Board of Appeals

VILLAGE OF WAUNAKEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING **Virtual Meeting Via Zoom** September 24, 2020 5:30 PM Meeting Minutes CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Trisha Ives, Ray Hill, Todd Micholic, Leigh Streit, Absent: None Also Present: Tracy Meinholz, Lori Lubinsky, Kaila Macek, Kevin Even, Bryan Kleinmaier, Mike Lawton, Jerry Tierney, Don Tierney, William & Dorothy Blobner, Christa Westerberg, Michelle Burse, Steve “Duke” Raemisch, Tom Burke, Dan Birrenkott, Andrew Parrish, Ann, Bob R, Brandt, Bruce Hoesly, Chris Calkins, Dan, David Dies, DBT, Don D, Douglas Pahl, Duane Ives, Henry Polley, Jen Parish, Jim Costanzo, Julie & Jeff Yeager, Kristin Stark, Laura O, Laura Sowinski, Les Dorscheid, Matt Schreiner, Nila Frye, Paul Wagner, R. Bolton, Rich Endres, Robert Fox, Roberta Baumann, Robin Nickel, Sam Kaufman, Sandy Taylor, SKW, Terri Peterson, Robert Harvey, Theresa Fox NEW BUSINESS 1 Appointment of Chairperson Motion Ives, second by Streit, to appoint Ives as chairperson. Roll call vote: Ives-Aye, Hill-Aye, Streit-Aye, Prior-Aye, Micholic-Aye. Motion carried. 2 Public Hearing and Discussion/Action on appeal of an administrative decision issued by the Waunakee Zoning Administrator informing the Dane County Department of Planning and Development that land in the Town of Westport, but located in Waunakee’s extraterritorial zoning area, may be lawfully used for non-metallic mining activities on the grounds that this is a valid nonconforming use. The subject land is owned by Quincy Ridge, LLC and is located approximately at the corner of Schumacher Road and Easy Street, Parcel Number 0809-042-9000-8 * Ms. Lubinsky stated the nature of the case and explained how the meeting would progress. The Petitioners, the Zoning Administrator, and the Owners of Quincy Ridge Quarry, all stated their cases and answered questions by the Board members. The public was then allowed to provide their statements. Due to time constraints, the parties then agreed to submit post-hearing briefs no later than noon on October 2, 2020. Once these have been received, the Board will reconvene for deliberation and decision. The written decision must be delivered on or before October 24, 2020. No action taken at this time. 3 Public Hearing and Discussion / Action on Octopi Brewing Company’s (“Octopi”) application for an area variance to reduce a side yard setback adjacent to a street so that it may construct an addition to its existing brewery. Octopi is located at 1131 Uniek Drive in Waunakee. Doug Pahl, of Aero Eberle, presented the plans for expanding the existing brewery at 1131 Uniek Drive and answered questions from the Board members regarding the encroachment into the side yard setback. No one from the public requested to speak. Attorney Kleinmaier went over the proposed determination with Board members. Motion Hill, second by Ives, to approve the variance as stated in the order of determination. Ives-Aye, Hill-Aye, Micholic-Aye, Streit- Aye, Prior-Aye. Motion carried. ADJOURN Motion Hill, second by Ives, to adjourn the meeting at 11:14 p.m. Motion carried. Respectfully Submitted: Tracy Meinholz, Board of Appeals Secretary  VILLAGE OF WAUNAKEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZONING VARIANCE Filing Date: __July 28, 2020__________ Parcel #s: _191/0809-091-6735-1_____ Hearing Date: __September 24, 2020_____ Notice Dates: September 10 and 17, 2020_ FINDINGS OF FACT Having heard the testimony and considered the evidence presented, the Zoning Board of Appeals finds the following facts: 1. Applicants: _ Octopi Brewing Company________ 2. The Applicant operates a business (Eliana Lola, LLC, a related business, owns the land) on the following described property that is the subject of the application (address, CSM, or other description): _______________________________________________________________________ ___1131 Uniek Drive, Waunakee, WI 53597_________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 3. The property is presently being used as a _business for the production and packing of beverages and other ancillary uses_____ and is a ____ permitted use in the zoning district in which it is located or a ____ legal-nonconforming use in the zoning district in which it lies. For avoidance of doubt, the property is located in the Waunakee Business Park and is subject to the General Development Plan, including the associated development regulations, for Waunakee Business Park 2. 4. The existing structure ____ does; or ____ does not conform to current zoning standards. 5. The Applicants propose (brief description/attach plans): __The Applicant wishes to expand its brewing capacity by adding a second Brewhouse that will more than double its capacity. Due to the nature of the site and the configuration of the interior elements of the business operations, there is only one viable location for the expansion, per the Applicant. According to the Applicant, the Brewhouse equipment must be installed within close proximity to the existing Brewhouse and interior mechanical equipment. More information is contained in the Application, which is part of the packet for the Zoning Board of Appeals and is hereby incorporated into these findings of fact. __________________ 6. The Applicants request an [use] [area] variance to the following section of the Village of Waunakee Zoning Code: __________________________________________________________________________Ge  neral Development Plan for Waunakee Business Park, Section H.2., Exhibit A_ to the GDP (Development Regulations), which governs side yard setbacks for corner lots_____________________________________________________________________ 7. What specific departure from the ordinance is being proposed (refer to the standards of the ordinance): ________________________________________________________________________ The Applicants wish to construct a portion of the Brewhouse expansion in the 30-foot side yard setback required for a corner lot under the General Development Plan for Waunakee Business Park, Section H.2., Exhibit A to the GDP (Development Regulations). Please see the map on page 27 of the Zoning Board of Appeals packet for a picture._______________________________________________ CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Based on the above findings of fact, the Board draws the following conclusions: A. Is the variance consistent with the purpose and intent of the regulations for the district in which the development is located? Yes __X_ or, No ____. Explain. __The standard side yard setback for the Waunakee Business Park is 20 feet. The 30-foot requirement in this case results from the property being a corner lot. The new side yard setback with the variance granted will be 20 feet, which is consistent with the standard side yard setback. Further, allowing for a 20 foot side yard setback in this instance is consistent with the purpose and intent of the General Development Plan as the property will continue to be used for a permitted purpose. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ B. Owing to special conditions, will a literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance result in an unnecessary hardship? For an area variance, an unnecessary hardship exists if compliance with the strict letter of the restrictions governing area, setbacks, frontage, height, bulk, or density would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose or would render conformity with such restrictions unnecessarily burdensome. For a use variance, an unnecessary hardship exists if the applicant demonstrates that without the variance the applicant has no reasonable use of the property. Yes _X__ or, No ____. Explain. __In this case, an unnecessary hardship exists if the Applicant is required to comply with the 30-foot side yard setback. Specifically, compliance with the side yard setback would unreasonably prevent the Applicant form using the Property for a permitted purpose. The property is currently used for the production and packing of beverages and other ancillary uses, which is permitted. The Applicant wishes to expand its brewing capacity  by adding a second Brewhouse. Due to the nature of the site and the configuration of the interior elements of the business operations, there is only one viable location for the expansion. The Brewhouse equipment must be installed within close proximity to the existing Brewhouse and Brewhouse mechanical equipment, specifically the boiler equipment. This way the new equipment can take advantage of the existing distribution infrastructure within the facility that connects all of the vessels, packaging, and cleaning equipment. This is a vast network of process piping and redundancies would be very costly. The Brewhouse expansion is limited on the West by the existing in-ground wastewater treatment infrastructure and the electrical switchgear and electrical entrances into the building. Relocation of these items is prohibitively expensive. There are two driveway entrances serving the service court which allow articulated trucks to enter at the north, make a wide arc, and back into the loading docks. Therefore, the maximum depth of the new Brewhouse addition must be limited to the South to allow this truck turning motion to occur so truck traffic related to loading and unloading is limited to the site. Because the corner of the lot is not a right angle, the building, aligned parallel to the main frontage (Uniek Drive) is out of alignment with the Prairie View Road frontage, so any expansion aligned with the current Prairie View frontage grows nearer the setback the deeper it becomes. With limitations to the West and South, an encroachment occurs on the Southeast corner of the proposed expansion. ______ ________________________________________________________________________ C. Is the hardship unique to the property? Note that the hardship must be due to exceptional, extraordinary, or unusual circumstances or conditions applying to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district and that are not of a recurring or general nature. Yes _X__ or, No ____. Explain. __ Because the corner of the lot is not a right angle, the building, aligned parallel to the main frontage (Uniek Drive) is out of alignment with the Prairie View Road frontage, so any expansion aligned with the current Prairie View frontage grows nearer the setback the deeper it becomes. With limitations to the West and South, an encroachment occurs on the Southeast corner of the proposed expansion. Further, there are other limitations on the property, explained in Section B. above, that also create a unique hardship (e.g., the location of existing utility structures. ________________________________________________________________________ D. Is the hardship self-created? Note that the hardship cannot be self-created and that no variance is to be granted solely based on economic gain or loss. Yes ____, or No __X_. Explain.  __No. The Applicant has not create the hardship as discussed in Sections B. and C. above. __________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ E. Will the variance create a detriment to adjacent property or materially impair or be contrary to the purpose and spirit of this ordinance or the public interest? Yes ___, or No _X___. Explain. __No. The variance will have limited, if any, impact on adjacent property and will not materially impair or be contrary to the purpose and spirit of the Business Park General Development Plan or the public interest. The property will continue to be used for a permitted purpose. Further, Village of Waunakee planning staff believe that one benefit of granting the area variance will be improved truck turning movements on the property, thereby benefitting public safety. __________________ ________________________________________________________________________  ORDER AND DETERMINATION On the basis of the above findings of fact, conclusions of law and the record in this matter the Zoning Board of Appeals for the Village of Waunakee orders the requested area variance is granted subject to the following conditions: __The 30 foot side yard setback for the property (which is a corner lot) is reduced from 30 feet to 20 feet for the side of the property adjacent to Prairie View Drive for the sole purpose of allowing the Applicant to construct the Brewhouse Expansion. Further, the Brewhouse Expansion shall be constructed consistent with the site plan approved by the Village of Waunakee Plan Commission. _______________________ ________________________________________________________________________ The Director of Public Works is directed to issue an area variance permit incorporating these conditions. Construction, if any, for which a variance is granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals shall be completed within one year or the variance shall become null and void. Extension for exercise of the permit or privilege may be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals upon written request by the applicant. This order may be revoked by the Zoning Board of Appeals after notice and opportunity to be heard for violation of any of the conditions imposed. This decision may be appealed by filing an action in certiorari in the Dane County Circuit Court within 30 days after the date of filing of this decision. The Village of Waunakee assumes no liability for and makes no warranty as to reliance on this decision if construction is commenced prior to expiration of this 30-day period. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS /s/ Trisha Ives /s/ Tracy Meinholz Signed __________________________________ _____________________________ Trisha Ives, Acting Chairperson Tracy Meinholz, Clerk Dated: ___September 24, 2020_ Filed: __September 28, 2020__