Planning, Zoning and Land Records Committee

Minutes (114 KB)

                                      Sauk County Planning, Zoning and Land Records Committee
                                                                        April 26, 2011

PZLR Committee Members Present: Lehman, Ashford, Gaalswyk, Halfen, Nobs

Committee Members Absent: None.

Chair Lehman called the PZLR committee to order at approximately 9:00 a.m.

The committee discussed the agenda. Gaalswyk spoke of moving item 6a to item 8a, under the Surveyor report. Lehman spoke of a request from Schauf to remove item 9a from the agenda. The committee wished to leave it on the agenda and discuss it. Motion by Gaalswyk, seconded by Nobs, to adopt the agenda with the move of item 6a. Motion carried 4-0 with Ashford absent at this time.

Motion by Gaalswyk, seconded by Halfen to adopt the minutes of April 14 2011. Motion carried 4-0 with Ashford absent at this time.

Public Comment: None.

Ashford now present.

Communication: Lehman asked about Thiessen and commenting about the Reedsburg Airport.

Lehman spoke of a copy of a letter received from Planning and Zoning revoking a special exception permit for Danny Gingerich. Steward explained.

Department Update – Mapping

Pate appeared and provided a copy of a department update report. He spoke of the redistricting, the migration of GIS data, a new ArcGIS data website versus the MapGuide/Mpower site. Halfen asked about the number of hours supplied by staff, as reported in the update. Pate explained the new projects that they are currently working on that is adding a significant amount of time.

Motion by Gaalswyk, seconded by Halfen to approve the vouchers in the amount of $10,080.02. Motion carried 5-0.

Department update: Register of Deeds

Bailey appeared and provided a monthly report and output measures. He spoke of the first quarter and the department at about 25% of budget at the end of the first quarter. Halfen asked how the timeshare documents compare to other years. Bailey explained he feels it is normal.

Motion by Gaalswyk, seconded by Ashford, to approve the vouchers in the amount of $4,332.65. Motion carried 5-0.

Department update: Surveyor

Dederich appeared and stated he does not have any vouchers for the committee today. He also provided copies of a letter/request for payment from Driftless Area for remonumentation/coordinates. He then spoke of the process and the issues he is having with the request and the work that has been done.

Gaalswyk spoke of the standards set by other, when compared to Driftless. Dederich explained.

Halfen asked about the standard. Dederich stated he has contacted other surveyors about what they feel the standards are, and they all agree that you go by the state standards. Halfen asked if Driftless is not aware of the standards. Dederich points to the copy of the email. Halfen believes that no bounties should be paid out that do not meet the 1:50000 standard. Dederich also spoke of bad corners and not doing proper investigation into the corners.

Krueger asked about the standards. Halfen explained there is a code of ethics for surveyors and requirements to get licensed. Halfen recommends that Dederich make it very clear that anyone that participates in the bounty program that they meet the 1:50000 standard.

Krueger asked that the document being drafted be reviewed and approved by Corporation Counsel. Dederich stated that after he finishes the document he will send it to Corp Counsel. He also spoke of how significant the work is and the necessity to do it correctly.

Ashford asked if Driftless found existing monuments or did he actually place them. Dederich stated both. However with the monuments that were found, the coordinates that were provided were incorrect. Some of the new monuments were placed in the wrong location.

Ashford asked about the existing monuments found and why those would not be paid for. Dederich stated it is the coordinates that are paid for, not the existing monuments.

Ashford asked if surveyors contact Dederich before doing a bounty request. Dederich stated they do have to contact him and receive his approval and explained the process.

Motion by Halfen, seconded by Gaalswyk, due to the fact that 50% of the corners being in error, the invoice #404 for $4,000 shall not be paid. Motion carried 5-0.

The Committee then went to public hearing at 10:30 a.m.

Lehman called the public hearing to order at approximately 10:30 a.m. and the members introduced themselves. Mr. Peck appeared by telephone.

This was a Petition by Brad Peck to change the zoning of his property from Resource Conservancy 35 to Recreational-Commercial Zoning District. The land to be affected by the proposed rezone to Recreational-Commercial is located in Section 8, T.8N, R.3E, Town of Spring Green, Sauk County, Wisconsin. Said area to be rezoned contains 8.87 acres more or less.

Brian Simmert gave background information and reviewed the staff report for Petition 2-2011.

Nobs asked about the transfer of property from Sauk County and that it was not surveyed properly so now it needs to be corrected. Simmert explained.

Halfen asked if the property owner has been assessed on the full acreage. Simmert stated he doesn’t know.

Gaalswyk asked when the county sold the property did they get the entire 5 acres. Simmert stated he paid for it, however the survey was wrong.

Halfen asked about the setback distances.

Mr. Peck appearing stated that all structures have been moved out of the setbacks, except for the flagpole structure that they are applying for a variance.

Halfen asked about the fencing. Simmert explained.

Halfen asked about the surrounding properties and doesn’t mention the Hicks property. Simmert stated it speaks of the land use south of the property which mentions the home site.

Halfen asked if they have been notified. Simmert stated they have been notified and they are doing a transfer of lands to clarify the boundary lines.

Mr. Peck, reappearing stated that this is a continuing business and they are just going through with the rezone to come into compliance with the zoning ordinance. He did restate that all buildings that were in the setbacks have been moved or torn down other than the flagpole structure, which will be requesting a variance.

Halfen asked if there is an existing mini golf course and if there is any intention of putting in a driving range. Peck stated they would not be putting in a driving range.

Halfen asked about the go-cart/race track. Peck stated they use gravel and will be a pedal cart track. Halfen confirmed that no motorized cars on the track. Peck stated no motorized vehicles will be used.

Gaalswyk spoke of the transfer/sale of the parcel to the Peck’s and when they agreed to sell that part of the county forest, the Peck family was not able to build what they wanted to build for their ag business/storage building, and not for all the recreational uses and feels that many were misled as to what is happening. Peck stated they did not do the transfer/sale illegally or underhandedly and they needed that land to expand their retail/farm market area, and that is what they did.

Ashford asked why you would be putting in ponds and lakes. Peck stated 2 are already there, one is a quoi pond and a duck pond as well. They are asking for additional ponds out farther to accompany swans.

Lehman asked if he has spoken to the Property and Insurance Committee regarding the land that was not transferred to them in error. Peck stated that it wasn’t a purchase but a swap of lands.

Lehman confirmed the pedal track. Peck stated it will be a tri-cycle track and the kids will race on the tri-cycles, not a motorized vehicle.

Halfen asked why they are providing a permit for a go-cart race track if they are not going to do that. If it is a pedal track, then don’t ask for the special exception permit for the go-cart track, and allow for the pedal track. Simmert explained the Board of Adjustment process.

Halfen stated he requests that the condition be forwarded to the Board of Adjustment that the pedal track be no more than that and it is not allowed for a motorized track use.

Seeing as no one else wished to appear, Chair Lehman closed the public portion of the hearing at 11:00 a.m. and went into deliberation.

Motion by Halfen, seconded by Gaalswyk to approve the rezoning with the requirement that a condition be requested to the Board of Adjustment that the track be used as a pedal track only and not for go-carts.

Department Update: Planning and Zoning

Discussion on the merger.

Steward appeared and stated that his last day will be May 6th. Halfen stated that the members were told that Mark’s last day will be determined by the start date of the newly hired Director and asked why that is not happening. He also spoke of the structure of the newly created department and the process that is happening, which is not the process they were told.

Gaalswyk stated that he felt that in order for Mark to remain as a subordinate to the new Director that would take additional finances. Halfen stated that he agrees, however the decision on the structure of the new department would be made with the input from the new Director, and that is not how it’s being done. He is frustrated with the process being taken is not the process that they were told of and feels there is a lot going on behind the scenes and someone is making all the decisions and is not a group/committee decision.

Ashford stated it was an idea, but no structure was set into stone.

Nobs stated the process troubles him as well.

Ashford stated she doesn’t believe the committee has the authority to set structure and is up to the Administrative Coordinator. Halfen questioned that without Committee approval or County Board approval. Ashford stated she felt she could.

Nobs stated that he feels bad that the Committee members that were not allowed to be part of the interview process were strongly encouraged to not come to the interviews and feels that the Administrative Coordinator was so adamant that it was open, yet he was told he couldn’t come and would like to have been a part of the interviews to help make his decision on the newly hired, rather than being told what he should think and how they should vote.

Halfen stated that he did participate in the selection of interviews and he did not rank Brent as the number one applicant and how he ranked applicants was never part of the discussions that took place afterwards during the selection and appointment process. He stated he has nothing against the new Director, but the process taking place and things happening behind the scenes is what he has a strong problem with.

Halfen requested that the Chair pursue the issue with the Administrative Coordinator that there is an interim director appointed between Mark’s last day and the start date of the new Director.

The Committee then discussed the BOMC. Ashford forgotten that there was 2 pots of $10,000 and that there was 2 resolutions that stated differently how to use the money. The committee discussed Templin not being able to attend the meetings due to a conflict, however the new Director will be able to attend meetings and continue to provide support for the BOMC, which can be funded out of the $10,000 received from HoChunk in 2010 and carry forward.

Motion by Halfen, seconded by Gaalswyk, to direct Planning and Zoning to use the money to support the BOMC and for staff to bill the BOMC for staff time from the 2010 grant received by HoChunk. Motion carried 5-0.

Motion by Gaalswyk, seconded by Ashford to adjourn.

Respectfully submitted,


Joel Gaalswyk, Secretary