DANE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 10 ZLR... · 2011. 5. 5. · April 12, 2011 NOTE: These minutes reflect the notes of the recorder and are subject to correction and approval at a

ZLR Committee Work Meeting Agenda Page 1 of 2 May 10, 2011

DANE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

ZONING & LAND REGULATION COMMITTEE

WORK MEETING AGENDA

Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 Time: 7:30 P.M. Location: ROOM 201, CITY-COUNTY BUILDING

NOTE: If you need an interpreter, translator, materials in alternate formats or other accommodations to access this service, activity or program, please call the phone number below at least three business days prior to the meeting. NOTA: Si necesita un intérprete, un traductor, materiales en formatos alternativos u otros arreglos para acceder a este servicio, actividad o programa, comuníquese al número de teléfono que figura a continuación tres días hábiles como mínimo antes de la reunión. LUS CIM: Yog hais tias koj xav tau ib tug neeg txhais lus, ib tug neeg txhais ntawv, cov ntawv ua lwm hom ntawv los sis lwm cov kev pab kom siv tau cov kev pab, cov kev ua ub no (activity) los sis qhov kev pab cuam, thov hu rau tus xov tooj hauv qab yam tsawg peb hnub ua hauj lwm ua ntej yuav tuaj sib tham. Contact Information: Zoning Office, Planning & Development Department, 266-4266, or 266-9138 (TDD)

ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of the 04/12/11 and 04/27/11 meetings of the Zoning & Land Regulation Committee. III. PUBLIC COMMENT IV. REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM THE APRIL 27, 2011

PUBLIC HEARING

1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2169 by THOMAS ZICKERT to allow UNLIMITED LIVESTOCK on the property located at 17 EAST MEDINA ROAD in Section 36, Town of Medina.

V. REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS

1. PETITION # 10275 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2157 by STOUGHTON FARMS INC to

change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural to A-2(8) Agricultural to allow a 488 FOOT TALL FM RADIO TOWER IN THE A-2(8) ZONING DISTRICT on the property located at 3768 OLD STAGE ROAD in Section 34, Town of Rutland.

ZLR Committee Work Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 2 May 10, 2011 VI. PLATS AND CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS

1. PRELIMINARY PLATS: Chalet Meadows, Town of Middleton, Section 6 (16 lots, 19 acres, Application deadline is 07/11/2011) Acceptance of application and schedule for a future consideration pursuant to established committee policy. 2. FINAL PLATS: None 4. CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS: None

VII. RESOLUTIONS

1. None. VIII. ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS

1. None.

IX. OTHER BUSINESS

1. None. X. ADJOURN AGENDA POSTED: May 5, 2011 Supervisor Patrick Miles, Chair, Zoning & Land Regulation Committee

ZLR Committee Work Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 6 April 12, 2011

NOTE: These minutes reflect the notes of the recorder and are subject to correction and approval at a subsequent meeting of the Committee.


Dane County Board of Supervisors

MINUTES OF THE APRIL 12, 2011 MEETING MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruskewitz, Eicher, Jensen, Matano, and Miles. OTHERS PRESENT: Everson, Lane, and Violante I. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Miles called the meeting to order at 7:38pm in Room 351 of the City-County Building. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion by Matano / Jensen to approve the minutes of the 03/08/11 and 03/22/11 meetings of the Zoning & Land Regulation Committee; motion carried, 4-0-1 (Abstain: Bruskewitz)

III. PUBLIC COMMENT

David Dinkel updated the Committee on the status of pending zoning petitions #10172 (Dalby Farms) and #10179 (Pooche).

IV. ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM THE MARCH 22, 2011 PUBLIC HEARING

1. PETITION # 10291 by JEFFREY ZIMMERMAN to change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive

Agricultural to R-1 Residential to allow the SEPARATION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE FROM THE FARM on the property located at 4973 RIDGE ROAD in Section 36, Town of Sun Prairie.

TOWN: Approved with no conditions

Motion by Jensen / Eicher to recommend approval; motion carried, 5-0.

2. PETITION # 10296 by PROPERTIES ON FISH LAKE LLC to change the zoning from RH-3 Rural

Homes to RH-2 Rural Homes to allow the DIVISION OF AN EXISTING PARCEL INTO THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS on the property located WEST OF 8623 SCHOEPP ROAD in Section 03, Town of Roxbury.

TOWN: Approved with conditions

Motion by Bruskewitz / Jensen to recommend approval with conditions; motion carried, 3-2 (Nay: Eicher and Matano). 1. A deed restriction shall be placed on the property to prohibit construction of structures below 868

feet ASL. The lowest floor level, including basement floors, shall not be constructed below this level.

2. A deed notice shall be placed on the individual properties to inform future owners that Fish Lake Road may become impassable at times or be closed to vehicular traffic permanently due to fluctuating water levels of Fish Lake and Mud Lake.

3. A joint driveway agreement shall be recorded between Lots 1 and 2; and between Lot 3 and Lot 1 of CSM 11216 (parcel 0907-032-8140-0).


4. A vision clearance corner shall be reflected on the certified survey map. 3. PETITION # 10297 by 2121 FISH HATCHERY ROAD LLC to change the zoning from C-1

Commercial to C-2 Commercial to allow ZONING COMPLIANCE FOR AN EXISTING BUSINESS on the property located at 2121 FISH HATCHERY ROAD in Section 35, Town of Madison.


Motion by Jensen / Matano to recommend approval with conditions; motion carried, 5-0.

1. A deed restriction shall be recorded on the property to limit the land use to the following:

a. major repairs to motor vehicles b. sales, rental or leasing of new and used motor vehicles c. sales, service and rental of recreational equipment d. parking or storing of motor vehicles e. warehouses f. retail and service uses g. sales and repair of lawn and garden equipment h. bicycle sales and service i. self service laundries and dry cleaning establishments j. medical, dental and veterinary clinics k. banks, offices, office buildings and condominium office buildings l. bakeries m. printing plants n. laundries and dry cleaning plants o. woodworking shops p. machine shops q. rental businesses r. wholesale businesses s. warehousing and storage incidental to a permitted use t. off-site parking of motor vehicles u. Any vehicle/equipment in a state of repair must be behind the front most edifice of the

building 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2165 by JEFFREY MRKVICKA to allow a DAY CAMP SCHOOL on

the property located at 2418 DAHLK CIRCLE in Section 25, Town of Springdale.


Motion by Matano / Eicher to approval Conditional Use Permit #2165 with 5 conditions; motion carried, 5-0. 1. The hours of operation of the day camp school shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday

through Friday. 2. Dates of the operation of the day camp school shall be limited to June 1 through Sept. 15. 3. Capacity of the day camp school shall be limited to 15 children. 4. Signage shall conform to all pertinent ordinances in the Town of Springdale, Dane County and

the State of Wisconsin. 5. Adequate off-street parking shall be installed on site to accomodate vehicle parking as required

under Dane County Code of Ordinance section 10.18. V. ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM

PREVIOUS MEETINGS 1. PETITION # 10170 by FJD FARM LLC to change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural to R-1

Residential to allow the REALIGNMENT OF THREE EXISTING LOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT on the property located NORTH OF 502 NORTH MAIN STREET in Section 21, Town of Deerfield.


TOWN: Approved with no conditions

Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend denial of the petition; motion carried, 3-2 (Nay: Bruskewitz and Jensen). Finding of Fact: There are insufficient housing density rights available on the original farm to create three residential lots.

2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2159 by STANLEY LIEN to allow the RENEWAL OF NON-

METALLIC MINERAL EXTRACTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT on the property located at 372 KOSHKONONG RD in Section 14, Town of Christiana.


Motion by Jensen / Bruskewitz to approval Conditional Use Permit #2159 with 18 conditions; motion carried, 5-0. 1. The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan covering the entire CUP area for the duration of

operations, and receive approval of an erosion control permit prior to commencing extraction operations.

2. The applicant shall apply for and receive all other required local, state, and federal permits.

3. The operator shall develop and operate the site according to the submitted site and operations plan.

4. Operations shall cease no later than fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of the conditional use permit.

5. Reclamation shall be completed within one year after operations have ceased, and shall be phased according to the revised operations and reclamation plan.

6. Reclamation shall meet requirements of Chapter 74 of the Dane County Code of Ordinances.

7. All drive aisles shall be either graveled or paved according to revised operations plans, and shall be maintained in a dust free manner in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations.

8. Open excavation area shall not exceed eight (8) acres.

9. Hours of operations shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Saturday. There shall be no Sunday operations. Crushing of stone shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Crushing shall not be permitted on Saturday, Sunday or legal holidays.

10. There shall be a minimum of an 80-foot setback from all Township roadway right of way lines, and a minimum of a 200-foot setback from all property lines of other owners.

11. There shall be a safety fence around portions of the extraction area that contains high walls and/or steep slopes. That safety fence shall be a minimum of 5 feet in height with a single strand of barbed wire on the top. For areas that are not high walls or steep slopes, during operations, the edges of the extraction area shall be maintained at a slope no greater than 1:1. The site shall be signed, “no trespassing”.

12. All blasting shall be performed in strict accordance with State of Wisconsin rules and regulations. No explosives shall be stored on the quarry site.

13. The owner/operator shall notify, in writing, the Town of Christiana Clerk, local utility (Wisconsin Power and Light), and residents living within one-quarter mile of the open excavation area of the quarrying activity, the dates of blasting at the quarry. Said notification shall be provided more than 72 hours prior to blasting.

14. The operator shall use spray bars (water) in the crushing process to reduce dust. Use of spray bars is not required when the temperature is below freezing. The operator shall spray the site with water if and when needed to control dust.

15. The operator shall require all trucks, excavation, crushing, screening and washing equipment to have


muffler systems, which meet or exceed then current industry standards for noise abatement.

16. The applicant shall meet DNR standards for particulate emissions as described in NR 415.075, Wisconsin Administrative Code.

17. Owner/operator shall maintain liability insurance coverage in the amount of $5,000,000 and maintained at that level or greater until the quarry is closed or CUP 2159 expires. Proof of insurance shall be submitted annually to the Township and the insurance Township shall be named as an additional insured.

18. The Dane County zoning administrator or designee may enter the premises of the operation to inspect those premises and to ascertain compliance with these conditions or to investigate an alleged violation. If the operation is not in reasonable compliance with the terms of this approval, such approval is subject to amendment or revocation.

VI. PLATS AND CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS

1. PRELIMINARY PLATS: None. 2. FINAL PLATS: None. 3. PRELIMINARY CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS: a. Variance request for Todd Nelson, Town of Dunn, Section 8, to allow a proposed 1-lot Certified

Survey Map to maintain less than the minimum frontage of 66-feet to facilitate the possible development of a public right-of-way that could service additional lots. Lot 1 is proposing 28.02 feet of road frontage along Jordan Drive.

Motion by Bruskewitz / Jensen to grant a variance from Dane County Code of Ordinance Section 75.19(6)(b) to allow proposed lot 1 to have 28.02 feet of public road frontage along Jordan Drive; motion carried, 5-0. Motion by Jensen / Eicher to approve the preliminary Certified Survey Maps listed as b thru d subject to the following conditions; motion carried, 5-0. b. APPLICATION # 9276, Mark Wagner, Town of Middleton, Section 7 (1 lot, 1.8 acres) 1. The document is to be completed in accordance with S.236.34, Wisconsin State Statutes. 2. The net lot area calculation is to be specified in square feet. 3. The intermittent stream is to be shown and labeled as such. 4. All owners of record are to be included in the owner’s certificate. (County records indicate that WAGNER DAIRY FARMS LLC is the owner). Middle initials are required to provide valid certificates. 5. The City of Middleton approval certificate is to be included with respect to extraterritorial jurisdiction. 6. The required certificates are to be executed. 7. Comments from the Dane County Surveyor are to be satisfied:

• There is course missing in the boundary description (N 34-59-59 E, 139.80 per map). Please correct the description to include said course. The misclosure is negligible with the course inserted. 236.34(1)(b) & 236.34(1)(d)(2)


• The map indicates a monument set at the West 1/4 corner of Section 7. Please file the

appropriate USPLSS Monument Record as per administrative code. A-E 7.08 8. The recordable document is to be submitted for review and approval. c. APPLICATION # 9277, Crazy Acres, Town of Albion, Section 23 (1 lot, 4.9 acres) 1. Rezone Petition #10262 is to become effective (one day following publication in the Wisconsin State Journal) and all conditions established with Zoning Petition #10262 are to be timely satisfied.

• Recording of an approved CSM. • Record the Deed Restriction. • Payment of Rezone Conversion Fees.

2. The document is to be completed in accordance with S.236.34, Wisconsin State Statutes. 3. The net lot area calculation is to be specified in square feet. 4. All owners of record are to be included in the owner’s certificate. (County records indicate that CRAZY ACRES INC is the owner). Middle initials are required to provide valid certificates. 5. The required certificates are to be executed. 6. Any comments from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation are to be satisfied. 7. Dane County Surveyor approvals are to be obtained. When all revisions are complete, submit a copy to the Dane County Surveyor for technical review and approval. 8. The recordable document is to be submitted for review and approval. d. APPLICATION # 9281, David Roark, Town of Cross Plains, Section 24 (3 lots, 20 acres) 1. Rezone Petition #10277 is to become effective (one day following publication in the Wisconsin State Journal) and all conditions established with Zoning Petition #10277 are to be timely satisfied. 2. The document is to be completed in accordance with S.236.34, Wisconsin State Statutes. 3. Lot 2 is to be a minimum of 2.0 acres net excluding the road right-of-way. 4. The Town approval certificate is to be satisfied. 5. All owners of record are to be included in the owner’s certificate. (County records indicate that DAVID M ROARK & LYNN B ROARK and J & A LLC is the owner). Spouse’s signature and middle initials are required to provide valid certificates. 6. The required certificates are to be executed. 7. Dane County Surveyor approvals are to be obtained. When all revisions are complete, submit a copy to the Dane County Surveyor for technical review and approval. 8. The recordable document is to be submitted for review and approval. 4. CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS: Motion by Jensen / Eicher to approve final Certified Survey Maps listed a thru d; motion carried, 5-0. Chair Miles signed the Certified Survey Maps.


a. APPLICATION # 9233, Gary Paulman, Town of Windsor, Section 12 (3 lots, 29.5 acres) b. APPLICATION # 9258, Ronald Dorshorst, Town of Sun Prairie, Section 36 (2 lots, 20.8 acres) c. APPLICATION # 9264, Ted White, Town of Primrose, Section 27 (1 lot, 4.2 acres) d. APPLICATION # 9270, Don Tierney, Town of Windsor, Section 25 (1 lot, 1.4 acres)

VII. RESOLUTIONS

1. RESOLUTION 312, 2010-2011, Authorizing acceptance of Dane County’s Share of US EPA Climate Showcase Communities Grant Funding

Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend approval of Resolution 312; motion carried, 5-0.

2. RESOLUTION 322, 2010-2011, Approving Natural Path Sanctuary Cemetery Plat, Section 24, Town of

Springdale

Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend approval of Resolution 322; motion carried, 5-0. VIII. ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS

1. None.

IX. OTHER BUSINESS

5. Update Zoning and Land Regulation Committee’s Rules and Procedures Motion by Matano / Eicher to approved the revisions of the Committee Rules and Procedures with minor text changes on page 11 (corrections to Federal Register and Administrator Code references) and to delegate the authority of Certified Survey Map review/approval to Planning and Development Staff (Daniel Everson); motion carried, 5-0.

6. Delegate authority of Certified Survey Map review and approval to Planning and Development Staff

See motion above.

X. ADJOURN

Motion by Matano / Eicher to adjourn the meeting at 9:14pm; motion carried, 5-0. Roger Lane, Recording Secretary Minutes filed with the County Clerk 04/13/11 Note: These minutes are the notes of the recorder and are subject to change at a subsequent meeting of the committee.

ZLR Committee Public Hearing Agenda Page 1 of 4 April 27, 2011


Dane County Board of Supervisors

MINUTES OF THE APRIL 27, 2011 PUBLIC HEARING MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruskewitz, Eicher, Jensen, Miles, and Matano. OTHERS PRESENT: Everson, Kodl, Lane, Violante, and Members of the Public.

I. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Miles called the meeting to order at 7:35pm in Room 201 of the City-County Building. II. PUBLIC COMMENT

No comments made by the public. III. PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND

RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS 1. PETITION # 10298 by ALLAN BREUNIG to change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural to R-1

Residential and A-4 to allow a ONE RESIDENTIAL LOT on the property located at 8312 COUNTY HIGHWAY V in Section 23, Town of Roxbury.

IN FAVOR: Allan Breunig, Ken Meinholz, Nick Ganser OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Approved with no conditions Motion by Jensen / Matano to recommend approval; motion carried, 5-0.

2. PETITION # 10299 by EUGENE LARSEN to change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural to A-

2(2) Agricultural and A-4 to allow the SEPARATION OF THE FARM RESIDENCES AND BUILDINGS on the property located at 7012 PATTON ROAD in Section 22, Town of Vienna.

IN FAVOR: Daniel Paulson of Paulson and Associates represented Eugene Larsen OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Approved with condition Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend approval with condition; motion carried, 5-0

1. Deed restrict parcel number 0909-214-8160-7 to prohibit residential development on the remaining A-1

Exclusive land. The housing density rights have been exhausted for the original farm. 2. The A-4 parcel shall be deed restricted to prohibit buildings being constructed on the parcel.


3. PETITION # 10300 by RANDY DOCKEN to change the zoning from A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural to A-2(4) Agricultural to allow the SEPARATION OF THE FARM RESIDENCE AND BUILDINGS on the property located at 2469 DOCKEN RD in Section 14, Town of Blue Mounds.

IN FAVOR: Petitioner OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Approved with condition Motion by Bruskewitz / Matano to recommend approval with condition; motion carried, 5-0.

1. The A-2(4) parcel shall be deed restricted to one animal unit per one full acre of land. 2. The recorded lot shall not exceed 7.9 acres of land.

4. PETITION # 10301 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2168 by THOMAS RINDY to change the zoning

from B-1 Local Business to C-1 Commercial to allow a DUPLEX on the property located at 1734 WASHINGTON STREET in Section 34, Town of Springdale.

IN FAVOR: Stuart Rindy representing Thomas Rindy OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Approved the zoning petition and conditional use permit with conditions Motion by Bruskewitz / Jensen to recommend approval of zoning petition #10301 with condition; motion carried, 5-0.

1. The parcel shall be deed restricted to the land use to a duplex only.

Motion by Matano / Bruskewitz to approve Conditional Use Permit #2168 with the following condition and contingent upon zoning petition #10301 becoming effective; motion carried, 5-0.

1. The residential use of this property shall be limited to a duplex (two residences).

5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2166 by URBAN ASSETS LLC to allow a DOMESTIC ABUSE

INTERVENTION FACILITY on the property located at 2102 FORDEM AVENUE in Section 12, Town of Madison.

IN FAVOR: Melissa Huggins and Shannon Barry representing Domestic Abuse Intervention Services, Doug Hersh representing Potter Lawson Architects. OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Approved with condition Motion by Matano / Eicher to approve with the following conditions; motion carried, 5-0.

1. The property shall be used for a domestic abuse intervention facility. 2. Parking and exterior lighting shall meet the requirements found under Dane County Code of Ordinance

section 10.18. 3. Domestic Abuse Intervention Services (DAIS) shall enter into an agreement with the Town of Madison

for payments in lieu of taxes for Town services. The first annual payment will be for the amount of $10,000 with subsequent payments adjusted for inflation.


6. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT # 2169 by THOMAS ZICKERT to allow UNLIMITED LIVESTOCK on the property located at 17 EAST MEDINA ROAD in Section 36, Town of Medina.

IN FAVOR: David Dinkel representing Thomas Zickert OPPOSED: None STAFF: P&D, HWY TOWN: Pending Motion by Jensen / Eicher to postpone; motion carried, 5-0.

IV. REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS

1. PETITION # 10292 by MICHAEL PEPER to change the zoning from RH-3 Rural Homes and RH-1 Rural Homes to RH-3 and RH-1 to allow the RECONFIGURATION THE SHAPE OF TWO EXISTING LOTS on the property located at 4411 and 4413 LIBBY ROAD in Section 32, Town of Blooming Grove. TOWN: Approved with no conditions Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend approval; motion carried, 5-0.

V. PLATS AND CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS

1. PRELIMINARY PLATS:

a. REVERE TRAILS, Town of Windsor, Section 33 & 34 (89 lots) (73 acres) (Application deadline is 06/13/2011) Acceptance of application and schedule for a future consideration pursuant to established committee policy. Motion by Jensen / Bruskewitz to postpone accepting the application to allow the applicant to work on outstanding issues regarding the community septic system plan with the Public Health Department and the violation with the DNR concerning the wetlands; motion carried, 5-0.

2. FINAL PLATS:

a. FIRST ADDITION TO NATURE VALLEY CONSERVATION, Town of Vienna, Section 36 (15 lots) (15.3 acres) Consideration of the 12/14/10 conditional approval and execution of the plat document pursuant to established Committee policy. Staff finds that the 07/13/2010 conditions of approval have been satisfied. Motion by Jensen / Bruskewitz to approve; motion carried, 5-0. Chair Miles signed the Plat.

3. CERTIFIED SURVEY MAPS:

a. None. VI. RESOLUTIONS

1. RESOLUTION 1, 2011-2012 – Authorizing Emergency Fire Wardens for Dane County for the Year 2011. Motion by Matano / Eicher to recommend approval; motion carried, 5-0.

ZLR Committee Public Hearing Agenda Page 4 of 4 April 27, 2011 VII. ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS

1. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 13, 2010-2011: Amending Chapter 82 of the Dane County Code Of Ordinances, Incorporating the Town of Middleton Comprehensive Plan into the Dane County Comprehensive Plan. Motion by Jensen / Matano to suspend the rules to allow registrants to speak; motion carried, 5-0. Tim Roehl, Town of Middleton Supervisor, was opposed to the amendments made by County Planning staff. David Shaw, Town of Middleton Administrator, was concerned with the proposed amendments. Motion by Bruskewitz / Matano to postpone to allow time for Planning Staff to meet with Town officials to resolve differences; motion carried, 5-0.

2. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 37, 2010-2011: Amending Chapter 10, Defining Small Scale Electric

Generating Stations and Requiring a Conditional Use Permit for Such Uses in the A-1 Exclusive Agriculture District.

TOWNS IN FAVOR: 15 TOWNS OPPOSED: 4 Motion by Jensen / Matano to approve Substitute 1 as an amendment to Ordinance Amendment 37; motion carried, 5-0. Motion by Jensen / Matano to recommend approval of Ordinance Amendment, Substitute 1; motion carried, 5-0.

3. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 5, 2011-2012 – Amending Ch. 12, Exempting Farm Buildings from

Zoning Permit Fees. Motion by Jensen / Bruskewitz to recommend approval; motion carried, 5-0.

VIII. OTHER BUSINESS

None. IX. ADJOURN Motion by Matano / Eicher to adjourn the meeting at 9:03pm; motion carried, 5-0.

Roger Lane, Recording Secretary Minutes filed with the County Clerk 04/28/11 Note: These minutes are the notes of the recorder and are subject to change at a subsequent meeting of the committee.

TOWN ACTION RECOMMENDATION

ZLR COMMITTEE ACTION - REZONING ZLR CUP APPROVAL

Approved ______________________________ Postponed _____________________________________ Appoved As Specified by Town Approve Cond/Amnd Town Cond/Amnd Comm Con by ZLR DENY

Denied ______________________________ As Ccnditioned _____________________________ Date________________ ___________________________________________ COUNTY BOARD ACTION Subject To: Amended Changed Zone Dist. _______________ REZONING Conditions Amendments Changed Boundary Description Referred Date________________ Approved Amended on Floor IF CUP: DENY DENY County Board Agenda Item Conditions None Vote Action Date ________________________ _____-_____

STAFF REPORT DANE COUNTY ZONING & LAND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Dane County Application for Change in Zoning or CUP Hearing Date: 4/27/2011 Item #: 6 Zoning Petition #: None C.U.P. #: 2169 Internal Tracking Number: RECU25835

Town/Section: Town of Medina/36

Applicant: THOMAS ZICKERT Location: 17 EAST MEDINA ROAD Area: 4.0 acres Delayed Effective Date: NO

Proposed Use: UNLIMITED LIVESTOCK

Description: Applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit for unlimited livestock in the A-2(4) zoning district. A prospective buyer of the 4-acre parcel wishes to raise cattle and other livestock on the property (less than 60 animal units). Thomas Zickert owns the surrounding ~70 acres of farmland and has agreed to allow the new owner to spread manure on the larger tract of ag land. Observations: The entire property is Class II soils. No significant environmental features observed on the property. Town Plan: The subject property is located in the Agricultural Preservation district. The goal of this district is to preserve land for long-term farm use. Staff: Staff suggests that a nutrient (manure) management plan be obtained from Dane County Land Conservation Division. See attached suggested conditions. 4/27 ZLR: Postponed due to no town action. Town: Approved with condtion.

H:\Zoning\ZLR\Conditional Use Permits\CUP #2169 proposed.doc

Dane County Zoning Division City-County Building 210 Martin Luther King, Jr., Blvd., Room 116 Madison Wisconsin 53703 (608) 266-4266/266-9083 Fax (608) 267-1540

DANE COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #2169

THE ZONING AND LAND REGULATION COMMITTEE OF THE DANE COUNTY BOARD PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.255(2) OF THE DANE COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES DOES HEREBY: GRANT Conditional Use Permit #2169 for unlimited livestock pursuant to Dane County Code of Ordinance Section 10.126(3) and subject to any conditions contained herein. EFFECTIVE DATE OF PERMIT: PENDING THE CONDITIONAL USE SHALL BE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 17 East Medina Road, Town of Medina, Dane County, Wisconsin Parcel # 0812-361-8010-0 Lot 1, Certified Survey Map 13002, Section 36, Town of Medina, T8N, R12E, Dane County, Wisconsin CONDITIONS: 1. Owner is responsible for instituting a manure management plan approved by Dane County

Land Conservation. 2. The conditional use permit shall expire when Erick Mankowski no longer lives on the

premises as a tenant or owner. 3. Up to 15 animal units shall be allowed for the first year of the Conditional Use Permit; Up

to 31 animal units may be permitted after the first year subject to the review of the operation by the Town. Animal units shall be equivelant to one (1) large beef cattle or two (2) small beef cattle

THE ZONING AND LAND REGULATION COMMITTEE AFTER PUBLIC HEARING AND IN THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MADE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:

1. That the establishment, maintenance and operation of the proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals comfort or general welfare.

H:\Zoning\ZLR\Conditional Use Permits\CUP #2169 proposed.doc

2. That the uses, values, and enjoyment of other property in the neighborhood for purposes already permitted will not be substantially impaired or diminished by the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the proposed conditional use.

3. That the establishment of the proposed conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly

development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (Continued on page 2)

4. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary site improvements will be made.

5. That adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize

traffic congestion in the public streets. 6. That the proposed conditional use does conform to all applicable regulations of the district in

which it is proposed to be located.

EXPIRATION OF PERMIT In addition to any time limit established as a condition in granting this CUP, Section 10.25(2)(n) of the Dane County Code of Ordinances provides that any use for which a conditional use permit has been issued, upon its cessation or abandonment for a period of one year, will be deemed to have been terminated and any future use shall be in conformity with the ordinance.

TOWN ACTION RECOMMENDATION

ZLR COMMITTEE ACTION - REZONING ZLR CUP APPROVAL

Approved ______________________________ Postponed _____________________________________ Appoved As Specified by Town Approve Cond/Amnd Town Cond/Amnd Comm Con by ZLR DENY

Denied ______________________________ As Ccnditioned _____________________________ Date________________ ___________________________________________ COUNTY BOARD ACTION Subject To: Amended Changed Zone Dist. _______________ REZONING Conditions Amendments Changed Boundary Description Referred Date________________ Approved Amended on Floor IF CUP: DENY DENY County Board Agenda Item Conditions None Vote Action Date ________________________ _____-_____

STAFF REPORT DANE COUNTY ZONING & LAND REGULATION COMMITTEE

Dane County Application for Change in Zoning or CUP Hearing Date: 1/25/2011 Item #: 5 Zoning Petition #: 10275 C.U.P. #: 2157 Internal Tracking Number: RECU25799

Town/Section: Town of Rutland/34

Applicant: STOUGHTON FARMS INC Location: 3768 OLD STAGE ROAD Area: 15.5 acres Delayed Effective Date: YES Change: From A-1EX Exclusive Agricultural To A-2(8) Agricultural

Rezone Reason: ALLOW FOR A FM RADIO TOWER Proposed Use: FM RADIO TOWER IN THE A-2(8) ZONING DISTRICT

Description: Magnum Communications is requesting a conditional use permit for a communications tower in the A-2(8) Agriculture Zoning District. Applicant proposes to construct a 488-foot tall FM radio tower on the property for relocation of existing station WBKY FM (95.9, “Bucky Country”), currently located in Portage, WI. The applicant has obtained the required FCC licenses for the proposed relocation. Observations: Proposed site is approximately 2,000 feet off Old Stage Road. The property is adjacent to a significant woodland area to the southeast, farmlands to the west, and numerous rural residential properties to the east and north. Town Plan: The property is in an agricultural preservation area. Town policies in this area are designed to protect agricultural uses and rural character from incompatible uses. Staff: The County’s Radio Frequency Engineering consultant is reviewing the proposal for compliance with the county’s communication tower ordinance. A detailed staff report will be provided upon receipt of the engineer’s report. Staff recommends postponement of the petition to allow for public input at the hearing. 1/25 ZLR: Postponed due to opposition by the public and no town action. The Committee Chair requested that a second public hearing be held on March 8, 2011. Town: Denied both the zoning map amendment and the CUP.

545-105 (2/06) WEB

TOWN BOARD ACTION REPORT – REZONERegarding Petition #____________________

Dane County Zoning & Land Regulation Committee Public Hearing Date____________________

Whereas, the Town Board of the Town of_____________________________ having considered said zoning petition,

be it therefore resolved that said petition is hereby (check one): ❑ Approved ❑ Denied ❑ Postponed

Town Planning Commission Vote: _____ in favor _____ opposed _____ abstained

Town Board Vote: _____ in favor _____ opposed _____ abstained

Please note: The following space is reserved for comment by the minority voter(s), OR, for the Town to explain itsapproval if the decision does not comply with the relevant provisions of the Town Plan.

THE PETITION IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S) (Check all appropriate boxes):

1. ❑ Deed restriction limiting use(s) in the __________ zoning district to only the following:

2. ❑ Deed restrict the balance of A-1 EX Agricultural Exclusive zoned land owned by the applicant from the originalfarm (as of date specified in the Town Plan) prohibiting non-farm development. Please provide propertydescription, or tax parcel number(s):

3. ❑ Deed restrict the applicant's property described below prohibiting division. Please provide propertydescription, or tax parcel number(s):

4. ❑ Condition that the applicant must record a Notice Document which states all residential development units(a.k.a. splits) have been exhausted on the property, and further residential development is prohibited underTown & County Land Use Planning policies. Please provide property description, or tax parcel number(s):

5. ❑ Other Condition(s). Please specify:

I, ____________________________, as Town Clerk of the Town of_________________, County of Dane, hereby

certify that the above resolution was adopted in a lawful meeting of the Town Board on_____________________

Town Clerk_________________________________________ Date:___________________________

TOWN BOARD ACTION REPORT – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Regarding Petition # __________ Dane County ZLR Committee Public Hearing ___________________ Whereas, the Town Board of the Town of _________________________ having considered said conditional use permit application, be it therefore resolved that said conditional use permit is hereby (check one): APPROVED

DENIED (IF DENIED, PLEASE COMPLETE FINDINGS SECTION ON PAGE 2) PLANNING COMMISSION VOTE: ____ In Favor ____ Opposed TOWN BOARD VOTE: ____ In Favor ____ Opposed Whereas, in support of its decision, the Town Board has made appropriate findings of fact that the standards listed in section 10.255(2)(h), Dane County Code of Ordinances, and section 10.123(3)(a), if applicable, are found to be (check one):

SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED (PLEASE COMPLETE FINDINGS SECTION ON PAGE 2)

PLEASE NOTE: The following space, and additional pages as needed, are reserved for comment by the minority voter(s), OR, for the Town to explain its approval if the decision does not comply with the relevant provisions of the Town Plan. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION(S): ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I, ________________________, as Town Clerk of the Town of ___________________, County of Dane, hereby certify that the above resolution was adopted in a lawful meeting of the Town Board on ____________, 20____. _________________________________________ _________________________, 20____. Town Clerk Date

PLEASE INDICATE THE APPROPRIATE FINDING FOR EACH STANDARD (CHECK ONE / STANDARD) 1. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED 2. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED 3. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED 4. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED 5. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED 6. SATISFIED / NOT SATISFIED

FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIED CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS If the Conditional Use Permit application is denied, please complete the following section. For each of the standards, indicate if the standard was found to be satisfied or not satisfied. Please note the following from section 10.255(2)(b):

“No permit shall be granted when the zoning committee or applicable town board determines that the standards are not met, nor shall a permit be denied when the zoning committee and applicable town board determine that the standards are met.”

1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the

conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or welfare.

2. That the uses, values and enjoyment of other property in the

neighborhood for purposes already permitted shall be in no foreseeable manner substantially impaired or diminished by establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use.

3. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede

the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.

4. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other

necessary site improvements have been or are being made. 5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide

ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.

6. That the conditional use shall conform to all applicable

regulations of the district in which it is located.

THIS SECTION IS RESERVED FOR FURTHER EXPLANATION OF THE FINDINGS: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Room 116, City-County Building, Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Fax (608) 267-1540

Housing & Economic Development (608)266-4270, Rm. 362 Planning (608)266-4251, Rm. 116 Records & Support (608)266-4251, Rm. 116 Zoning (608)266-4266, Rm. 116

TO: ZLR Committee FROM: Majid Allan, Senior Planner DATE: May 5, 2011 RE: Town of Rutland denial of petition 10275 / CUP 2157 (Magnum

Communications proposed 488’ FM radio tower) As noted on the staff report for the town of Rutland has denied petition 10275 / CUP 2157. The town board’s initial action on CUP 2157 did not include any written findings of fact in support of the denial. At a subsequent meeting on May 3rd, the town board amended its initial action report to include several findings of fact in support of its denial of CUP 2157. Staff is awaiting an opinion from corporation counsel regarding the town’s amended action on the petition. Past experience suggests that, so long as proper parliamentary procedures were followed, it is likely that the amended town action is legitimate and properly constitutes the town board’s action on the matter. On May 2nd, Magnum Communications filed an appeal of the town board’s denial of CUP 2157, citing as part of the grounds for the appeal, the absence of any written findings of fact in the town board’s initial action. That appeal has been transmitted to the county clerk and filed with the county board. Had the town board not amended its action, the absence of written findings would constitute an approval of the CUP application. Changes to the county ordinance enacted in 2008 provide towns with binding authority to deny conditional use permits. The following is the pertinent provision from s. 10.255(2)(c)2 of the ordinance:

2. Either the town board or the zoning committee may deny an application for conditional use permit. If the town board action is denial no further action by the zoning committee is required. The zoning committee may approve or deny a conditional use permit without town action if the town board fails to act within the time period set forth in sub. 1. above. All such decisions may be appealed to the county board under sub. (2)(j). If the county board reverses a denial by the town board, the application shall be referred to the zoning committee with instructions to draft appropriate conditions. (emphasis added)

Attached for your reference is a copy of the county ordinance provisions regarding Conditional Use Permits. Since the town acted on the CUP within the allotted timeframe, and because an appeal of the town’s denial has already been filed, staff advises that the committee take no action on CUP 2157. The town’s recommendation to deny rezoning petition 10275, however, does require committee action. The committee has two practical options: recommend denial of petition 10275 to the county board, or recommend approval of the petition with conditions/amendments (e.g., restriction prohibiting any residential development on the property). The CUP has been denied by the town, and any conditional approval of the zoning petition will cycle back to the town for final action. Staff will be at the May 10 work meeting and can respond to any additional questions the committee may have.

H:\Zoning\ZLR\Composite Reports\2011 Reports\CUP 2157 Files (FM Radio tower in Rutland)\Update on Rutland denial of 10275-2157.doc 2

Conditional Use Permit provisions from section 10.255

Dane County Code of Ordinances (2) Conditional uses.

(a) Statement of purposes. The development and execution of this ordinance is based upon the division of the county into districts, within which districts the use of land and buildings, and bulk and location of buildings and structures in relation to the land are mutually compatible and substantially uniform. However, there are certain uses which, because of their unique characteristics, cannot be properly classified as unrestricted permitted uses in any particular district or districts, without consideration, in each case, of the impact of those uses upon neighboring land or public facilities, and of the public need for the particular use at a particular location. Such uses, nevertheless, may be necessary or desirable to be allowed in a particular district provided that due consideration is given to location, development and operation of such uses. Such uses are classified as conditional uses and are of such an unusual nature that their operation may give rise to unique problems with respect to their impact upon neighboring property or public facilities. The following provisions are then established to regulate those conditional uses which require special consideration.

(b) Authority. Subject to sub. (c), the zoning committee, after a public hearing, shall, within a reasonable time,

grant or deny any application for conditional use. Prior to granting or denying a conditional use, the zoning committee shall make findings of fact based on evidence presented and issue a determination whether the prescribed standards are met. No permit shall be granted when the zoning committee or applicable town board determines that the standards are not met, nor shall a permit be denied when the zoning committee and applicable town board determine that the standards are met.

(c) Town/zoning committee action.

1. The town board of the town where a conditional use is proposed shall be given notice and opportunity to approve or disapprove a conditional use. The town board shall communicate its position in writing on the conditional use application within sixty (60) days of the date of the public hearing. The town board may request an extension of the review period of up to forty (40) days by submitting a written request to the zoning committee. The zoning committee shall not take action on the application for conditional use until the time period for action by the town board has expired.

2. Either the town board or the zoning committee may deny an application for conditional use permit.

If the town board action is denial no further action by the zoning committee is required. The zoning committee may approve or deny a conditional use permit without town action if the town board fails to act within the time period set forth in sub. 1. above. All such decisions may be appealed to the county board under sub. (2)(j). If the county board reverses a denial by the town board, the application shall be referred to the zoning committee with instructions to draft appropriate conditions.

3. Town board and zoning committee actions shall be supported by written findings of fact. Failure of

a town board or the zoning committee to make written findings of fact shall constitute approval of the application. Written findings of fact shall, at a minimum, address the standards enumerated in sub. (2)(h) and, where applicable, s. 10.123(3). All findings shall be based solely upon the evidence within the public record.

4. If the town board approves the application subject to conditions and such conditions are amended

or deleted by the zoning committee, the conditional use permit as approved by the zoning committee shall be submitted to the town board for approval of the zoning committee’s conditions or denial of the permit. The town board shall submit a certified resolution indicating their action to the zoning administrator within forty (40) days of the approval by the zoning committee. If the town board does not act within the forty (40) day time period, the permit shall be deemed approved. If the town board denies the permit with the conditions as amended by the zoning committee, the permit shall be deemed denied. Such denial is appealable to the county board under sub. (2)(j).

(d) Initiation of conditional use. Any person, firm, corporation or organization having a freehold interest, a

possessory interest entitled to exclusive possession, a contractual interest which may be a freehold interest, or an exclusive possessory interest which is specifically enforceable in the land for which a


conditional use is sought, may file an application to use such land for one or more of the conditional uses provided for in this ordinance provided that the conditional use is one which is permitted by the zoning ordinance in the zoning district where the parcel is located.

(e) Application for conditional use. An application for a conditional use shall be filed with the zoning

administrator on a form prescribed by the zoning administrator. The application shall be accompanied by such plans and other information as may be prescribed by the zoning administrator or the zoning committee and shall include a statement in writing by the applicant and adequate evidence showing that the proposed conditional use shall conform to the standards set forth in par. (h) hereinafter.

(f) Hearing on application. Upon receipt of the application and statement referred to in par. (e) above, the

zoning committee shall hold a public hearing on each application for conditional use at such time and place as shall be established by the zoning committee. The hearing shall be conducted and a record of the proceedings shall be preserved in such manner and according to such procedures as the zoning committee shall, by rule, prescribe from time to time.

(g) Notice of public hearing shall be given by publication of a Class 2 notice as provided for in chapter 985 of

the Wisconsin Statutes. Notice to parties of interest shall be according to policies established by the zoning committee.

(h) Standards. No application for a conditional use shall be granted by the town board or zoning committee

unless such body shall find that all of the following conditions are present:

1. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare;

2. That the uses, values and enjoyment of other property in the neighborhood for purposes already

permitted shall be in no foreseeable manner substantially impaired or diminished by establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use;

3. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development

and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district;

4. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary site improvements have been or are being made;

5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as

to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets; and

6. That the conditional use shall conform to all applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.

(i) Conditions and guarantees. Prior to the granting of any conditional use, the town board and zoning committee may stipulate such conditions and restrictions upon the establishment, location, construction, maintenance and operation of the conditional use as deemed necessary to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the community and to secure compliance with the standards and requirements specified in subsection (h) above. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the town board and zoning committee shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the being and will be complied with.

1. In addition to such other conditions as the town board and zoning committee may impose upon any

conditional use, in the case of dependency living arrangements, each body shall require as a condition of approval that the use shall be discontinued at the time that a dependent person ceases to reside in the secondary living area. In no event shall the space so created be used for general rental purposes. The town board and zoning committee may, if they so desire, require the owner to record deed restrictions implementing these additional restrictions and such deed restrictions may be required to run in favor of the county, the town and adjacent landowners.


(j) Appeal. Any person aggrieved by the grant or denial of a conditional use permit, or the county board supervisor of the district in which the affected parcel is located, may appeal the decision of the town board or zoning committee to the county board. Such appeal must specify the grounds thereof in respect to the findings of the zoning committee, town board or both, the reason why the appellant is aggrieved and must be filed with the office of the zoning administrator within 20 days of the final action. The zoning administrator shall transmit such appeal to the county clerk who shall file such appeal with the county board. The county board shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal and give public notice thereof as well as due notice to the applicant and the appellant(s) and decide the same within a reasonable time. The action of the zoning committee, town board or both, shall be deemed just and equitable unless the county board by a three-fourths vote of supervisors present and voting reverses or modifies the action appealed from. An appeal from a decision of the zoning committee, town board or both, shall be taken to the county board. No other entity of county government has jurisdiction to hear any such appeal and the avenue of appeal provided for herein is exclusive.

(k) Effect of denial of application. No application for a conditional use which has been denied wholly or in part

shall be resubmitted for a period of one year from the date of said denial, except on the grounds of new evidence or proof of change of conditions found to be valid by the zoning committee.

(l) In any case where the holder of a conditional use permit issued under this ordinance has not instituted the

use or begun construction within one year of the date of approval, the permit shall be null and void.

(m) Revocation of a conditional use permit. If the zoning committee finds that the standards in subsection (2)(h) and the conditions stipulated therein are not being complied with, the zoning committee, after a public hearing as provided in subs. (2)(f) and (g), may revoke the conditional use permit. Appeals from the action of the zoning committee may be as provided in sub. (2)(j).

(n) Abandoned conditional uses. Any use, for which a conditional use permit has been issued, upon its

cessation or abandonment for a period of one year, will be deemed to have been terminated and any future use shall be in conformity with these ordinances.

Room 116, City-County Building, Madison, Wisconsin 53703 Fax (608) 267-1540

Housing & Economic Development (608)266-4270, Rm. 362 Planning (608)266-4251, Rm. 116 Records & Support (608)266-4251, Rm. 116 Zoning (608)266-4266, Rm. 116

Staff Report for Petition 10275 / Conditional Use Permit 2157 Property Owner: Stoughton Farms, Inc. Property Location: 3768 Old Stage Road, Section 34, Town of Rutland Proposed Zoning: A-1EX (Exclusive Agriculture) to A-2(8) Agriculture Proposed Use: Conditional Use Permit for a Communications Tower Parcel Size: 15.5 acres Proposal Summary: Magnum Communications is requesting a conditional use permit for a communications tower in the A-2(8) Agriculture Zoning District. Applicant proposes to construct a 488-foot tall FM radio tower on the property for relocation of existing station WBKY FM (95.9, “Bucky Country”), currently located in Portage, WI. The applicant has obtained the required FCC licenses for the proposed relocation.

This report includes the following sections:

1. Decision-Making Considerations (pg 2) 2. Summary of Common Tower-Related Issues (pgs 3-4) 3. Relevant Town / County Comprehensive Plan Policies (pgs 5-7) 4. Radio Frequency Engineering Summary & Recommendations (pg 8) 5. Preliminary Staff Analysis (pg 9)

H:\Zoning\ZLR\Composite Reports\2011 Reports\CUP 2157 Files (FM Radio tower in Rutland)\Staff report Petition 10275 - CUP 2157 (FM Radio tower, sec 34 Rutland).doc 2

1. Decision-Making Considerations While the proposal satisfies the standards of the county tower ordinance, the committee must also find that the proposal is consistent with the town and county comprehensive plans, and that the 6 standards enumerated in s. 10.255(2)(h) are satisfied (see below). In addition, because the proposal involves a rezoning of land out of the A-1EX (Exclusive Agriculture) district, state statutes require that the following findings be made prior to approving a rezoning:

1. The land is better suited for a use not allowed in the farmland preservation zoning district.

2. The rezoning is consistent with any applicable comprehensive plan. 3. The rezoning is substantially consistent with the county certified farmland

preservation plan. 4. The rezoning will not substantially impair or limit current or future agricultural use

of surrounding parcels of land that are zoned for or legally restricted to agricultural use.

When granting CUPs, the ZLR and respective town board need to find that the proposed conditional use satisfies the following six standards outlined under §10.255(2)(h) of the D.C. Ords.: 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the conditional use will not be

detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or general welfare. 2. That the uses, values and enjoyment of other property in the neighborhood for

purposes already permitted shall be in no foreseeable manner substantially impaired or diminished by establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use.

3. That the establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.

4. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary site improvements have been or are being made.

5. That adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets; and

6. That the conditional use shall conform to all applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.


2. Summary of Common Tower Related Concerns / Issues There are a number of issues that are commonly associated with the siting, operation, and maintenance of communication towers. Below is a summary these issues in the context of the FM radio tower proposed under CUP #2157. Air navigation. The site is not within 5 miles of any public airport nor is there any privately operated airstrip within 3 miles. At the proposed height of 488’ feet, FAA notification is required. The applicant filed for and has received a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) “determination of no hazard to air navigation”. The applicant has also received similar authorization from the WI Bureau of Aeronautics to construct the proposed tower at this location. Fall-down radius. The fall-down radius is essentially the area around a tower that could be affected in the event that the tower fell down. The applicant has submitted a letter from a structural engineer regarding the “folding” design of the proposed tower in the event of a catastrophic fall down:

“Due to the slenderness of the guyed tower mast in relation to the tower’s height and considering the special factors of safety incorporated in the guys and their foundations, the expected failure mode would be buckling of tower mast leg members in the unlikely event of a collapse. Should gross failure of any one guy anchor occur, the outer guys anchored in the same row will prevent the tower mast from falling straight over. With this occurrence, the mode of collapse for this structure is expected to be a folding configuration with the majority of the tower mast falling within a radius from the mast base out to 25% of the tower height or 122 feet. Some limited portion of the mast and other scattered debris could be expected within a radius from the base out to 50% of the tower height or 245 feet. For any distance beyond this we would only expect some light debris and only a part of the mast under an extremely unusual set of circumstances.

Ice-fall radius. During the winter months, ice can build up on towers and subsequently melt and fall off the tower affecting the ground and structures in close proximity to the tower. Falling ice can drift further from the base of a structure due to strong winds, including “riding” down guyed wires, thus potentially impacting a wider area than that immediately around the base of the tower. Should the CUP be approved, the RF engineer’s report recommends that “ice breakers” be installed on the guyed wires to minimize the potential for ice-fall. Visual aesthetics. This is a highly subjective issue and one of the most significant points of contention often associated with new communication tower requests. The tower would be visible from many residences in the vicinity. A petition signed by 46 individuals in opposition to the proposed tower was submitted at the January 25, 2011 public hearing, citing aesthetic impacts and concerns over negative impacts to property values and migratory bird and bat populations. Under FAA regulations, the proposed tower would need to be painted “international orange and white”, and require lighting (red incandescent or LED lights) at several intervals along the length of the tower.


Negative impact on property values. The installation of a tall communications tower can potentially have a negative impact on neighboring property values. An objective and quantitative evaluation of this issue is beyond the expertise of county staff. Nonetheless, neighboring property owners often site concerns with loss of property value as a primary concern. The county ordinance standards for the granting of a conditional use permit does require that the town board and zoning committee make findings that, “the uses, values and enjoyment of other property in the neighborhood for purposes already permitted shall be in no foreseeable manner substantially impaired or diminished by establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use” [s.10.255(2)(h)2]. This particular standard is somewhat subjective and requires diligently balancing the rights and interests of property owners on both sides of an issue. Migratory bird populations. Research has shown that communications towers can result in significant migratory bird mortality rates. The US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) has submitted a set of communications tower siting guidelines that include recommendations to mitigate the negative impacts on migratory birds. Bird collisions with towers are affected by a number of factors, including location of towers within migratory “fly ways”, weather patterns, tower lighting, and the use of guyed wires. Additional research and consultation with outside experts may be needed to effectively ascertain the potential impact of the proposed tower on migratory bird populations. Electromagnetic radiation. The issue of electromagnetic radiofrequency (RF) emissions is commonly raised in response to communication tower proposals. However, an evaluation of the issue is somewhat outside of the County’s jurisdiction given that there are no relevant County regulations; Department staff do not have the technical capabilities to evaluate and comment on this issue; and it is regulated and governed by the FCC through the federal licensing and permitting process. This is a relatively low-density rural / agricultural area, which should mitigate any negative affects associated with RF emissions. If so desired, the Committee/County has the option of referring specific questions to the County’s contracting RF engineering consultant, Evans Associates. Otherwise, the issue is deemed to be governed entirely by the FCC.


3. Relevant Town / County Comprehensive Plan Policies The following is a preliminary list of the relevant / applicable policies contained in the Town of Rutland Comprehensive Plan and the Dane County Comprehensive Plan. As per the comprehensive plan consistency requirement enumerated in state statutes and county ordinance, the committee must consider the proposed use in light of these plan policies and render a decision that is consistent with the adopted plans. Town of Rutland Comprehensive Plan The subject property is located in the town’s Agricultural Preservation Area. Town goals and objectives for the agricultural preservation area include preserving agricultural land, existing farm operations, and the rural character of the town. The town’s overall land use goals and objectives include the following: Goal 7 Land Use Create a pattern of development that fosters the rural character and agricultural land preservation and that minimizes potential conflicts between incompatible land uses. Objectives:

1. Maintain the agricultural land base to the greatest extent possible. 2. Minimize the negative effects of incompatible land uses.

Relevant town plan policies include the following: Policies (note: numbers below correspond to the policies as they appear in the town plan)

2. Use open space areas as buffers between incompatible land uses, to protect environmentally sensitive lands, or to compliment other land development.

3. New commercial development adjacent to residential developments shall provide adequate open space, buffers, and screening.

12. Require buffers between incompatible land uses to minimize potential negative effects.

The town’s policies on commercial development include the following:

2. In agricultural areas of the Town allow agricultural related commercial uses only if a rural location is required to serve farmers, and if it must be in proximity to a resource; if no prime agricultural land is used; and if wastewater can be adequately handled by a soil absorption system.

3. To limit any non-agricultural commercial or recreational use to small, rural-oriented businesses which provide services needed by residents of the town. Such uses must meet the following criteria prior to zoning approval:


a. Be consistent with agricultural policies for farmland preservation. b. Have access to a state or county highway. c. Shall not adversely affect the traffic capacity and safety of the highway. d. Provide a buffer between the commercial use and any adjacent non-

commercial use. e. Not endanger the environment or groundwater of the area.

4. Encourage the provision of technology-based infrastructure such as high-speed

Internet connections. Town town’s policies on environmental protection include the following: Goal 11 Natural Environment Protect natural resources and environmentally sensitive land from inappropriate use and/or development. Objectives:

1. Minimize disruption to environmentally sensitive lands (e.g., wetlands, floodplains, recharge areas, riparian habitat, etc.).

Policies:

1. Identify and protect the unique natural resources such as: wetlands, woodlands, groundwater, and native prairies.

2. Protect scenic vistas from inappropriate development. 3. Ensure that floodplain areas are protected from development or filling to maintain

their natural flood accommodation capacity. 4. Restrict development along stream corridors to protect riparian habitat, water

quality, and aesthetics. 5. Protect rare and endangered species and maintain their habitat. 6. Support the efforts of landowners to keep natural areas from being developed by

using conservation easements or other means.


Dane County Comprehensive Plan Utilities and Community Facilities Element Telecommunications Policies & Programs

1. Encourage Dane County communities to adopt enforceable guidelines for siting and removing telecommunications facilities.

2. Strengthen consideration of aesthetics in the building of towers (e.g., education, design competition, exhibits).

3. Maximize coordination of telecommunication facility needs with existing structures, buildings, water towers, etc.

4. Adopt ordinance requiring feasibility study of alternatives before allowing new tower construction.

5. Because Internet communication has become necessary in the conduct of commerce and provision of services in the county, promote countywide wireless Internet service (WiFi).

6. Encourage exploration of municipally owned telecommunication facilities to furnish wireless service to all areas of the county.

Agricultural, Natural, and Cultural Resources Element Land Resources B. Minimize encroachment and adverse impacts of utilities and transportation facilities on land and water resources in Dane County. Wildlife Resources F. Before approving any changes in zoning, consider the impact on wildlife habitat, potential locations of rare plant and animal species and archeological sites. J. Preserve and enhance wildlife habitats through cooperation on acquisition and management of wildlife habitat in Dane County, maintaining large areas of open space in the county, and minimizing the disturbance caused by development.


4. Radio Frequency Engineering Summary & Recommendations The county’s RF engineering consultant, Evans Associates, reviewed the proposed tower to determine compliance with the county communications tower ordinance. The analysis, completed by Ralph Evans, found that the proposal satisfies the minimum standards of the county’s tower ordinance. The county’s RF engineering consultant recommends the following conditions, should the town board and ZLR committee approve the CUP application:

1. A copy of the FCC required radiation calculations should be provided according to Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) Bulletin 65 and its revisions.

2. A statement of compliance concerning the inspection of the erected tower by a registered professional tower engineer should be provided.

3. A statement from Magnum AND a professional tower engineer should be provided detailing the number and type of co-locaters that could be supported by the tower. The statement should also verify that the following minimum set of co-locators could be supported:

a. Four 4-bay 150 MHz. antennas centered at 400 feet with 7/8” transmission line.

b. Four Cellular/PCS antenna arrays (six antennas mounted on the tower without platforms) at 200 to 250 feet with six 7/8” transmission lines. If meeting this condition requires a tower with a greater visual impact, consideration should be given to mitigation measures such as using a solid rod tower for reduced face size.

c. An equipment shelter should be used that can be expanded to house the equipment for these antennas.

4. A statement should be provided that the proponent and the tower erector will be responsible to install “ice breakers” and “preform clips” on the guy wires for extra safety8.

5. 10’ fences with razor wire should be installed to secure the guy anchors and tower base.

Should the committee ultimately decide to approve the proposal, the consultant’s recommendations should be included as enforceable conditions of approval on the conditional use permit.


5. Preliminary Staff Analysis The proposed site is approximately 2,000 feet south of Old Stage Road. The property is adjacent to a significant woodland area to the southeast, farmlands to the west, and numerous rural residential properties to the east and north. The property is located within one mile of two large tracts of publicly owned natural resource areas: the WI DNR-owned Badfish Creek State Wildlife Area (to the east), and the USFWS-owned Harvey’s Marsh Waterfowl Production Area. DNR and USFWS staff have expressed concerns with the potential impact of the tower on migratory bird species and waterfowl. USFWS has produced siting guidelines for communications towers that are intended to mitigate, to the extent possible, the potential negative impacts on migratory bird species. These guidelines have been provided to the committee for consideration. As noted above, neighboring property owners have raised numerous concerns and objections to the proposal. Staff will continue to consult with outside experts and research the numerous issues raised by neighbors and others, including the potential impacts on migratory bird species and the nearby resource areas. Additional information and recommendations will be provided to the committee prior to consideration of the petition at the next work session. As significant opposition is expected to be presented at the public hearing, and because the town has not yet acted, staff recommends postponement at the 3/8/11 meeting per the committee’s rules and procedures.

Badfish CreekState Wildlife Area

US Fish& Wildlife Area

Anthony BranchFishery Area

(/14

ÆÿA

Old Stage Road

Old Stone RoadCent

er Road

Lake K

egonsa

Road

Union Dane Road

Oak Rid

ge Roa

d

Oak Hill Road

Flint Ro

ad

North Union Road

Hildreth

Road

Bi gl ow Ro ad

Frankl

in Road

Shady Willow Road

Game R

idge Tr

ail

Casara Road

Gallagher Lane

Lake K

egonsa

Road

²

0 1,700 3,400850 Feet LegendProposed

Public Land (Existing)

Perennial Stream

Intermittent Stream

Constructed Drainage

Wetlands > 2 acres

Petition 10275CUP 2175

Stoughton Farms

Proposed Tower

624 Water StreetPrairie du Sac, WI 53578 608.644.1449 phone 608.644.1549 fax

WBKY Board SubmitallCoverletter.doc 1 of 1

April 10, 2011 Town of Rutland Chairman Dale Beske [email protected] SUBJECT: DANE COUNTY CUP #2157 WBKY FM TOWER/STOUGHTON FARMS Dear Mr. Beske: A number of questions have been posed by the Town of Rutland regarding our tower construction and rezoning application. In response to this we have compiled answers to these questions and provided supplemental information. A list of this information is as follows:

WBKY - Rutland Tower Ordinance Review WBKY – Dane County Ordinance 10.255 (2) (h) (1-6) Review WBKY - Response to Chairman Beske Questions WBKY - Zoning Drawings 04/08/2011 WBKY - Tower Photo Simulations 04/08/2011 WBKY - Adjacent Properties Figure

We expect that our response and supplemental information satisfies any outstanding questions. However, if additional clarification is required please let us know prior to our April 19th Town Meeting. Considering the time between now and then we would hope to receive any questions by next Thursday April 14th so we could try and prepare and issue information to the board prior to the meeting. Sincerely, Edge Consulting Engineers, Inc.

David Lyshek, P.E. Project Manager Cc: Dane County Senior Planner Majid Allan, [email protected]

624 Water Street Prairie du Sac, WI 53578 608.644.1449 phone 608.644.1549 fax

RutlandOrdinance_ComplinaceStatement.doc 1 of 3 3/22/2011

WBKY BROADCAST TOWER TOWN OF RUTLAND ORDINANCE NO. 12.5 REVIEW

The following provides an outline of the related Rutland Ordinance. It has been formatted to sequentially follow the ordinance for ease of review. Comments with respect to our proposed project have been hi-lighted in red italicized font. The body text is initiated at Section 1 which addresses the findings and purpose of the ordinance. It then moves on to Section 7 which addresses the standards and conditions for evaluating a proposal under this ordinance. SECTION 1 1) 1 Findings and Purpose of Ord. 12.5: We feel that our proposal is consistent with the intent and purposes of

the Rutland Tower Ordinance. a) Ensure that Town receives adequate information to properly evaluate We feel we have been compliant

with this requirement. . b) Create a standard review process. – We have been following the standard review process. c) To accommodate communication companies while protecting public health, safety, and general

welfare - We comply by meeting Federal and State reviews and requirements. There are general welfare benefits such as broadcast coverage for general lifestyle enhancement and information/entertainment, Emergency Alert System and Amber Alert service that accompanies broadcast, general emergency communication and public notice. Applicant has also had dialogue with local Law Enforcement Officials and Fire Chiefs and has pledged that during catastrophic events, the FM station would stand at the ready to provide extensive on-going broadcast assistance from their command centers. Documented community/government support has also been provided.

d) To facilitate an appropriate pattern of tower sitings and avoid potential negative impacts. Although we would prefer to co-locate on an existing structure, none meet our elevation and location requirements required to avoid interference concerns. We comply by having selected a candidate with significant offsets to adjacent properties and the right-of-way. In addition, significant visual screening is available due to existing tree-lines and the tower has been located near an existing quarry. The property is currently used for agricultural purposes.

e) Preserve the Towns remaining agricultural land use. – We comply. Although the proposed tower is on an agriculture property the majority of the development is on a fallow portion of the land and limited ground disturbance is anticipated. Following the installation of our tower the property shall continue to be used for agricultural purposes with our development occupying approximately .04% of the currently tilled field.

f) Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties. We comply having selected a site location that is offset from property lines, utilizes existing tree-line screening, and being located near the existing quarry.

SECTION 7 7) Changes to Zoning District Boundaries:

a) Standards to consider I. Is the change in zoning consistent with Land Use Plan? Yes – the proposed zoning change is from

one agricultural district to another (A-1 to A-2). The proposed parcel is 15.5 acres. 8.8 acres is currently fallow field which is where the tower base, equipment building, and (4) of the (6) guy anchors shall be located. The remaining 6.7 acres shall be continued to be harvested along with the adjacent fields. Only (2) guy anchors shall be located within this area. As a safety precaution they shall be located within a secured fence approximately 3’ x 22’ long (66 sqft each). This relates to only 0.04% of the 6.7 tillable acres being occupied by our installation. Not only is the zoning change consistent, but the future practices shall be consistent with ongoing activities.

RutlandOrdinance_ComplinaceStatement.doc 2 of 3 3/22/2011

II. Is the tower needed at the proposed site for the provision of wireless services? The proposed tower shall be for FM Broadcast purposes. In accordance with the Dane County ordinance provisions shall be made to accommodate additional communications co-location.

III. Are preferred sites available? No – See Evans Report 1) Existing Tower Structures- None available due to limited height. 2) Town or school district lands None available with adequate space and within the non-interfering

broadcast window. 3) Private lands where towers will not interfere with activities or aesthetics on the site. As described

above, the proposed tower shall not substantially interfere with existing activities (agricultural) The selected location is considered a preferred site as aesthetic impacts are limited by existing wood lines, offsets to the right-of-way and adjacent properties as well as its close proximity to an existing quarry.

4) Residential area towers that would use camouflaging techniques: steeples, lights, etc. A residential area tower is not being proposed.

IV. Whether the proposed structure would endanger health and safety due to failure or falling ice. Would the tower endanger health and safety (failure, falling ice) The remote location and code required design standards will ensure that there is not legitimate health and safety concern. A fall radius and design criteria letter prepared by ERI has also been provided. In accordance with the Evans study recommendations #4, ice breakers and preform clips shall be installed to address ice related concerns.

V. Would the tower cause objectionable noise, glare, physical activity or effects that will impair peaceful enjoyment of neighboring properties? Remote location (360’+ to East PL, 400’ + to South PL, 2000’+ North to Old Stage Rd., 1300’ to West parent property line) and existing wood lines will ensure that these concerns are mitigated as much as practical. After initial construction site activities will typically be limited to a WBKY official visiting the site once per week to confirm equipment is accurately matching remote control readings. Related noise from the base building would primarily be limited to air ventilators and relate to less noise than a typical residential development. The tower is proposed to be a galvanized structure which is dull gray in color which typically limits glare.

VI. The extent that sight lines from existing homes and roadways would be adversely affected. The remote location and existing wood lines to the south, east, a

Documents

DANE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 10 ZLR... · 2011. 5. 5. · April 12, 2011 NOTE: These minutes reflect the notes of the recorder and are subject to correction and approval at a