that the Town would most likely have to buy that parcel due
to the lack of access. The Moelter’s
agreed that the off-ramp project is planned for so far off into the future that
it is almost impossible to determine what type of development would take place
at the Glover-STH 35 intersection.
4. Riverway concept review/public hearing for a variance for the
disturbance of slopes greater than 12% for the replacement of a septic system –
Robert and Tom Lee,
Rob Jones explained that this is a concept review
for a variance to allow for filling and grading in a slope preservation zone in
order to replace a private waste water treatment system. He said that the owners will replace the
existing septic with an updated septic system and be constructed in accordance
with Commerce Chapter 83 and the St. Croix County Sanitation Code. He stressed that the principal concern
tonight should be that the project comply with the requirements of
171-j.5(b). He added that this is a
similar proposal to two applications reviewed in January 2008, and that most of
the discussion should revolve around the protection of the existing vegetation.
Ray Knapp then led the Plan Commission through a review of the maps provided
that detailed the layout of the new septic system.
Paul Steiner, who worked on the previous two septic
applications and represents the applicants, explained that the septic system
must be located on the north side of the cabin as soil borings taken to the
west determined that the soils there were unacceptable. There will be 4 trees removed north of the
septic system, two 5” elms, one 2” elm, and a 3” elm. This is necessary to facilitate installation
of the trenches.
Mark Mitchell asked why a holding tank wasn’t
proposed. Mr. Steiner explained that the
soils on this site were acceptable where the proposed system is to be installed
and that holding tanks were generally considered as a last resort by St. Croix
County due to the fact that they need to be pumped on a regular basis and that
there is the possibility of undetected failure.
Joe Duerre asked how the construction equipment
would be brought into the site. Mr.
Steiner said that the equipment would be brought down the path to the
site. He stated that the only
disturbance would be rubber tire tracks and no trees would be removed.
Ray Knapp opened the public hearing for a variance
for the disturbance of slopes greater than 12% for the replacement of a septic
system – Robert and Tom Lee,
Jan Cuccia asked if the Plan Commission wanted to
have replacements planted for the four trees that are being removed. Bob Rolle suggested that the applicant document
that there are trees every 12 feet across the front of the property. The Plan Commission reviewed the information
that Rob Jones felt should be included as part of the Riverway
Application. The applicant should
include, along with previously provided documentation:
5. Riverway concept review/public hearing for reconstruction in a
non-conforming area – Mary Delaney,
Mary Delaney, applicant explained that one half of
this bunk-house has been on-site for 90 years.
The other half of this structure is about 40 years old. The oldest portion of this structure is badly
deteriorated and beginning to collapse.
They want to tear down that portion and replace it with a closed in
sitting porch. The sound portion of the
structure would be used as a bunk house for grand children to sleep, the
sitting porch would be used by the children’s parents as a place to relax and
enjoy themselves. She stated that this
building cannot be seen from the river and that the plan is to keep it that
way.
Rob Jones explained the layout of the site by
drawing a picture of it on the white board.
Ray Knapp verified with the applicant that there is electricity in this
building, but no water. He then reviewed
the drawings submitted with the application and clarified that the applicant is
asking that the old steps be removed and the building squared off. This would increase the foot print of the
building.
Rob Jones reviewed the engineering comments. He said that this request is to reconstruct a
portion of a bunk house adjacent to a home in the Riverway. He added that the Plan Commission has
previously discussed whether these secondary structures should be classified as
accessory structures or as part of the principal structure. While a nonconforming accessory structure may
not be reconstructed or structurally altered, a nonconforming principal
structure may be reconstructed if the Town has determined that he requirements
of 171-L.3 have been met. Rob went on to
say that the DNR was going to offer feedback as to whether day cabins were
accessory structures or principal structures but that he has not received that
feedback yet. As such, the Plan
Commission may want to include as a caveat that the Town will continue to seek
input from the DNR.
After additional discussion it was clarified that if
the bunkhouse is considered part of the principal structure it could be
reconstructed to the same size it is now without a variance. However, if it is considered an accessory
structure only ordinary repair and maintenance can be done without a
variance. If this building is considered
a principal structure the following criteria are critical:
Ray asked if the Plan Commission wanted to hear back
from the DNR prior to giving feedback to the Delaneys. Members felt they were comfortable with
defining this as a principal structure and as such that the applicant could
reconstruct as long as it is within the existing footprint. They applicant was cautioned that the DNR has
not given a definitive response and may disagree. If so, the DNR position would be an
overriding factor.
Ray Knapp opened the public hearing for reconstruction in a non-conforming
area – Mary Delaney,
Ron Carlson, member of the local Sierra Club asked
what
Bob Rolle explained that this is not a variance
request unless the applicant expands the structure and in that case the
applicant would need to show hardship. However,
the applicants need to contact
Ron Carlson then said that the Town’s Riverway
Ordinance would allow the occupied portion of a detached garage to be
considered a principal structure while the County’s ordinance does not. Ray Knapp agreed that there are multiple
layers of review when it comes to the Riverway and the applicants need to
contact the County.
The public hearing was closed at 8:31 PM.
John Delaney, co-applicant, asked if a person could
repair one wall at a time. Ray Knapp
said that was not in line with the spirit of the ordinance. Rob Jones read from the ordinance and explained
what ordinary repair and maintenance entailed.
Mr. Delaney went on to ask in regards to a variance, which organization actually
grants it. He was told that the Plan
Commission would make a recommendation to the Town Board of Appeals and that
they would make the final determination.
However, the Plan Commission made it clear that a hardship did not exist
and receiving a variance would be unlikely.
In summary, Ray stated that the general consensus
was that this building would be part of the principal structure and could be
reconstructed in the same foot print, but that input is still need from the
DNR. Also, as Mr. Carlson suggested, the
applicant should go to
§
A professional scale drawing showing all pertinent information
§
Any proposed alterations of vegetation and topography or notes saying
that there will be no alterations
§
Photos of the site taken from the middle of the river, slightly
upstream and downstream of the property
§
An erosion control plan
§
A vegetation management plan
§
Location of the proposed on-site wastewater treatment system and
private water supply information (this must be brought up to code and sized for
the number of persons on the property)
The applicant was told that the DNR web site has
technical standards for erosion control plans.
6. Riverway concept review/public hearing for an after-the-fact permit for
reconstruction in a non-conforming area – Andrew Murphy,
Rob Jones explained that this item is an after the
fact permit application for the reconstruction of a stairway and landing to provide
pedestrian access to the river and the replacement of a deck with a reduced
footprint. The deck appears as if it
would have been classified as a nonconforming accessory structure and would not
have been structurally altered, reconstructed, or expanded without a
variance. He went on to say that the
Town may want to discuss, among other issues, the following aspects of the
application:
Ray asked how Rob determined that the above ground
wooded deck was reduced in size from the previous deck. Rob responded that before and after photos
would lead you to that conclusion. Ray
then shared before and after photos that the owner had provided with the
application. There was general consensus
that it appeared that no vegetation was removed and that the deck did, in fact,
appear to be smaller. Mark Mitchell
asked if based on past experience the Plan Commission would have granted a
variance for this project. Ray Knapp
commented that a variance might have been issued if the deck was unsafe. There was discussion about whether the
pictures indicated that the deck was a safety concern or not. The applicant states that it was and that
joists were rotting from contact with the ground, however the pictures do not
indicate that. The applicant was asked
how the after the fact application came about.
Nancy Carlson, co-applicant said that they are trying to sell the house
and the real estate agent wanted to see the permit.
She went on to say that the project began on
impulse, that a nephew (who is in the construction business) had completed the
work for them. She apologized for not
getting a riverway or building permit
Jan Cuccia asked for clarification about the added
lighting. Ms. Carlson said that the
lighting goes down to the tram and that she doesn’t feel that it can be seen
from the river during the summer.
Ray Knapp asked if her nephew in the construction
business really had no idea that a permit would be required for a project of
this scope. Ms. Carlson said, no, he
didn’t. Ray added that this project
would have required a building permit even if it was outside of the Riverway.
Ray Knapp opened the public hearing for an after-the-fact permit for
reconstruction in a non-conforming area – Andrew Murphy,
After further discussion the Plan Commission agreed
that the applicant could move forward with an after the fact Riverway
Application. Bob Rolle and Jan Cuccia
would like to see the light replaced with downward facing lamps. The applicant agreed to do this.
The application should be for a variance for
reconstruction of a non-conforming accessory structure (the deck) and an after
the fact conditional use permit for the construction of the stairway. As part of the application the following
additional information will be required:
§
A scale drawing showing all pertinent information for the steps and the
landing with details of the posts and signed off by an engineer that the
footings are done to code
§
Photos of the site taken from the middle of the river, slightly
upstream and downstream of the property
§
A construction plan for the stairways and landing
§
An extensive library of photos showing the vegetation all around this
area.
Other than Joe Duerre, the consensus was that a
citation should be issued. The applicant
was also instructed to contact St. Croix County Planning and Zoning.
7. Review
suggested subdivision ordinance revisions;
This
item was tabled until the January 5, 2009 meeting. Mark Mitchell will send an electronic colored
copy of the ordinance to the Town Hall for distribution.
8. Building Permits/Utility Permits;
Members of the Plan Commission reviewed the building
permits, there were no utility permits.
9. Committee Reports & correspondence;
Ray Knapp handed out the updated Riverway
Ordinance. Jan Cuccia reported that
approval from the DNR has been received.
Jan Cuccia reported that she read an article in the
Bob Rolle gave an update on the final changes being
made to the Comprehensive Plan.
10. Adjourn;
David Wolf moved
to adjourn the meeting of the December 4 Plan Commission at PM. Joe
Duerre seconded. Motion passed, all in
favor.