APPROVED

PLAN COMMISSION

November 3, 2011

Hudson Wisconsin  54016

 

Members Present:     Ray Knapp, Jan Cuccia, Joe Duerre, David Wolf, Paul Mahler, Bob Rolle

 

Members Absent:      Mark Mitchell (excused)

 

Staff Present:             Rob Jones, Cedar Corp.,

 

Recording Secretary:         Sharon Weide

 

Others present:          Steven West, Mark Erickson, Gene Haberman, Charlie Macdonell, Jeff                                                Warren, Theresa Barnes

 

Call to Order

Ray Knapp called the meeting of the Town of Troy Plan Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

AGENDA: 

  1. Approve Minutes;
  2. Exception to design standards to move a driveway – Divine Custom Homes, 397 Eagle Bluff;
  3. Review & recommend process for replacement POWTS in the riverway;
  4. Riverway concept review/public hearing to replace a POWTS – Thomas Mudge, 333 N Cove Rd.;
  5. Riverway concept review/public hearing for reconstruction in a non-conforming area and a variance or conditional use permit – Steve and Tamrah O’Neil, 284 Brugler Ct.;
  6. Review & recommend road acceptance –Walnut Hills (Tribute);
  7. Building Permits/Utility Permits;
  8. Committee Reports & correspondence;
  9. Parking committee update;
  10. Adjourn;

 

1.      Approve Minutes;

 

Jan Cuccia moved to approve the minutes of the October 6, 2011 Plan Commission meeting.  Joe Duerre seconded.  Motion carried.

 

2.      Exception to design standards to move a driveway – Divine Custom Homes, 397 Eagle Bluff;

 

Rob Jones began by saying that the applicant has requested an exception to design standards to construct a driveway in an area other that the location designated on the approved plat that created the lot.  The plat identifies the driveway place on the southwest portion of the lot accessing East Cove Road. The applicant is requesting approval of a driveway accessing Cedar Court on the northeast portion of the lot.  He went on to review the driveway criteria found in the town code under Sections 125 (Driveway and Roads) and 135 (Subdivision Ordinance).  After some discussion it was determined that the language in Section 135 would govern the placement of the driveway.  In that section there are 5 criteria for granting an exception to design standards:

·         Consistency with the policies underlying the subdivision standards.

·         The effect on the surrounding property values.

·         The effect on the neighborhood traffic and safety.

·         Mitigating topographic features.

·         Where the conveyance of land for public purposes will result in otherwise substandard lots.

 

Jeff Warren, Divine Custom Homes, stated that the request is to place the driveway 200 feet from the intersection of East Cove Road and Cedar Court, but that he is happy to put it at a point that makes the most sense.

 

During discussion it was confirmed that the requested placement would not create a safety hazard, that there is an existing unimproved driveway on the southwest portion of the lot that must be removed, and both East Cove Road and Cedar Court are Class E Roads.

 

Bob Rolle moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Town Board approval of an exception to design standards for the lot located at 508 East Cove Road to remove an existing driveway located on East Cove Road to move it to a replacement driveway located on Cedar Court Road from 150 to 200 feet north of the intersection with East Cove Road, with the stipulation that the existing driveway and entrance to the lot be removed.  David Wolf seconded.  Motion carried.

 

The applicant was advised that it is their responsibility to deal with St. Croix County and the post office on the address change.  Once the new address is assigned the applicant should get back in touch with the Town office staff.

 

3.      Review & recommend process for replacement POWTS in the riverway;

 

Ray Knapp explained that in October the Board of Appeals approved a fast track process by which failing private on-site wastewater treatment systems (POWTS) requiring a variance in the Riverway District could be approved.  He went on to ask if the Plan Commission could support a similar process for the repair or replacement of existing, failing POWTS in the Riverway District that do not require a variance because they are outside of a slope preservation zone.  He directed their attention to a document detailing the proposed process.

                                                     
Bob Rolle moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Town Board that they implement at their discretion a fast track process for approving POWTS systems in the Riverway District that do not require a variance.  Jan Cuccia seconded.  Motion carried.

 

4.      Riverway concept review/public hearing to replace a POWTS – Thomas Mudge, 333 N Cove Rd.;

 

At the request of the applicant this item was removed from the agenda.  This will be dealt with in the future under the expedited process if it is approved by the Town Board.

 

5.      Riverway concept review/public hearing for reconstruction in a non-conforming area and a variance or conditional use permit – Steve and Tamrah O’Neil, 284 Brugler Ct.;

 

Rob Jones began by explaining that the O'Neil's are applying for an after-the-fact Riverway permit to reconstruct a retaining wall near the home and reconstruct a deck (that they had removed) adjacent to a legal non-conforming principal structure. 

 

He went on to say that retaining walls are classified as “structural erosion control measures”.  If they are outside of a slope preservation zone (SPZ) they must meet the criteria of 171-I.9, if within an SPZ the reconstruction may be conditionally permitted upon verification of compliance with 171-J.6.  Retaining walls are allowed if they are required to address significant on-going erosion and must be constructed of natural materials.  Detailed construction plans must be provided.  Decks are classified as non-conforming accessory structures.  As such, ordinary repair and maintenance is allowed but they may not be reconstructed or altered without a variance.  The town has issued variances and after-the-fact variances for deck reconstruction in the past.  He stated that the principal concern has typically been whether the deck is proposed to be reconstructed in the same or a reduced footprint.

 

Ray Knapp added that he had previously questioned the town's building inspector about a permit that was issued for this property.  The inspector had assured him that the permit was for ordinary repair and maintenance only and that the applicants had not told him that they intended to take down and reconstruct the deck.  He was also unaware that any grading was to take place.

 

Steve West, Landstedt Companies, represented the applicant.  He handed out additional documentation requested during the site review:

·         Documentation on the dimensions of the original deck,

·         Detail on the retaining wall, including a drawing (not to scale) and photos of the materials to be used,

·         Photos of a tree that was removed that had been previously hit by lightning,

·         Additional photos of the site.

He confirmed that the building inspector did not know that the deck was coming down and that the retaining walls were being replaced.

 

The application was reviewed as presented.  Additionally, the following points of concern with the documentation included in the application were discussed:

·         It appears that on the north side of the home the ground was disturbed in order to install an egress window.

·         It appears that the slope behind the house may have been modified on the east side.

·         The pitch of the ground near the retaining walls appears, from the photos provided, to have had a reasonable pitch prior to recent grading.

·         The topographic map provided is not specific to this parcel.

 

Ray Knapp opened the public hearing for Steve and Tamrah O’Neil, 284 Brugler Ct. at 7:40 PM.  No one came forward.  The public hearing was closed.

 

The applicant was told that the application for a riverway permit will take two routes.  The application for the deck is considered a variance and will be heard by the Board of Appeals.  The application for the replacement of the retaining wall may be a conditionally approved activity, if so it will be heard by the Town Board.  If it's in an SPZ it will also require a variance.   An application must include the following additional documentation:

·         The Plan Commission feels they have enough documentation on the dimensions of the deck however, a scale drawing for the retaining walls is required, an elevation view of the retaining wall is required, and a topographic map showing the SPZ, setbacks, and OHWM is required.

·         A recent aerial photograph of the site.

·         Photographs of the site as it is today, along with a detailed description of all work done to date which identify the areas that have been graded.

·         More detail on the infiltration basin.

·         A vegetative management plan that would include any tree removal and seeding of disturbed ground.

·         Before and after pictures of the north and east side of the home and terrain.

·         Engineered detail with more information on the backfill at the retaining walls.

 

Ray Knapp finished by saying that it is unfortunate that builders put the Plan Commission in the situation of approving after-the-fact permits.  The process is much less arduous and time consuming if it's followed as it should be.  Additionally, the applicant was cautioned to not remove any more of the old deck footings.

 

6.      Review & recommend road acceptance –Walnut Hills (Tribute);

 

Rob Jones summarized that the Walnut Hills subdivision (now known as Tribute) was approved by the town in 2003, at which time the town and the developer entered into a Developer's Agreement.  A second phase of the project was constructed in 2005.  The revised plans for this phase were not approved by the town as required in the Developer's Agreement.  Due to these revisions the ownership of the roads and infrastructure within the right of way of the development was never assumed by the town.

 

Since that time ownership of the property was assumed by Citizens State Bank and an amended Developer's Agreement was approved and signed.  The agreement addressed the following concerns raised by the town:

·         A beam guard rail was added,

·         Storm water management ponds were reconfigured,

·         An inlet was added near an intersection, and

·         A culvert was added into a ditch heading into the ponds.

 

Rob finished by saying that all seeding has been completed and that Cedar Corp. recommends the acceptance of the roads. 

 

Gene Haberman, Citizens State Bank, said that eight lots have been sold and that three new homes have either been built or are in the process of being built. 

 

The Plan Commission discussed the maintenance plan for the storm water management ponds and the retaining wall as well as whether or not there is a functioning home owners association (there is).  Additionally, Rob mentioned a couple of minor sink holes that the road crew has discovered.  These will need to be taken care of under the town's maintenance budget.

 

Jan Cuccia moved the Plan Commission recommend to the Town Board acceptance of the roads at Tribute, formally known as Walnut Hills, the roads being Walnut Hill Way, Legacy Court and Heritage Pass.  Joe Duerre seconded.  Motion carried.

 

7.      Building Permits/Utility Permits;

 

Building permits were reviewed.  The following utility permit was submitted for approval:

 

Permit #     Applicant                      Address                        Project

U11-015     St. Croix Gas                415 S. Second St.,         Installation of underground gas service

                                                      River Falls, WI  54022   and main extension to 285 Cove Lane

U11-016     AT&T WI                    304 S. Dewey St.,         Installation of underground phone                                                                Eau Claire, WI  54701   extension on the S. side of Tower Rd.

U11-017     St. Croix Gas                415 S. Second St.,         Installation of underground gas service                                                         River Falls, WI  54022   to 312 S. Glover Road

 

Bob Rolle moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Town Board that for AT&T we do not approve the permit until the check is received.  Jan Cuccia seconded.  Motion carried.

 

Jan Cuccia moved to recommend the Town Board approve utility permit number U11-015 and U11-016 for St. Croix Gas for underground gas service.  Joe Duerre seconded.  Motion carried.

 

8.      Committee Reports & correspondence;

 

There were no committee reports.

 

9.      Parking committee update;

 

Jan Cuccia began by saying that she, Bob Rolle, and Charlie Macdonell had met in early October to review the town's ordinances and state statutes as they relate to parking.  She explained that there are parking regulations in more than one town ordinance that need to be updated.   She reviewed those with the Plan Commission

 

Bob Rolle explained state law in regards to parking and went over a handout that he prepared describing the types of town roadways and roads.  He brought up some issues to consider when banning permanent parking or storage of materials in the right of way (ROW) and the possible creation of "event" parking permits.

 

The Plan Commission discussed if a "no parking" ordinance should be selective to specific areas of the town, if there should be a ban on all trailer parking, nuisance parking (vehicles for sale), and whether there should be signs posted on the roadways that enter the town.  It was generally agreed upon that there should be no parking or storage of vehicles in the town ROW (33 feet from the center of the road) except in one's own driveway. 

 

The Parking committee will reconvene to rewrite the existing ordinances to make them consistent and define where one can park on town roads (33 feet from center line).  They will talk with other municipalities and Cedar Corp. about how these types of regulations are managed without making it a nightmare.  The possibility of a special permit for some land owners along Glenmont (where the grade is steep) was discussed. 

 

10.  Adjourn;

 

David Wolf moved to adjourn the meeting of the November 3, 2011 Plan Commission meeting at 9:10 PM.  Joe Duerre seconded.  Motion carried.