APPROVED
PLAN COMMISSION
March 3, 2011
Members
Present: Ray Knapp, Jan Cuccia, David Wolf, Mark Mitchell, Paul
Mahler
Members
Absent: Bob Rolle, Joe Duerre
Staff
Present: Rob Jones, Cedar Corp.
Recording Secretary: Sharon Weide
Others present: Kathy Halberg, Lee Halberg, Keith Willard, Jenny
Willard, Tony Bauer, Laurie Halberg, Jim Marnie, Charlie
Macdonell, Miles Cross.
Call to Order
Ray Knapp called the meeting of the Town of
AGENDA:
1.
Approve Minutes;
Mark Mitchell
moved to approve the minutes of the February 3, 2011 Plan Commission. Paul Mahler seconded. Motion passed, all in favor.
2.
Exception to Design
Standards – Thomas Jensen,
Ray Knapp said that the applicant had contacted the
town clerk to withdraw the request for an exception to design standards.
3.
Concept review/public
hearing for septic in the riverway – Patrick Delaney,
Rob Jones explained that the applicant has applied
for an after-the-fact permit for filling and grading in the Riverway District
as a result of replacing a failing septic system. Like an earlier application the septic tank
failed, necessitating the replacement prior to obtaining all of the proper
permits. He described the site by saying
that the septic tank is in the trench and that by now the contractor has most
likely back filled. He said that the
timing of the replacement makes backfill compaction and site restoration more
complicated so he advised the Plan Commission to consider ways to mitigate
potential settling and erosion following the local thaw. Rob added that this application could be
considered in one of three ways - a permitted activity, a conditionally
permitted activity within 40 feet of a slope preservation zone, or an
after-the-fact variance in a slope preservation zone (SPZ). He finished by saying that the site would
need to be surveyed to determine which way the application should precede.
There was no one present representing the
applicant. Ray Knapp explained that the
site is a sloped area and fairly close to the river. Mark Mitchell asked where the site was in
relation to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Dave Wolf expressed his
concern that the contractor felt that erosion control would not be an issue. There was additional discussion about why the
work needed to be done prior to obtaining the proper permit and whether or not
there was enough information available to allow the applicant to move forward.
Ray Knapp opened the public hearing for septic in
the riverway – Patrick Delaney,
Members of the Plan Commission went on to discuss
their concerns about the location of the septic tank in relation to the SPZ and
erosion that could occur due to the spring floods. Ray Knapp will write the applicant a letter
directing them to appear before the Plan Commission in April. The applicant will be directed to identify
where the septic system is in relation to the SPZ so that it can be determined
whether the final application will be for a permitted activity, a conditionally
permitted activity within 40 feet of a slope preservation zone, or an
after-the-fact variance in a SPZ. Additionally,
the applicant will be directed to address the erosion control issue.
4.
Concept review/public
hearing – Keith & Jenny Willard,
Rob Jones began by explaining that the Willard's are
proposing to increase the pitch of the roof, add a cupola to the roof line,
replace the exterior surfaces on the roof and the home, and replace and screen
in a portion of an existing deck. There
are three categories in our ordinance that apply to this application:
1. A house in a nonconforming
area is defined as a nonconforming principal structure. Reconstruction, footprint expansion and
vertical expansion are allowed if all applicable requirements are met in
171-L.3 and 171-L.4. In this case it
appears that the structure is greater than 200 feet from the OHWM and footprint
expansion may be allowed up to 2000 square feet. As such, enclosing a portion of the existing
deck would be permitted as long as the area is counted in the total square
footage of the structure. Vertical
expansion is permitted if the structure meets all the requirements for
footprint expansion.
2. The replacement of the roof
surface and the siding is considered ordinary maintenance and repair. The color and material proposed must comply
with the standards in 171-I.
3. The deck on the house is defined
as a nonconforming accessory structure and unless a variance is granted work is
limited to ordinary maintenance and repair, it cannot be replaced.
He finished by saying that although it appears the
site is greater than 200 feet from the OHWM
he would like to see that noted on the site map. Ray Knapp clarified that the only part of
this application that would require a variance is the rebuilding of the deck
prior to it's being enclosed.
Keith Willard explained that the structure is a 1974
built
Ray Knapp opened a public hearing for Keith and
Jenny Willard,
·
Lee Halberg stated that he and his wife have no objections to the
Willard's plans.
·
Miles Cross, Cross Construction, said that the current 3/12 pitch roof
doesn’t meet current standards or code.
He added that the house has issues with ice dams and water and needs
updating. He finished by saying that the
deck was not built on appropriate footings and should be replaced.
·
Laurie Halberg said that his family originally owned the property to
the east and he has no objections to the plans
The public hearing was closed at 7:39 PM.
Ray Knapp began the Plan Commission's discussion by
asking members if they agreed that modifications to the exterior of the house
(if done in earth toned colors), raising the roof and adding the cupola were
all permitted activities. The consensus
was that they could as long as the applicant could prove that the structure is
greater than 200 feet from the OHWM.
Paul Mahler asked how high the house was now. The answer was that it is 17 feet high now
and with the cupola it will be about 24 to 25 feet high.
The discussion then turned to the reconstruction of
the deck. The issue of hardship was
addressed, along with other options, such as bumping out the house and putting
in a new foundation, which is allowable under the Riverway Ordinance. The majority of the Plan Commission members
indicated that they could support rebuilding the deck and screening half of
it. Jan Cuccia said she would prefer
that the applicant not ask for a variance, but if they felt it was necessary
she said they would need to document hardship.
Paul Mahler and Jan Cuccia both offered viewpoints at to what
constitutes a hardship.
The applicant was told that the following items
would need to be submitted in the application for a Riverway Permit and
variance:
1. A scale drawing showing the
OHWM and 200 foot setback, the square footage of the existing house, deck and
the square footage of what is proposed,
2. Photos of the existing
vegetation and topography and a statement that it will not be disturbed,
3. An erosion control plan or a
statement that no earth will be disturbed, the location of any silt fencing,
4. A schedule of any reseeding
if necessary,
5. Verification that the
existing wastewater treatment system meets Department of Commerce Chapter 83
specifications.
5.
Building Permits/Utility
Permits;
Building permits were reviewed. There were no utility permits. Rob Jones stated that Baldwin Telecom had
begun the application process and the application would be coming before the
Plan Commission for review in April.
6.
Review & recommend
revisions to Subdivision of Land Ordinance – Chapter 135;
Ray Knapp explained that State Legislature has made
amendments Wisconsin Act 376 (platting requirements) and that those changes
necessitate modifications in the town's Subdivision Ordinance (SDO). He went on to say, per the town attorney,
that local ordinances are prohibited from being more restrictive as to time
limits and deadlines than state law and that sub-dividers now have the
authority to construct subdivisions in phases.
Towns are also now prohibited
from requiring a letter of credit for the construction of infrastructure
sooner than reasonably necessary. Jan
Cuccia and Ray Knapp then led a discussion on the revisions to the town's
SDO. There are additional violations
proposed to section 135-4.C and renumbering of section 135-5.B in order add a
new paragraph (135-B.3) that lays out the items the town will consider when
determining if a phased proposal should be granted.
There was considerable discussion around what a
reasonable amount of time for completion of a phased project would be. It was recommended that a subdivision should
be completed within a reasonable amount of time not to exceed ten years. Additionally, there should be a statement
added that "infrastructure improvements in various phases that depend on
one another must be done concurrently".
The Plan Commission would like to see these changes made to 135-5.B(3).
There will be a new paragraph in 135-B.4 requiring
the disclosure of phasing plans at the time of preliminary plat submission
and a change in that section specifying
that the final plat must be submitted for approval within 36 months of
preliminary plat approval by the town.
Section 135-10.A makes changes to the letter of credit requirements.
Jan Cuccia
moved to recommend to the Town board adoption of the revisions to the
Subdivision of Land Ordinance – Chapter 135 as presented before us with the two
revisions to Section 135-5.B(3) that we discussed. David Wolf seconded. Motion passed, all in favor.
7.
Committee report on wind
energy system regulation;
Ray Knapp reported that the first meeting of the
committee is scheduled for Monday, March 14th.
8.
Committee Reports &
correspondence;
Jan Cuccia reported that she had attended a planning
workshop in New Richmond and that it was recommended that there be periodic
reviews of the Comprehensive Plan.
Additionally, attendees were told that towns should refer to their plans
when making land use decisions.
Mark Mitchell asked what the Town Board felt about
the Cooperative Boundary Agreement. Ray
Knapp said that in general the board felt unfavorably towards the draft and
that there will be a discussion at the next meeting on what the next what steps
should be in the negotiation process.
9.
Adjourn;
David Wolf moved
to adjourn the meeting of the March 3, 2011 Plan Commission at 9:06 PM. Mark Mitchell seconded. Motion passed, all in favor.