GOVERNMENTAL BODY:       WAUPACA COUNTY SHORELAND ZONING ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

DATE:                                            TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 2013

PLACE:                                          ROOM 1068, COURTHOUSE

                                                         811 HARDING ST., WAUPACA, WI

TIME:                                             12:30 P.M.

 

MEETING MINUTES

                                                                                                                       

OPEN SESSION

 

1.                  Call Meeting To Order

 

Chair Dennis Kussmann called the meeting to order at 12:30 p.m. 

 

2.                  Roll Call

 

Shoreland Zoning Advisory Committee Members Present:  Chris Klein (Little Hope Millpond/Town of Dayton), Bruce Golding (Little Hope Millpond/Town of Dayton), Kay Ellis (Chain O’Lakes Property Owners Association), Richard Mann (Lake Leader Representative), TJ Tooley (Pigeon Lake), Bob Van Epps (Lake Leader Representative/Weyauwega Lake), Dennis Kussmann (County Board/Planning & Zoning Committee), John Penney (County Board/Planning & Zoning Committee), Bob Ellis (County Board/Planning & Zoning Committee), Patricia Craig (County Board/Board of Adjustment/South Branch of the Little Wolf River), David Johnson (County Board/Board of Adjustment/Waupaca River), John Skyrms (Old Taylor Lake Association), Kent Gibbs (Stratton Lake Association President), Joe Udoni (Realtor), Bob Underberg (Chain O’Lakes Property Owners Association), James Loughrin (County Board/Board of Adjustment), Terry Murphy (Iola Lake District/County Board/Planning & Zoning Committee), G. Robert Flease (County Board/Wolf River) and Dennis Timm (Landscaper/Waupaca River).

 

Shoreland Zoning Advisory Committee Members Excused:  Terry Martin (Architect) and Tom O’Day (Waupaca & Wolf River).

 

Others present:  Gerald Murphy (County Board), Dale Trinrud (Town of Farmington) and Bob Olson (Waupaca River).

 

Staff Present:  Ryan Brown, Jean Gliniecki, Jeff Henneman and Jason Snyder.

 

3.                  Chair Kussmann read the Open Meeting Statement, “This meeting and all other meetings of this committee are open to the public.  Proper notice has been posted and given to the press in accordance with Wisconsin Statutes, so the citizenry may be aware of the time, place and agenda of this meeting.”

 

4.                  Approve Agenda As Presented

 

Bob Underberg motioned to approve the agenda as presented.  The motion was seconded by Bob Ellis.  Motion carried unanimously. 

 

5.                  Approve and Sign Minutes from the February 12, 2013; February 26, 2013 and March 12, 2013 meetings. 

 

Patricia Craig motioned to approve these minutes as sent out.  The motion was seconded by Bob Underberg.  The motion was carried.

 

6.                  The Committee continued their review of the proposed amendments to the Waupaca County Shoreland Zoning Ordinance.   A memo was handed out for the proposed revisions to the nonconforming structures section of the Shoreland Zoning Ordinance.

 

Patricia Craig motioned to approve Sec. 8.33.  The motion was seconded by Chris Klein.  Motion carried. (References need to be revised to be consistent with the current Waupaca County Shoreland Zoning Ordinance.)

 

8.33 Shoreline Setback Nonconformities of Principal Structures Between 35 Feet and Required Setback

                          2)  Principal Structure Between 50 Feet and Required Setback

A principal structure which is nonconforming as to shoreline setback and which is located between 3550 feet from the ordinary high water mark and the required setback may be expanded provided under the following parameters:

No expansion is permitted within 50 feet of the OHWM;

a)               All expansion is located on the landward side of the existing structure, wherever practicable;

b)               The overall footprint of the enclosed nonconforming principal structure (living space) after expansion does not exceed 1700 square feet;

c)               Impervious surface standards of Section 6.16 are complied with;

d)              Only one expansion over the life of the structure is permitted;

e)               Expansion shall not include a new basement under an existing structure or conversion of a crawlspace to a basement but a basement may be constructed under a new addition and;

f)                Expansion must comply with all other ordinance provisions including mitigation requirements.

g)               As an alternative to expansion under Section 8.32(2)a-g above, an additional story no larger than the footprint of the original structure and not exceeding 28 feet in height may be permitted.  Height shall be measured from the lowest exposed point of the structure to the peak of the roof.

 

1)      VERTICAL EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.

An existing principal structure that was lawfully placed when constructed but that does not comply with the required building setback per Section 7 may be expanded vertically, provided that all of the following requirements are met:

a)      The use of the structure has not been discontinued for a period of 12 months or more.

b)      The existing principal structure is at least 35 feet from the ordinary high-water mark.

c)       Vertical expansion is limited to the height allowed in section 4.3

d)     The county shall issue a permit that requires a mitigation plan that shall be approved by the county and implemented by the property owner by the date specified in the permit. The mitigation plan shall meet the standards found in section 8.34.

e)      All other provisions of the shoreland ordinance shall be met.

2)      EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE BEYOND SETBACK.   An existing principal structure that was lawfully placed when constructed but that does not comply with the required building setback under Section 7 may be expanded horizontally, landward or vertically provided that the expanded area meets the building setback requirements per Section 7 and that all other provisions of the shoreland ordinance are met. A mitigation plan is not required solely for expansion under this paragraph, but may be required per Section 6.22.

3)      REPLACEMENT OR RELOCATION OF NONCONFORMING PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE An existing principal structure that was lawfully placed when constructed but that does not comply with the required building setback per Section 7 may be replaced or relocated on the property provided all of the following requirements are met:

a)      The use of the structure has not been discontinued for a period of 12 months or more.

b)      The existing principal structure is at least 35 feet from the ordinary high-water mark.

c)       No portion of the replaced or relocated structure is located any closer to the ordinary high-water mark than the closest point of the existing principal structure.

d)      The county determines that no other location is available on the property to build a principal structure of a comparable size to the structure proposed for replacement or relocation that will result in compliance with the shoreland setback requirement per Section 7.  The setback reductions in Section 5.4 shall be utilized in determining location availability.

e)       The county shall issue a permit that requires a mitigation plan that shall be approved by the county and implemented by the property owner by the date specified in the permit. The mitigation plan shall meet the standards found in section 8.34, include enforceable obligations of the property owner to establish or maintain measures that the county determines are adequate to offset the impacts of the permitted expansion on water quality, near-shore aquatic habitat, upland wildlife habitat and natural scenic beauty. The mitigation measures shall be proportional to the amount and impacts of the replaced or relocated structure being permitted. The obligations of the property owner under the mitigation plan shall be evidenced by an instrument recorded in the office of the County Register of Deeds.

f)        The county shall issue a permit that requires that all other structures on the lot or parcel that do not comply with the shore-land setback requirement per Section 7 and are not exempt under Section 5.5 to be removed by the date specified in the permit.

g)       All other provisions of the shoreland ordinance shall be met inclusive of Section 5.4

 

 

 

Bob Van Epps motioned to eliminate 8.31(2)(a & b) below. The motion was seconded by TJ Tooley.  Motion carried.  

 

Bob Underberg motioned to amend Bob Van Epps motion to read to eliminate 8.31(2)(a-d) below and end the sentence in 8.31(2) after improved internally.  The motion was seconded by TJ Tooley.  The vote was 14 to 2.  Motion carried.

8.3  NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES

It is the intent of these provisions to balance the public objectives of this ordinance with the interests of owners of nonconforming structures by:

1)      treating structures which are most nonconforming and therefore offensive to the objectives of this ordinance more restrictively than structures which are more nearly in compliance with ordinance provisions; and by

2)      allowing for the improvement or expansion of principal structures essential to the reasonable use of a property provided the adverse effects of such improvement or expansion are adequately mitigated.

8.31       General Provisions. 

1)  Nonconforming accessory structures are limited to ordinary maintenance and repair and such alteration as shall bring them into greater compliance with the terms and objectives of this ordinance.  Such structures shall not be improved or expanded.

2)  Nonconforming principal structures (buildings) may be improved internally. or expanded provided that:

a)         modification or replacement involves no more than 25 percent of the perimeter of the structure or one wall, whichever is greater and

b)         the lifetime total of all expansions is limited to 50 percent of the structure's enclosed footprint which existed at the time the structure became nonconforming except where Section 8.32 and 8.33 allows a lesser degree of expansion.

c)         the associated sanitary system is brought up to current standards for new construction, [justified by increased loading of the system and authorized by DSPSCOMM 383.03 & 383.25;

d)        the existing structure (prior to modification or replacement) is constructed on a full foundation that extends at least 4 ft. below ground or one that is certified by a registered engineer or architect to be adequate for the proposed construction;

3) A structure that is nonconforming as to structural or dimensional standards may not be expanded or enlarged so as to increase its dimensional nonconformity.

     4) An existing principal structure that was lawfully placed when constructed but that does not comply with the required building setback per section 7 may be maintained and repaired within its existing building envelope. Maintenance and repair includes such activities as interior remodeling, plumbing, insulation, and replacement of windows, doors, siding, or roof.  Maintenance and repair does not apply to roof pitch modification or window modification resulting in an increase of the waterward façade as specifically addressed in Section 8.32. Structures located in a floodplain shall be subject to the provisions of any applicable floodplain zoning ordinance.

5) Impervious surface standards of Section 6.2 are complied with.

6) In the application of Sections 8.32 and 8.33, a structure shall be regulated by the requirements of the most restrictive zone (0-35 or 35-required setback) in which it is located.

 

8.32       Shoreline Setback Nonconformities.  of Principal Structures Between OHWM and 35 Feet

                                    1)  Principal Structure Between OHWM and 50 Feet

A principal structure which is nonconforming as to shoreline setback and which is located within 35 50 feet of the ordinary high water mark may be improved internally subject to the limitation of Section 8.31(2)(a) but may not be expanded.  Such improvement shall be confined to enclosed portions of the building envelope which existed at the time the structure became nonconforming and shall not include new basements or additional stories. However the following modifications are permitted:

(a)             1)  Replacement of siding and upgrading of insulation;

(b)                        2)  Replacement of roofing and modification of roof pitch provided modification does not exceed a 6:12 (rise to run) roof pitch, modification does not result in a volumetric expansion of living space; and 

(c)    3)  Replacement and modification of windows provided no more than 50% of the waterward façade is converted to glass.  

 

Bob Underberg motioned  to eliminate the above sentence in 8.31(4) and eliminate 8.32(3).  The motion was seconded by John Skyrms.  The motion was carried.

 

Modifications to roof pitch and window placement permitted in Sections 8.32(2 & 3 1b&c) shall require 2 points of mitigation consistent with the provisions of Section 8.32(4)4.

(d Expansion of Existing Commercial Structures provided:

  The structure is limited to the permitted and conditional uses listed for the C-S (Service Commercial) zone;

  Such expansion shall be located on the landward side of the existing structure;

   There shall be no increase in the area of impervious surfaces;

   The area of the expansion may not exceed 1500 square feet;

  No more than 50% of the lot may be occupied by buildings; and

   A mitigation plan under Section 8.32(4) shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval prior to issuances of a zoning permit.  The plan shall be implemented concurrent with expansion of the building.

 

4.23 (2) VISUAL CLEARANCE TRIANGLE  There was some discussion on the visual clearance triangle, but no vote was taken.

 

7.                  Public Comment.  There was none.

 

The Committee decided to meet the fourth Wednesday of every month, so the next meeting date will be Wednesday, May 22, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 1068 (County Board Room) at the Courthouse.

 

8.                  Adjourn

 

At 2:35 p.m., John Penney motioned to adjourn the meeting.  The motion was seconded by Dennis Kussmann.  Motion carried unanimously.