|
TOWN OF ROCHESTER Link to Town Board Meetings
|
|
Link to Town Board Meetings |
December 8, 2003 REGULAR BOARD MEETING 7:30 p.m.
Meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.
Gary Chart, Public Works Supervisor, and Betty Novy, Clerk, were also present. Colleen Holder, Treasurer, was absent.
Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to approve minutes of the November 11, 13, 15 & 17, 2003 meetings as printed. Motion carried.
Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to approve December disbursements as follows. Motion carried.
Public Works Report: Gary Chart reported he is catching up with sign installations before the ground freezes. A complaint was received at 29522 Fernwood Drive about water collecting on the road. A 20’ x 20’ area of the road is depressed and will need to be repaired. Gary recommended this repair become part of the bid package for 2004 road improvements.
Treasurer’s Report: Colleen was absent. A written report was received as follows:
Sheriff’s Department. Sergeant Kacmarcik reported the following statistics for November: three accidents; ten speeding citations, ten traffic citations and forty warnings were issued. Complaint statistics were as follows: ten complaints were originated through calls directly to Sheriff’s Department; Deputy Prochaska assisted with eleven additional complaints, performed follow up on five and originated twenty-two on his own. Six foot patrols were conducted. In addition, report was made on cutbacks to plowing State highways. Sgt. Kacmarcik will keep the Board updated on the situation.
Deputy Prochaska reported two vehicles stolen from Lynch Truck Center during October. Both vehicles have been recovered with only minor damage. He requested a Bond Schedule be devised specifically for Town ordinances. At this time, only his discretion is used. A bond schedule should consist of a list of Town ordinances utilized most frequently (such as animal at large; failure to license dog, etc.) and specific fine amounts. The fine amounts should include a graduated scale based on repeat offenses. Sgt. Kacmarcik indicated he could make recommendations on this by using bond schedules of seven other communities as reference. Deputy Prochaska and Sgt. Kacmarcik were directed to compile the information and present it when ready.
Class “B” Liquor License Application:
It was verified legal requirements of issuance had been met. Darlene described operations of the business in that customers could receive a glass of wine or beer in conjunction with other services. Hours of operation were stated as follows: Monday 9:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m.; Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; and Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Paul stated concern about licensing an establishment which is located next to a daycare center. He felt the nature of the business could change once the license was granted. Darlene indicated sale of wine and beer will not be advertised, it is only an enhancement to other services. She stated this type of business is new to this area, but common in areas like Brookfield and Milwaukee. The concept is for a customer to spend up to four hours there while receiving spa services such as massage, manicures, etc. In between services, they wait in a relaxation area. It is at this time they can enjoy a glass of wine or beer if they want. Mike indicated he is not too concerned about a change in use of the liquor license since the establishment is open only limited hours. Mike moved, 2nd by Gary to approve a Class “B” Liquor License for Enve’ Salon & Day Spa. Votes were: Mike: Aye; Gary: Aye; Paul: Naye. Motion passed.
Shoreland Contract (Resubmittal) to build 2,304
sq. foot garage–35510 Ravine Drive
Gary Beck reported the Plan Commission recommended approval of the contract. Several neighbors were present to complain about Gary moving his old garage down their road without permits and the damage he caused to several properties. Gary Beck explained citations were issued in regards to that incident and any comments should be limited to the issue at hand; the shoreland contract. Renee Fralick, 433 Shervin Drive, initially complained of large equipment going down the road. When reminded to stay on the issue, she indicated the proposed structure is too large for the area and will promote more noisy vehicles going down street. Renee indicated concern that Gary will be operating a business out of the garage. It was indicated the structure is to be used for storage only. This is one of the conditions on the shoreland contract. Renee indicated concern about recent history where Gary has not obtained permits for such things as moving a garage down their street or burning down a house in their neighborhood. She questioned who will watch Gary to make sure rules are observed. She summarized her main concern as noise; she would prefer not to have the big machines Gary is storing continually coming down her road. Another resident questioned whether they have any rights in a private residential area. April Lessard, 418 Miller Avenue, reiterated this concern.
Mike Weinkauf indicated the issue regarding the size of this structure was referred to Racine County’s corporation counsel. It was confirmed the size of structure is allowable on this lot based on current zoning law. The permit cannot be denied. An application submitted in the past required some additional work be done by Gary to prove the structure would not create any drainage problems. Modifications have been made to size and placement of the structure since then; all requirements have been met. Ray Najdowski, 430 Shervin Drive, questioned whether there were any environmental protection or wildlife issues since the structure is in a shoreland area; or whether it might threaten some endangered species. Ray described the structure as being about 150 – 200 yards from the lake. In addition, there is a stream that runs between the structure and the lake. Gary Beck stated if there were issues of this type, the Department of Natural Resources would be involved. Gary Kempken stated the D.N.R. reviewed the application. Mike read conditions recommended by the Plan Commissions and stated the building inspector will be there to monitor the situation and verify no discharge occurs to the lake.
Additional concern was expressed about the weight of trucks Gary will be driving over the roads. Gary Kempken indicated the weight of a garbage truck is five or six times more than anything he would have. Concern, again, was expressed over use of the building. It was, again, indicated this structure is limited to storage only. If violations occur, it should be reported to Racine County code enforcement immediately. Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to approve the Shoreland Contract for Gary Kempken with the following conditions as recommended by the Plan Commission:
1. that appropriate erosion control measures be put in place during construction; 2. that there be several follow up visits after construction to verify the site remains erosion free; 3. that the property be maintained in an erosion free condition; and 4. that the owners be required to submit an as-built grading plan verifying final grades are as presented.
Motion carried.
Request for variance to 75 foot setback requirement: 29117 Washington Avenue;
Jane explained that at the time of presentation to the Plan Commission, a survey was not available verifying location of her lot line in relation to her home. The survey has since been completed. It shows the house sitting 76.4 feet back from the property line. She explained it is medically necessary to construct a bedroom on the floor level of her home, which has only two bedrooms upstairs. Septic line and well placement limit where the addition can be located. House layout is such that a seventeen foot addition to the front is most appropriate. It was noted several structures along that portion of Washington Avenue are closer to the road than the proposed addition. She explained the Zoning Board of Appeals meets on January 6, 2003. She would like to have the Town’s recommendation in hand so as to expedite the process of building plans. Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to recommend approval of the variance request up to seventeen feet made by John and Jane Babik . Motion carried.
Discussion of density requirements for area labeled “Urban Reserve” in Land Use Plan
It was reported that a proposed land division was recently submitted to the Plan Commission in the area labeled “Urban Reserve” in the land use plan. Since no density requirement is specified in the plan for that area, the Plan Commission seeks direction on what requirements to make. Mike indicated page 70 of the Land Use Plan describes what “urban” is; he interprets this to mean densities specified for other lands in the sewer district: one-half to 1.5 acre. Paul indicated zoning requires a minimum of 40,000 square feet; or one acre. In the new land division ordinance, this parcel does not have to hook up to sewer until a sewer line abuts his parcel. It may take some time before sewer lines extend that far. The Town Attorney has been consulted; in absence of a specified density, each division can be considered on its own merit. The only way to create a specific density for the entire area labeled “Urban Reserve” is to amend the Land Use Plan. This requires a greater process than a simple motion of the Board.
Mike reported that Ken Dahlstrom mentioned there may be some drainage issues with the proposed land division at the Plan Commission meeting. Ken Dahlstrom, present at this meeting, then indicated it has been verified the drain tile of concern is further to west. It was clarified it would not be an issue affecting this division. Ken indicated the Plan Commission’s biggest concern is that a neighborhood plan is in process for that area. Ken indicated one could rationale that the reason lower density is allowed in urban areas is because they are potentially served by sewers. However, in this case, sewer is not available. The Land Use Plan set aside the “Urban Reserve” area saying those lands could be commercial or residential. It also recommends those lands not be developed unless sewer connection is part of the plan. Those who drafted the Land Use Plan wanted to treat this area right; it was determined to be the best area for commercial development in the Town because of its frontage by three major highways. However, it could be 20 years before sewer gets to the point of the proposed land division. Ken indicated a need for the Town to get its act together; “he’s not the only person who will want to build”.
Jayson Hoppe (proposed land divider) was questioned on whether he had any further contact with Racine County regarding non-conforming structure issues. He reported that his brother (the property owner) will be looking into it. Ken questioned whether the Board would be creating a precedent by saying this 1.5 acre land division is okay in the Urban Reserve area. Would this density then set precedent for consideration of future divisions in that area? Chuck Haubrich questioned the neighborhood plan; will setting a precedent such as this screw up the plan? Ken indicated the Attorney stated the division could be considered on its own merit. He did not feel this would then set a precedent. New development should be consistent with what is already there. This one and a half acre parcel would be consistent with surrounding properties. It would use only 150 feet of frontage and would not affect the overall picture too much.
Jane Babik reported that while working on the Land Use Plan, the triangle area (surrounded by CTH D; STH 20; and STH 36) was an area they envisioned as attracting quality commercial development. This would be the best place for it in the Town. However, they didn’t want to commit to one particular idea; they were waiting for the right thing to happen- but it was agreed that this is where commercial development should go. She stated concern that peppering the perimeter with small parcels could impact its use when the right development comes along. Mike then questioned what to tell individuals who want to develop parcels commercially and brought up another proposed development discussed at Plan Commission meeting. Consensus was development of the neighborhood plan should be pursued and that landowners should be invited into the process.
Direction was given to Jayson Hoppe by consensus of the Board that they would approve parceling off 1.5 acres in that area for residential use; however he must be aware he will be living in an area slated for development. He will also need to hook up to sewer when the line extends that far. Further consensus was the division should be taken back to the Plan Commission after working out non-conforming issues with Racine County.
Application for Kennel License: Carrie & Tom Orlovsky, 32712 Vista View Drive
Deputy Prochaska reported inspecting the premises. The animals are healthy and the space is adequate and clean. Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to approve the kennel license application for four dogs to Carrie & Tom Orlovsky. Motion carried.
Gravel pit renewal fees
This item was placed on the agenda by request of electors at the 2004 Budget hearing. The Town charges $1,000.00 every other year for the permit and electors want the fee increased. Correspondence was read from the attorney indicating the amount charged must be directly related to costs of publication; investigation and public hearing per our ordinance. To supplement information compiled by the Clerk’s office, Ken Dahlstrom presented fees charged by several other communities. It was noted each community utilizes different fee structures. There was discussion on how much of an increase would be appropriate. Wayne Schrader stated example of cigarette license fees increasing from $5.00 to $100.00 just recently. He feels an increase in this proportion is feasible. Some communities base charges on the type of equipment used. Gary Beck thought an increase to $3-5,000 may be appropriate based on fee comparisons. Based on information obtained, it was decided to create a list of issues that could be drawn upon, such as a per-acre concept, possibly charging a depletion allowance fee for each acre removed; or a per acre fee based on unreclaimed land. Ken indicated communities such as Sussex and Lannon set their fee schedules based on more knowledge because these are big businesses for those communities. He suggested questioning them why they charge the way they do. Gary Chart suggested one standard fee; then a fee for the type of equipment utilized at the location such as a crusher, breaker; wash plant, railroad spur, whether an asphalt plant exists, etc. Consensus was to have the Plan Commission and Board come up with some options and discuss this issue in the upcoming year. Gravel pit renewals are not due until Spring of 2005.
Committee Formation to update ”A Land Use Plan for the Town and Village of Rochester: 2020”
Gary indicated opinion that an update is not needed until consolidation with the Village occurs. The Clerk reported an attempt to consolidate the Village and Town under new statutory language will require several updates to the Land Use Plan so that it meets requirements of comprehensive plan language under State Statutes. Mike indicated some items need updating in the Plan and stated the Urban Reserve definition (previously discussed) as an example. He reported talking to Lloyd Frye about heading up such a committee. Mike and Lloyd thought it would be beneficial to have different members of the community than those involved last time. He indicated he would like a group brought together to expedite the process and would like a report on progress at the Annual meeting. Gary Beck indicated the process took several years last time. He did not think this was a realistic goal. Ken Dahlstrom indicated the intent of revisiting the Plan is not to re-write it, but to look at how it’s going and determine where the holes and problem areas are. Chuck stated if a goal is to be consistent with smart growth language, the process must include broad community participation. In addition, he recommended a neutral facilitator be brought in to help bring people to consensus. Gary Beck directed the Clerk to find out what composition was of the last committee. SEWRPC (Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Plan Commission) should be contacted as to their participation. The cost of a facilitator should also be investigated. This issue should be on the agenda in January for further discussion.
Evergreen Drive winter parking restrictions
Gary Chart reported problems with large stones all along the north portion of Evergreen Drive in front of the Doerr building. They were installed by Kurt Doerr without permission of the Town and they create problems with parking, etc. along the roadway. Consensus of the Board was to send a letter to the property owner indicating the stones in the right of way should be removed. It was agreed that once the area froze, they would not be able to move them. Removal can wait until Spring if necessary. Winter parking restrictions were clarified to mean the north side of Evergreen Drive. Gary Chart installed them on the south side. Signs are to be moved to the correct side of the road.
Repair to Fernwood Drive: settling adjacent to house number 29522
Based on discussion during the public works report, consensus of the Board was to direct the Town Engineer to include an approximate 20’ x 20’ patch to Fernwood Drive as part of 2004 road project bid specifications.
Request for release of judgement and refund on 2001 and 2002 personal property taxes: Kurt Doerr
A written request by Kurt was presented stating he stopped operating his business in 2000. He requested release from taxes owed and a refund on taxes paid due to this situation. It was explained tax values were assessed because Personal Property Tax Statements had not been returned indicating a statement of value. According to State Statutes, the assessor must then assess a value based on prior year statements. No attempts were made by Kurt to contest his notices of assessed value (received in Spring of each tax year) by following Board of Review procedures. No response was made to initial tax bills or subsequent billings with interest. In addition, no appearances were made to contest judgements filed with Racine County circuit court. Proper notification procedures were followed in all instances.
The Clerk explained no chargeback to other taxation districts are allowed at this time. Any release or refund would be a cost borne directly by the Town. Consensus of the Board was to deny Kurt’s request. Correspondence should be sent explaining denial is based on the fact that proper procedures to contest these bills were not followed and that the court judged against him for this reason.
Request for Resolution: American Planning Association
Written information on the organization was reviewed by Board members. Mike moved, 2nd by Gary to deny the request for a resolution. Motion carried.
Wisconsin Urban Towns Committee Membership Application
Correspondence on committee membership was reviewed by Board members. Paul moved, 2nd by Mike not to take part in the Urban Towns Committee. Motion carried.
Plan Commission Appointment/ renewal of term: Chris Johnson
Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to renew Chris Johnson’s term through December of 2006. Motion carried.
Resolution #5-2003 establishing 2003 tax levies
Gary moved, 2nd by Paul to approve Resolution #5-2003. Motion carried.
Winter Newsletter: submitted for correction or approval
Consensus of the Board was to approve the newsletter for distribution.
Period for Public Comment: Ray Najdowski, 430 Shervin Drive, addressed the Board regarding Honey Lake Roads. He read a clause from State Statutes indicating a Lake District has no authority to manage roads. There was some discussion about ownership of these roads; they were known to be under the ownership of the Honey Lake Homeowners Association until such time as the district was formed. They were then deeded to the district. Ray indicated he had proof the Town owned the roads in 1926. He continued private ownership of these roads causes enforcement problems dealing with speeding and heavy equipment. It was explained the roads were paved in the late 70’s or early 80’s using public funding and have been under ownership of the Honey Lake Protection and Rehabilitation district ever since. It may have been that when they were accepted by the district; lake districts were able to manage roads. This would grandfather their ability to do so. Heavy equipment or commercial vehicle complaints should be referred to Racine County Code enforcement. Commercial trucks are not allowed to be parked for extended periods in residential areas.
Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to adjourn at 10:40 p.m. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted:
Betty J. Novy Clerk
|