land conservation and zoning committee

Transcription

LAND CONSERVATION AND ZONING COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Date & Time of Meeting: Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 12:30 p.m.
Meeting Location: Large Conference Room, 210 River Drive, Wausau 54403
Land Conservation and Zoning Committee Members: James Seefeldt - Chair; Alan Kraus - Vice-chair; Jean Maszk, Sandi
Cihlar, Jacob Langenhahn, Richard Duerr, Kelly King - FSA Member
Marathon County Mission Statement: Marathon County Government serves people by leading, coordinating, and providing
county, regional, and statewide initiatives. It directly or in cooperation with other public and private partners provides
services and creates opportunities that make Marathon County and the surrounding area a preferred place to live, work, visit,
and do business.
Conservation, Planning and Zoning Department’s Mission Statement: To protect our community's land and environment
because the economic strength and vitality of our community is dependent on the quality of our resources. Through
leadership, accountability, community engagement and collaborative partnerships we promote thoughtful and deliberate use
of resources and innovative solutions to ensure Marathon County has healthy people, a healthy economy and a healthy
environment today and tomorrow.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Call meeting to order
Request for silencing of cell phones and other electronic devices.
15 minute public comment
Approval of August 4, 2015 LCZ Committee minutes
5. Review and possible action, possible recommendation to County Board for consideration
A. Town of Rib Mountain – Zone changes (3) pursuant to §60.62(3) Wis. Stats.
6. Policy discussion, and possible action.
A. Preliminary Plat review - Kraus Acres (Darlene Kraus, Jerry Schmitt, Paul & Clover Schmitt) – located in part of the
NE¼ NE¼, Section 15 Town of Cleveland – Tim Vreeland, Surveyor
B. Zoning Comprehensive Revision updates
C. Eastern Lakes Management Plans: Request to develop implementation strategy
D. Town of Halsey Coordination Plan
7. Educational presentations / outcome monitoring reports, and possible action
A. Private On-site Waste Treatment System (POWTS) changes due to Budget Act 55
B. Wildlife Damage Abatement and Claims
C. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)/Farm Service Agency (FSA)
D. Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
E. Department Update
(1) Pheasants Forever TYE No-till Drill rental form
(2) Animal Waste Storage and Nutrient Management Ordinance: update community engagement
(3) Heart of America’s Dairyland Agricultural Enterprise Area: update UW-Madison study community engagement
8. Next meeting time, location, agenda items, future topics:
Future agenda items: October 2015
A. Funding options for Private On-site Waste Systems (POWTS) for economically disadvantaged citizens
B. Farmland Preservation – Ineligible claimants making claims
Next scheduled meeting: Tuesday October 6, 2015, 12:30 p.m., 210 River Drive
9.
Announcements and Requests
10. Adjournment
Any person planning to attend this meeting who needs some type of special accommodation in order to participate should call
the County Clerk’s Office at 715-261-1500 or e-mail [email protected] one business day before the
meeting.
SIGNED
FAXED TO:
News Dept. at Daily Herald (848-9361), City Pages (848-5887),
Midwest Radio Group (848-3158), Marshfield News (715 387-4175),
TPP Printing (715 223-3505)
Date:
Time:
By:
August 28, 2015
9:55
L. Moritzen
a.m.
Presiding Officer or Designee
NOTICE POSTED AT COURTHOUSE:
Date:
Time:
By:
a.m. / p.m.
Marathon County
Land Conservation And Zoning Committee Minutes
Tuesday August 4, 2015
210 River Drive, Wausau WI
Attendance:
Member
Present
Not present
James Seefeldt............................X
Alan Kraus .................................X
Jean Maszk .................................X
Sandi Cihlar ...............................X
Jacob Langenhahn ......................X
Richard Duerr ....................................................... X (excused)
Kelly King..................................X
Also present: Rebecca Frisch, Paul Daigle, Lane Loveland, Jeff Pritchard – CPZ; Jim Tharman – USDA/APHIS; Amy
Neigum – NRCS; James Stephens
1. Call to order – Called to order by Chairman Seefeldt at 12:30 a.m. at 210 River Drive, Wausau.
2. Request for silencing of all cellphones and other electronic devices.
3. Public comment – None
4. Approval of July 7, 2015 LCZ Committee minutes
Action: Motion / second by Langenhahn / Cihlar to approve the minutes from the July 7, 2015 meeting. Motion carried
by voice vote, no dissent.
Some agenda items were taken out of order to accommodate those in the audience.
5. Public Hearings, possible action, possible recommendation to County Board for consideration
A. David Zoromski – A-2/1 General Agricultural & M-1 Light Industrial to A-2/1 General Agricultural – Town of
Halsey
Discussion: Loveland was sworn in. He testified that the Zoromski parcel currently has two zoning districts and they
wish to have the entire parcel returned to agricultural zoning. The staff report included uses permitted in the A-2/1
and M-1 districts. Surrounding properties are mostly agricultural. Staff is unable to confirm consistency with the
Town of Halsey Comprehensive Plan as they have not adopted one, as required by state statutes as a guide for zoning
and subdivision regulations. The town instead adopted a Coordination Plan, which has been discounted by the
Attorney General as not meeting the requirements of a Comprehensive Plan. The County does not have a copy of the
Halsey Coordination Plan. Committee could disapprove on the basis of no local comprehensive plan. The application
fits within the county’s farmland preservation plan and is consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan and the
county’s future land use map for the Town of Halsey. Committee agreed the application met all 7 rezone standards.
Action: Motion by King / Kraus to recommend approval of the Zoromski rezone to the County Board. Motion
carried by voice vote, no dissent.
Follow through: Forward to County Board for action at their next regularly scheduled meeting. Staff will contact
Corporation Counsel for direction on proper procedure for future applications where a town has no local
comprehensive plan. Staff will try to acquire a copy of the Halsey Coordination Plan.
B. John and Anne Mieska – A-2/2 General Agricultural to M-1 Light Industrial – Town of Reid
Discussion: Loveland testified that Mieskas purchased a parcel which had an existing residence and storage units.
The area with the storage units was separated by survey and they are requesting that parcel be rezoned to M-1 Light
Industrial. The staff report included uses permitted in the A-2/2 and M-1 districts. Surrounding properties are mostly
agricultural, with about 120 acres of M-1 and M-2 in the same section. The site is included in the county’s farmland
preservation plan. The town recommends approval of the application, citing it is consistent with the town’s
comprehensive plan. Committee agreed the application met all 7 rezone standards.
Action: Motion by Langenhahn / Maszk to recommend approval of the Mieska rezone to the County Board. Motion
carried by voice vote, no dissent.
Follow through: Forward to County Board for action at their next regularly scheduled meeting
C. Town of Plover – adoption of County Zoning and map
Discussion: Town of Plover is adopting County Zoning. The major land use in the town is A-1/9 Agricultural (9 acre
minimum). Daniel and Jennifer Hegewald, parcel ID 062.2910.182.0985, request their +/-10.5 acre parcel be zoned to
A-1/9 (currently RC on the distributed draft map). Town agrees. Frisch answered questions of James Stephens, Plover
resident who was unable to attend the information meetings. allows the Town of Plover to “test drive” county zoning
and, if not satisfied, can choose not to re-adopt through the comprehensive revision process.
1
Action: Motion / second by King / Maszk to recommend approval of the Plover zoning map as amended (Hegewald
property) to County Board. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent.
Follow through: Forward to County Board for action at their next regularly scheduled meeting.
6.
7.
Review and possible action, possible recommendation to County Board for consideration
A. Town of Wausau – Zone change pursuant to §60.62(3) Wis. Stats.
Discussion: Town of Wausau re-wrote their zoning ordinance, which now must go through county board for
approval. Dean Johnson reviewed the ordinance and determined all was in order. Cihlar had questions about 3
sections of the ordinance. Addressing is done through Marathon County. Town of Wausau is independently zoned.
Action: Motion / second by King / Langenhahn to recommend approval of the Town of Wausau zoning ordinance to
County Board. Motion carried by voice vote.
Follow through: Forward to County Board for action at their next regularly scheduled meeting.
Committee asked that in the future text changes should be presented either in the text, or in a summary sheet.
Policy discussion and possible action
A. State Statute shoreland zoning and POWTS changes
Discussion: Through the state budget process there were additions which may affect Marathon County’s requirement
for a POWTS evaluation prior to a sale of property served by a private septic system, and to shoreland zoning
standards not allowing regulations to be more strict than the State’s. Corporation Counsel Corbett has been asked to
provide legal guidance.
Action: None
Follow through: After consulting with Corporation Counsel, staff will report back to the Committee.
B. Zoning Comprehensive Revision
1) 10 year review – Report: Environmental Resources Committee is endorsing a 10-year review clause into the
revised zoning code, allowing towns to opt-in or opt-out of county zoning every 10 years.
2) Distribution of Title #2 & 3 – Report: Proposed zoning districts have been reduced, about in half, from the
current code. The goal is to have districts which apply to most rural and urban areas. Staff will begin to take the
code out to towns, where comments/suggestions may result in change. Next addressed will be the General
Provisions. County staff will be working with all towns on future zoning mapping.
3) Towns and Villages Association joint meeting update – Report: Task Force members and CPZ staff presented
the comprehensive revision progress at the joint meeting. Work will soon start with the towns and their zoning
maps. Kraus said that county zoning provides towns tools to accomplish their local vision and mission.
C. 2016 DATCP and DNR allocation
Discussion: Daigle presented a slide of preliminary DATCP and DNR 2016 allocations for staffing (up), bond grants
(up) and SEG grants (down). The cumulative result is almost $11,000 less allocation to the county, but there is an
additional $9,244 for staffing grants. Cost sharing to landowners is down.
Follow through: Staff will continue to monitor the allocations.
D. CPZ Department service fees
1) Conservation – Report: Fees last adjusted in 2014. Using 2014 permit numbers, suggested fees may increase
conservation revenues up to $12,000. No increase in fees may result in adjusting future levels of service.
2) Zoning – Report: Fees last adjusted in 2011. Marathon County fees were removed from the 3-year averages in
the chart. Included is a 3-year average of number of permits issued in various permit categories. Marathon
County fees are similar to surrounding counties, but lower than comparable counties.
3) POWTS – Report: Fees last adjusted in 2008. Marathon County fees were removed from the 3-year averages in
the chart. Included is a 3-year average of number of permits issued in various permit categories. Marathon
County fees are similar to surrounding counties, but lower than comparable counties.
Follow through: Staff will continue to monitor department budget and the need for fee increases.
O:\Common\LCZ_comte\Minutes\2015\LAND_20150804_Minutes.doc
2
8.
Educational presentations/ outcome monitoring reports, and possible action
A. USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)-Farm Service Agency (FSA) –
Discussion: Jim Tharman – USDA-Aphis report. 76 people are enrolled in the damage claim program, 31 for deer,
and 45 for turkeys. The number is down from 2014. 20 shooting permits have been issued, most for deer. There have
been more reports of ginseng damage. Upcoming events are a Ginseng Board Field Day, and coordination with apiary
growers. One wolf complaint in northwest Marathon County was confirmed, one was deemed to be coyotes.
Tharman explained phone-in registration, and enrollment criteria.
Amy Neigum – USDA-NRCS report. Two new manure storage facilities are under construction. There are 13
applications that were funded for the Conservation Stewardship Program in Marathon County. The local work group
met (1 of 21 groups) and a main topic of discussion is division and priorities of $12 million of state funds. Neigum
added that it has been a busy construction season.
B. Lincoln County Grazing drill request - Corbett
Discussion: A letter was received from Lincoln County stating they are co-owners of a no-till drill as they were coapplicant on grant requests used for the purchase of the drill. Corbett has requested financial documentation
referenced in the Lincoln County letter and, specificity as to which drill they are referring, including make, year and
serial number.
Action: Consensus of committee for Corbett to continue to pursue information.
Follow through: Corbett will email committee members of progress and/or outcome.
C. Department Update
1) Pheasants Forever No-till Drill
Discussion: Marathon County has formally accepted a no-till drill donated by Pheasants Forever. A change from
the July meeting is that the drill rental fee will be waived to Pheasants Forever only for Chapter projects, and not
to any club member. Drill rental rates are reasonable. Transportation would be by them, and not provided by
CPZ.
Action: Motion / second by King / Langenhahn to accept the drill with the revised rental form presented to the
Committee in September. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent.
Follow through: Staff will revise the rental form for approval at the September meeting.
2) Land and Water Resource Management (LWRM) Plan 5-year update
Discussion: Andy Johnson is currently in Madison presenting Marathon County’s 5-year LWRM update.
North Central Land and Water Conservation Association is meeting on Thursday August 20th for a Lincoln
County tour. Interested committee members should contact Paul Daigle to attend.
9. Next meeting time, location, agenda items and future topics:
Future agenda topics:
Date for next scheduled meeting - Tuesday September 1, 2015, 12:30 p.m., 210 River Drive. Kraus excused.
10. Adjourn – Motion / second by Langenhahn / Maszk to adjourn at 3:10 p.m. Motion carried by voice vote, no dissent.
Rebecca Frisch, CPZ Director
for Jim Seefeldt, Chair
cc:
(via email/web site) LCZ members; County Administrator; Deputy County Administrator; Conservation, Planning, & Zoning; Corporation Counsel;
County Clerk; County Board Members, DATCP, DNR, FSA, NRCS, USDA/APHIS
RF/lm
O:\Common\LCZ_comte\Minutes\2015\LAND_20150804_Minutes.doc
3
STATE OF WISCONSIN
MARATHON COUNTY
TOWN OF RIB MOUNTAIN
)
)
)
REPORT BY
TO COUNTY BOARD ON REQUEST TO APPROVE
THE ZONING AMENDMENTS OF THE TOWN OF RIB MOUNTAIN
TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF MARATHON COUNTY:
The Marathon County Land Conservation and Zoning Committee, having considered the request
to review amendments of the Town Zoning Ordinance filed by the Clerk of the Town of Rib Mountain,
and having heard comments in public session thereon, and being duly informed of the facts pertinent to
the changes proposed, having reviewed the staff's recommendations, and duly advised of the wishes of the
Town, hereby recommends that the County Board, pursuant to §60.62(3), approves the zoning ordinance
and/or zoning map of the Town of Rib Mountain as attached.
Dated this 1st day of September, 2015
Marathon County Land Conservation and Zoning Committee
___________________________________________________
James Seefeldt - Chairman
O:\Common\LCZ_comte\Agendas\2015\9-1-15Packet\RibMtnBB4.doc
STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTY OF MARATHON
)
) SS
)
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, §60.62(3) Wis. Stats. provides that any Zoning Ordinance and/or map adopted by a
Town Board and any amendment thereof shall be subject to the approval of the County Board in counties
having a county zoning ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Rib Mountain has amended their zoning as shown
on the attached report, and
WHEREAS, the County Zoning Committee has duly considered the amendment in public session
on September 1, 2015 and has recommended approval of the amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Marathon County Board of Supervisors
hereby approves the amendment to the Town of Rib Mountain Zoning Ordinance and/or Zoning map as
attached and made part of this record, all of which to be filed with the Marathon County Clerk.
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
March 25th, 2015
Chairman Kevin Mataczynski called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 PM.
Commission members present included Jim Hampton, Laura McGucken, Harlan Hebbe, Tom Steele,
Ryan Burnett. Christine Nykiel was excused. Also present was Zoning Administrator Dan Dziadosz
and Planning Assistant Spencer Houk.
MINUTES:
Motion by Tom Steel to approve the March 11th, 2015 regular planning commission
meeting minutes. Seconded by Harlan Hebbe. Motion carried 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a) Discussion requesting the proactive rezoning and changes to the Future Land Use Map of
the properties addressed 201, 203, 205, 209, 211, 301, 305, and 307 Sunrise Drive from
Suburban Residential- 3 ( Single Family) to Mixed Residential-4(duplex). Legally described as
Big Valley Preserve lot(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. PC Docket # 2015-04
Dan Dziadosz started by explaining that there will be two separate issues that the Planning
Commission will be taking up. First; a modification of the Future Land Use Map, and second the
rezoning of this property from SR-3 to MR-4. Staff explained that there have been previous inquires to
build duplexes on these parcels. The rezoning request before the Commission is primarily for
duplexes, with single family as a permitted use as well. Staff explained the location of the lots to the
Commission in correlation to the surrounding area.
The Commission questioned and commented before opening the Public Hearing. Laura McGucken
questioned the land uses available under MR-4 and the density associated with that land use. Staff
explained there are various land uses available that are listed as conditional uses under MR-4, and that
land use designation allows for a maximum of density of that of a duplex and nothing higher, as a
permitted use.
Public_Comment_Period:
Hank Mulder of 306 Sunrise Drive: Questioned why there is a need to change the land use designation
from Single Family to Multifamily. He also stated that in the past he had attempted to build another
single family home on his property. Stated that he had issues with the potential transient nature of
duplexes, and how that will be addressed.
Terry McCabe of 302 Sunrise Drive: Questioned the size of the lots in correlation to the placing of
duplexes on these lots. How will these duplexes be placed, will they be side by side, or placed on top
of each other. Gene Davis (representing the property owner) stated that they are adequate for the
placement of a duplex, and listed the specific lot widths. Staff answered that they are adequately large
enough to place duplexes on the lots, either side by side or stacked.
John Lang of 206 Sunrise Drive: Inquired about the set back of the lots from the street. Staff stated the
minimum set back is 35 feet.
Roseann Schulz of 308 Sunrise Drive: Questioned if the duplexes are required to have garages. Staff
answered that they will be required to have garages; at a minimum they will be required to have 800
square feet for living space, and 400 square feet for a garage. Questioned why if it wasn’t appealing as
single family housing, what would make it more appealing as multifamily housing.
Tim Boruch of 210 Sunrise Drive: Stated that the notice he received in the mail was the first notice
that he had received, and that it states other notices were posted on other dates. Staff explained that
this required a Class II hearing, a public posting in the week prior, and once the week before in the
newspapers, in addition to the personal mailings.
Gene Davis of 2003 Ridge View Drive: Representing the property owner (Richard Austin), stated the
various dimensions of the lots, including the width and depths of the lots. He stated that the current
offer from the developer is for the lots to stay SR-3, but that when the offer came in it was too late to
remove this item from the agenda. Staff explained the original inquiry for these lots was for duplexes,
and since then there have been multiple inquires.
Public Comment Period Closed
The Commission commented on issues that have been brought up as a result of the public comments.Tom
Steele stated that the Commission must first consider if the MR-4 land use designation is acceptable for
these lots, and is it a reasonable use. The Commission questioned and commented on the issues they need to
consider. Harlan Hebbe stated that the commission has three options; and stated that he would not like to
see eight duplexes in a row. Tom Steele stated that it may be logical to use the MR-4 as a buffer from the
highway, and then transition into SR-3. Laura McGucken suggests designating lots 1, 2, and 3 as MR-4 and
leave the remainder of the lots as SR-3.
Motion by Harlan Hebbe to recommend a change to the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land
Use Map designation of lots 1, 2, and 3 of Big Valley Preserve from Suburban Residential-3 to
Mixed Residential-4. Seconded by Laura McGucken. Motion carried 6-0.
Motion by Harlan Hebbe to recommend a change of the land use designation of lots 1, 2, and
3 of Big Valley Preserve from Suburban Residential-3 to Mixed Residential- 4. Seconded by
Laura McGucken. Motion Carried 6-0.
b) Discussion regarding modifications to the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use Map from Barren to
Outdoor Recreation and change the zoning from Suburban Residential- 2(SR-2) to Outdoor Recreational.
Property is legally described as Lot #1 of Certified Survey map #13792, Volume 60, Page 169, as being
part of Government Lot 2, Section 23, T28N, R7E. This is a vacant parcel of land east of Azalea Road,
south of Sunrise Drive, bounded on the East by the village of Rothschild. Parcel is presently serving the
Wis. River Pedestrian Bridge Trail. PC Docket# 2015-05
Dan Dziadosz brought forth the item for discussion. Staff explained that majority of the lot is not
developable for single family, and described the land uses associated with Outdoor Recreational. The
Committee questioned and commented before opening the public hearing.
Public Comment Period:
Roseann Schulz of 308 Sunrise Drive: Will the primary use of the lot after the land use designation change
remain biking. Staff stated that it will most likely not change in use after the land use change.
Public Comment Period Closed:
Motion by Tom Steele to recommend a change the land use designation from Suburban
Residential- 2 to Outdoor Recreational, legally described as Lot #1 of CSM Map #13792, Vol
60, Pg 169, being part of Gov. Lot 2, Section 23, T28N, R7E. Seconded by Harlan Hebbe.
Motion Carried 6-0.
Motion by Tom Steele to recommend a change to the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use
Map from Barren to Outdoor Recreational, legally described as Lot #1 of CSM Map #13792,
Vol 60, Pg 169, being part of Gov. Lot 2, Section 23, T28N, R7E. Seconded by Harlan Hebbe.
Motion carried 6-0.
CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP(CSM) APPROVALS: NONE
NEW BUSINESS: NONE
OLD BUSINESS:
a) Email correspondence regarding the conditional use review of PC Docket #2013-07; parcel
#34.192807.003 & 004.07. & 008; also known as 6510 Red Bud Road.
Staff brought forth email correspondence from Attorney Shane Vander Waal regarding progress on
the Kocourek Air property. Kevin Mataczynski stated that it is hard to determine if cutting has
begun from the road. Staff stated they are inclined to believe that it has begun. Staff also stated that
the property owner has purchased an additional adjacent lot for reclamation purposes, and will be
importing the overall condition of the properties.
CORRESPONDENCE/ QUESTIONS:
a) Staff introduced a letter regarding the conditional use interpretation from the Towns Attorney and
the Plan Commissions interpretation of that correspondence. Regarding Docket # 2014-28, the UHaul use question. It will be sent to the Other Guys Auto Body & Repair and Beck’s Properties to
outline the Plan Commissions determination.
ADJOURN:
Motion by Tom Steele and seconded by Jim Hampton to Adjourn. Motion Carried 6-0.
Meeting Adjourned at 8:00p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Spencer Houk, Planning and Zoning Assistant.
Regular Town Board Meeting
April 7, 2015
Chairman Allen Opall called the April 7th, 2015 regular meeting of the Rib Mountain Town Board to order
at 6:32 p.m. at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center, 3700 North Mountain Road, Wausau, WI.
Supervisors present were Jim Legner, Fred Schaefer, Gerry Klein, and Peter Kachel.
Also present was Administrator Gaylene Rhoden, Attorney Kevin Terry, Streets/ Parks Superintendent
Scott Turner, Building/Zoning Administrator Dan Dziadosz, SAFER District Fire Chief Steve Meilahn,
Deputy Fire Chief Matt Savage and Planning and Zoning Assistant Spencer Houk.
On April 3rd, 2015 copies of the meeting notice were made available to the media, Town Board, Town
Attorney, and posted at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center.
Public Comment on Town Board Agenda ItemsRoseann Schultz-308 Sunrise Drive- In regards to Town Board item 4.b.: Questioned if the board
was familiar with the area, Town Board members stated that yes they were familiar with the
area. Stated that she is not in favor of the proposed development if it were to include duplexes.
She stated that this was because she was afraid that they would become rental properties.
Heath Tappe- Developer of Big Valley Subdivision- Stated that he is in favor of the Staff
recommendations for the rezoning. Building will begin as soon as road limits come off.
Approve Minutes of the 3/17/2015 Regular Town Board Meeting and the Special Town Board Meeting
of 3/4/2015- Motion by Schaefer/Legner to approve the minutes of the 3/17/2015 Regular Town
Board Meeting and the 3/4/2015 Special Town Board Meeting. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Plan Commission Draft Minutes- None.
Town of Rib Mountain requesting a modification to the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use map and
Zoning Map to change the Land use designation of 201-307 Sunrise Dr. From Sr-3 to MR-4. Legally
described as Big Valley Preserve lot(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. None. PC docket #2015-04.
Staff brought forth the issue. The Board asked what they are dealing with, staff stated that they are
dealing with a land use designation change of the first three lots of the Big Valley Preserve. Chairman
Opall stated that residents were very outspoken that they did not want this change; he suggested
leaving the issue alone. Heath Tappe, the developer stated that he has no intentions of building
duplexes on those lots; however he does like the option of being able to. Supervisor Schaefer stated that
perhaps the Board should leave it alone, and if Tappe cannot sell those lots as a Single Family, the Board
can at a later date bring forth discussion for a change in the land use designation.
Motion by Kachel/ Schaefer to take no action. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Town of Rib Mountain (State of Wisconsin, Property owner), requesting a modification to Town of Rib
Mountain Future Land Use Map and Zoning Map to change the land use designation from Barren to
Outdoor Recreational and change the zoning SR-3 to Outdoor Recreational.
Dan discussed the issue, the board commented and questioned. Motion by Klein/Schaefer to approve
the modification to the Future Land Use Map and Zoning Map to change the land use designation
from Barren to Outdoor Recreational and change the zoning from SR-3 to Outdoor Recreational.
Questioned and Carried 5:0.
Update on MS4 Storm Water Permit Renewal- Scott Turner stated the report has come. Supervisor
Schaefer questioned how much the report costs to put together, Scott stated around $2500.
Update on Lake Wausau Planning Assistance with the Department of ArmyGaylene Rhoden state that since early 2012 the Town Board has been assisting the Lake Wausau
Association in their efforts of cleaning up the lake. At this time the Association requires assistance in the
grant process. This is on the agenda to inform the Board that certain signatures will be required by Town
Staff including the Administrator and Town Attorney. Motion by Schaefer/Klein subject to approval
from Town Attorney for approval of Town Staff to sign necessary documents for Lake Wausau
Association grant process. Questioned and Carried 5:0.
Approval of New HiresSeasonal Public Works-Scott Turner requests the approval to rehire of two seasonal employees,
Sam Falasky and Keegan Coyle. Both employees are not guaranteed full-time status. Motion by
Schaefer/Legner to approve the rehiring of summer seasonal employees Sam Falasky and
Keegan Coyle at the approved wage rate of $11.23/hour. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Temporary Assistant for Finance- In interim period of searching for a Finance Director, it is
requested that Pat Kluz be hired for 24 hours a week at $40/ hour to assist in keeping the
Town’s finances running smoothly. Funding would come from the current Clerk/ Treasurer
budget. Motion by Schaefer/Klein to approve the hiring of Pat Kluz on interim basis for $40/
hour up to 24 hours a week. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Call in Building Inspector- Staff recommends the hiring of Joe Perlock as the Call-In Building
Inspector at a rate of $25/hour. Motion by Klein/Legner to approve the hiring of Joe Perlock as
Call-In Inspector at a pay rate of $25/hour. Questioned and Carried 5:0.
Approval of Revised Personnel Policy 155- Flower & Memorials- Staff requests the increase of $50.00 for
flowers and memorials. Motion by Schaefer/Legner to approve the change the Personnel Policy 155 to
$100. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Approval of Operators License- Attorney Kevin Terry recommends the approval of five operator licenses.
Motion by Klein/Legner to approve the operator licenses for Bradley Chartier, John Depola, Teresa
Ebert, Jordyn Hackbarth, and Robert Hartlich. Questioned and carried 5:0.
ReportsTown Board- Gaylene Rhoden reported the impacts of the elimination of the Personal Property
Tax proposal and its effects. Members decided to have a letter drafted by the Administrator and
signed by Al Opall. Fred Schaefer reported that he had attended a meeting regarding an Active
Senior center and they are looking at potential sites. He also attended various listening sessions
and spoke about the concerns that the Town has with the proposals included in the proposed
State budget. Peter Kachel stated the Sunrise Drive was the only thing that came up for him.
Other Agencies-None
Town Attorney-None
Town Administrator- Written report provided, including the Prevailing Wage.
Building Inspector- Written report. Friends of Rib Mountain and the DNR are pursuing TORM
inspection for the project located in State Park. Town Attorney has been kept in the loop. Scott
Turner has been in touch regarding the failing wall on Rib Mountain Drive, and a letter will arrive
to them shortly.
Streets-Parks Superintendent-Written Report provided.
Director of Community Development- Introduction
Code Enforcement Officer- Written Report provided.
Park Commission- Meeting next week.
Finance and Personnel- No meeting set.
Public Safety- No meeting set.
Public Works- Discussion of 1.5 phase plans on Rib Mountain Drive.
Walkable Community Committee- None.
General Comments-Comment from the general public regarding the trash cans, stated Thank you.
Adjourn- Motion by Kachel/Legner to adjourn at 7:32 p.m. Questioned and carried 5:0.
Respectfully submitted,
Spencer Houk, Planning and Zoning Assistant.
STATE OF WISCONSIN
MARATHON COUNTY
)
)
)
REPORT BY
___________________________________________________
STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTY OF MARATHON
)
) SS
)
RESOLUTION
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
REPORT TO PLAN COMMISSION
FROM:
Steve Kunst, Community Development Director
June 4, 2015
DATE:
SUBJECT: Future Land Use and Zoning Map Amendment, 411 Rainbow Lane; Parcel #34.232807-005001.00.00
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
Town of Rib Mountain
State of Wisconsin, Department of Transportation
PROPERTY ADDRESSE(S): 411 Rainbow Lane
REQUEST: Future Land Use and Zoning Map Amendments to allow for the sale of former State right-of-way
property.
ZONING: Right-of-Way
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Transportation
ADJACENT ZONING: SR-3 (North); UR-8 (East); UR-8 and Right-of-Way (South); and Right-of-Way (West)
NARRATIVE:
The State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation is in the process of selling portions of excessive right-ofway. In order to complete an appraisal, the property located at 411 Rainbow Drive must be zoned something other
than ‘Right-of-Way.’ Any rezoning of the property requires amending the Town’s Comprehensive Plan Future
Land Use Map, currently identifying the property as ‘Transportation.’
PRE-APPLICATION DISCUSSION
This item was discussed at the March 11th Plan Commission meeting as an informal pre-application discussion. At
that meeting, it was recommended by the Plan Commission to zone the property in question as ‘Mixed
Residential’ (MR-4). To ensure the Wisconsin Statute requirement of consistency between the Town’s future land
use and zoning maps, the official Rib Mountain Future Land Use designation for the property needs to be ‘MultiFamily Residential.’ In order to formally recommend any amendments to the future land use or zoning maps, the
Plan Commission must hold a public hearing.
POSSIBLE ACTION
1. Recommend amending the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use Map from Transportation to MultiFamily Residential and the Town of Rib Mountain Zoning Map from Right-of-Way to Mixed Residential
(MR-4) for the property addressed as 411 Rainbow Lane.
2. Recommend amending the Town Future Land Use Map and Zoning Map in a different fashion.
3. Recommend taking no action.
1
June 10th, 2015
Chairman Kevin Mataczynski called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. Other
Plan Commission members present included Harlan Hebbe, Ryan Burnett, Tom Steele, Jim Hampton,
and Laura McGucken. Christine Nykiel was excused. Also present were Zoning Administrator Dan
Dziadosz and Community Development Director Steve Kunst.
MINUTES:
Harlan Hebbe asked that a sentence be added to second paragraph of page ‘3a-2’ of Commissioners
packets (page 2 of the draft minutes) to reflect the intention of Kwik Trip Inc. of having their proposal be
open 24 hours.
Motion by Harlan Hebbe, seconded by Tom Steele to approve the minutes of the May 27th,
2015 Plan Commission meeting, as amended. Motion carried 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING
a. Town of Rib Mountain (State of Wisconsin, Owner), requesting an amendment to the Town
of Rib Mountain Future Land Use Map and Zoning Map to change the future land use
designation from ‘Transportation’ to ‘Multi-Family Residential’ and rezoning the property
from ‘Right-of-Way’ to ‘Mixed Residential’ (MR-4) at the property addressed: 411 Rainbow
Lane; parcel # 34.232807.005.001.00.00; legally described as Pt. of the NE ¼ of the NW ¼,
CSM # 16671, Vol 78 Pg. 20; Doc # 1658672, located in Section 23, T28N, R7E. Docket #201506
Kunst introduced the item and mentioned the Plan Commission had discussed it at their March 11, 2015
meeting. Kunst noted at that meeting it was recommended to rezone the property to Mixed Residential
(MR-4). Kunst noted in order to rezone the property the Plan Commission had to hold a public hearing
as well as amend the Town’s Future Land Use Map from Transportation to Multi-Family Residential.
Laura McGucken asked if the property was considered to have street frontage of two or three sides. Dan
Dziadosz noted the property would be considered to have two street frontage setback requirements,
but would likely still be able to fit a nice duplex or single family home. McGucken noted she felt it best
to handle this item with two separate motions. Chairman Mataczynski asked for any public comment to
be brought forward. No public comment was made.
Motion by Laura McGucken, seconded by Jim Hampton to recommend approval for amending the
Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use Map from Transportation to Multi-Family Residential for the
property addressed 411 Rainbow Lane. Motion carried 6-0.
Motion by Laura McGucken, seconded by Tom Steele to recommend approval for amending the Town
of Rib Mountain Zoning Map from Right-of-Way to Mixed Residential (MR-4) for the property
addressed 411 Rainbow Lane. Motion carried 6-0.
1
NEW BUSINESS:
a. The Morgan Partners LLC. Pre-Application discussion for proposed development at the
properties addressed 4600, 4610, and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive; parcel(s)
#34.152807.001.013.00.00 and 34.152807.001.014.00.00. Docket #2015-13
Kunst introduced the item and described the purpose of a pre-application discussion as being an
informal conversation between a developer/landowner and the Plan Commission intended to be general
in nature. Ed Bowen, Morgan Partners LLC representative, provided an overview of the proposed project
to redevelop the Rib Mountain Travel Center property. Bowen noted a new retail structure is being
proposed to the west side of the property with a smaller restaurant building on the east, adjacent to Rib
Mountain Drive.
Plan Commissioners asked questions related to stormwater management, greenspace, landscaping
points, traffic counts, truck turning movements, signage, types of uses, hours of operation, and parking.
Bowen noted many of those details are still being worked out. Bowen mentioned they are working with
REI Engineering on the stormwater. Steele noted some discrepancies between the plan sets presented
by Morgan Partners and the upcoming Rib Mountain Drive project plans. McGucken noted overall, the
retail and restaurant uses are appropriate, but will come with more traffic. Dziadosz noted some of the
public benefits of the project include a trail connection from the existing trail along HWY 51 down to the
new controlled intersection on Rib Mountain Drive as well as the elimination of the existing 80 foot tall
sign.
b. Gene Davis Pre-Application discussion for potential development of property addressed as
2902 South Mountain Road; parcel #34.162807.016.000.00.00. Docket #2015-12
Kunst introduced the item, noting the discussion would be for the Hall Farm property. Gene Davis
presented the proposal on behalf of the Hall Family. Davis noted it has been a struggle to attract single
family residential development to the front 40 acre parcel adjacent to South Mountain Road. Davis
introduced two potential multi-family apartment layouts ranging from 8-10 buildings containing 12 units
each. Davis mentioned he has witnessed an increase in demand for apartments in both younger and
older generations as well as the need to house workers for Rib Mountain’s retail sector.
Jim Hampton asked what the plan would be for the remainder of the farm. Davis noted he was only
presenting on a portion of the property. Chairman Mataczynski noted concerns of this being a small
project without considering the rest of the property as well as the proposal being uncreative. McGucken
pointed out the challenge in predicting what is going to happen in the future. McGucken noted the
Town’s Future Land Use Map identifies this area as single family residential and what is being proposed
is far from the density of single family development. Additional concerns mentioned by the Plan
Commission included traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety, safety of children attending the school and
visiting the nearby park, and future road access. Davis asked if Rib Mountain simply doesn’t want to see
multi-family development. McGucken noted other areas of the Town have been considered for mixed
use developments, including the area near the Nice As New property.
2
OLD BUSINESS:
Kunst noted he felt it would be best if the Commission were to select a Vice-Chairperson in the event
Chairman Mataczynski was not able to attend a meeting. It was noted that this has previously been
discussed by the Commission, but was not acted upon due to lack of member interest in the role. Hebbe
noted he would volunteer for the position.
Motion by Laura McGucken, Seconded by Jim Hampton to nominate Harlan Hebbe for Vice-Chair of
the Rib Mountain Plan Commission. Vote carried 6-0.
Steele asked for an update regarding the status of the Bone & Joint Clinic landscaping. Dziadosz noted
he had not heard from their representative yet this year, but would get in contact with them in the
coming months.
Kunst noted he had been contacted by a number of residents and Town Board Supervisors who asked
whether the public would be able to speak on the pre-application discussion items. Kunst asked the
Commission if they would like to see a standing “Public Comment’ agenda item on regular Plan
Commission meeting agendas. Overall, the Commission sounded supportive of the idea, but noted there
should be some form of documented procedures. The Plan Commission asked that this idea be placed
on a future agenda for formal action.
Hebbe noted he was contacted by a resident who complemented the Plan Commission on their handling
of the Kwik Trip proposal and review process.
ADJOURN:
Motion by Tom Steele, seconded by Harlan Hebbe to Adjourn. Motion Carried 6-0. Meeting Adjourned
at 8:27 p.m.
3
June 16, 2015
Chairman Allen Opall called the June 16, 2015 regular meeting of the Rib Mountain Town
Board to order at 6:33 p.m. at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center, 3700 North Mountain Road,
Wausau, WI. Supervisors present were Jim Legner, Pete Kachel, and Gerry Klein. Fred Schaefer
was excused.
Also present were Administrator Gaylene Rhoden, Attorney Dean Dietrich, Streets/Parks
Superintendent Scott Turner, Building/Zoning Administrator Dan Dziadosz, Community
Development Director Steve Kunst, and Deputy Fire Chief Matt Savage.
On June 15, 2015 copies of the meeting notice were made available to the media, Town Board,
Town Attorney and posted at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center.
Comments from the Public Related to Town Board Agenda Items – None
Approve Minutes of 6/2/2015 Regular Town Board Meeting and Closed Meeting Minutes from
6/2/15 – Motion by Kachel/Legner to approve the minutes of the 6/2/2015 Regular Town
Board meeting and closed session meeting. Attorney Dietrich noted he had no issue with
approving minutes from a closed session meeting in this situation; but typically, minutes from
closed session meetings would be approved at the next closed session meeting of the Board.
Questioned and carried 4:0.
Plan Commission Daft Minutes – Community Development Director Kunst stated the Plan
Commission met the week prior and heard presentations regarding potential redevelopment of
the Rib Mountain Travel Center and the Hall Farm.
Plan Commission Report & Recommendations – Town of Rib Mountain (State of Wisconsin,
Owner), requesting an amendment to the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use Map and
Zoning Map to change the future land use designation from ‘Transportation’ to ‘Multi-Family
Residential’ and rezoning the property from ‘Right-of-Way’ to ‘Mixed Residential’ (MR-4) at the
property addressed: 411 Rainbow Lane; – Kunst noted the Board had been presented this
information in March and at such time it was recommended to hold a public hearing on the item.
Kunst stated the process was initiated by the State in an effort to sell of excessive right-of-way
property.
Motion by Legner/Klein to approve amending the Town of Rib Mountain Future Land Use
Map from Transportation to Multi-Family Residential and amending the Town of Rib
Mountain Zoning Map from Right-of-Way to Mixed Residential (MR-4). Motion carried
4:0.
Approval of Resolution 15-06 - Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of $2,830,000
General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2015-A – Dawn Gunderson of Ehlers Inc.,
presented handouts related to the Town’s borrowing note. Gunderson noted the resolution being
handed out was titled differently than the agenda item as a result of the bond sale being a lesser
amount. Gunderson noted $2,720,000 would be the principal amount of the issue, rather than the
1
June 16, 2015
originally anticipated $2,830,000. Attorney Dietrich noted the change is not consequential and
the public has clearly been advised of the intent of action to be taken by the Town Board.
Gunderson noted Standard and Poor’s affirmed the Town’s AA bond rating and a copy of the
rating report was included in the packet. Gunderson noted the sale took place earlier that
morning and received bids from six underwriters. The winning bid went to Raymond James
Associates Inc. out of St. Petersburg, Florida. Results of all bids were included in the packet.
Gunderson noted the true interest cost was the determination of the winning bid. Gunderson also
mentioned the market the Town was in results in a premium bid, where underwriters pay a
premium to purchase bonds in exchange for a coupon rate. As a result, the Town receives
additional money upfront, contributing to the Town’s ability to issue less debt.
Gunderson noted the total principle and interest of the issue was $3,108,000, representing
$54,690 less than the planning estimates. Gunderson pointed out the Town also refunded a
previous bond issue as part of this project and as a result were able to save $124,672. Additional
information on the Town’s AA rating was presented, making special note of the Town’s
management and internal practices as strengths. It was noted the AA rating represents a very
strong rating and Gunderson commended the Town for their work.
Motion by Klein/ Legner to approve Resolution 15-06 authorizing the issuance and sale of
$2,720,000 general obligation promissory notes, Series 2015A.
Attorney Dietrich pointed out since the Deputy Clerk was not present, part of the Town Board’s
action will be to have Steve Kunst serve as the Interim Deputy Town Clerk for the purposes of
attesting the resolution on page eight.
A roll call vote was taken. Results are below:
 Peter Kachel – Aye
 Jim Legner – Aye
 Gerry Klein – Aye
 Alan Opal – Aye
Motion carried 4:0
Approval of Resolution 15-07 Adoption of Procurement Policy – Administrator Rhoden noted
the Finance and Personnel Committee met twice on the Policy in an effort to help staff formally
identify when going out for bids/proposals is necessary. Rhoden mentioned the Policy was
primarily based on examples from other communities and allows the Town Board to suspend
sections if they deem necessary.
Motion by Legner/Klein to approve Resolution 15-07, adopting the Town of Rib Mountain
Procurement Policy, subject to attorney review. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Premier Tax: Approval to Proceed Further Investigation - Administrator Rhoden mentioned the
Finance and Personnel Committee reviewed the Premier Tax at their last meeting. Rhoden noted
the Town does not qualify for the tax based on the State Statute definition, but only Wisconsin
Dells and Lake Delton would likely meet those requirements. Rhoden mentioned other
communities in the state have had special legislation passed to implement the tax. The Finance
2
June 16, 2015
and Personnel Committee considered pursuing the Premier Tax alone as well as with
surrounding municipalities. Chairman Opal noted this is a tax on certain goods and must be used
for infrastructure. It was recommended that Rhoden and Klein work on putting together a letter
to neighboring municipalities for their consideration.
Motion by Klein/Legner to proceed further with investigation on the Premier Tax and send
letters to the following neighboring municipalities for consideration: City of Wausau, City
of Schofield, City of Mosinee, Village of Weston, Village of Rothschild, and Village of
Kronenwetter. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Approval of Operator License(s) – Attorney Dean Dietrich noted initial concerns with one of the
applicants, but it was not necessary for Chairman Opal to meet with them at this point in time.
Motion by Legner/Kachel to approve the operator licenses for Amber Bernthal, Dalen
Diederich, Sarah Flatter, Jordyn Hackbarth, Sara Hahn, Carlos Hernandez, Blair
Hubbard, Fredrick Juan, Stephanie Juan, Shirley Kastner, April Kegler (Weaver), Kelly
Knetter, Dorothy Lund, Ryan McFate, Ryan Nowak, Rebecca Shabazz, Tami Shier, Angela
Strangfeld, Dakota Thomae, Renae Tidd, Katie Tucker, Jessica Watts, and Jason Wolf.
Questioned and carried 4:0.
Approval of Annual Appointments – Chairman Opal recommended approving one year
appointments for Town Assessor Greg Schmidt and Town Attorney Dean Dietrich.
Motion by Kachel/Klein to approve annual appointments of Town Assessor Greg Schmidt
and Town Attorney Dean Dietrich. Carried 4:0
Reports Chairman – Chairman Opal noted he received a number of phone calls related to dog at
the trail near Doepke Park. He noted callers are complaining of issues with unleashed dogs and
refuse. Chairman Opal recommended the ordinance regulated the leashing of animals be looked
at by the Public Safety Committee.
Town Board –Supervisor Legner noted the presence of two families of geese near the
Doepke Park Trail. Supervisor Klein asked if a garbage can could be moved from the
baseball diamond at Doepke Park down to the entrance of the new trail.
Other Agencies – Matt Savage, of SAFER, noted he and Chief Meilahn traveled to New
Jersey related to the District’s new ambulance. He noted the project is about two and onehalf weeks behind schedule, but the ambulance is now in the state. Savage also noted the
District recently graduated their motor pump operators to full capability. Chairman Opal
noted the County Board has an informational meeting on Monday, June 22nd.
Town Attorney – Nothing to report.
Town Administrator – Written report provided. Rhoden noted work on the Town Beat is
underway. Rhoden also noted the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point has offered
another intern opportunity for next fall. She mentioned a ribbon cutting ceremony was
coming up for the Quality Inn on Tuesday, June 23rd and she that she will be attending
the annual Wisconsin City/County Managers Association conference. It was also noted
3
June 16, 2015
tennis equipment was purchased with the $250 grant received by the Town for next
year’s program.
Community Development Director – Written report provided. Kunst also mentioned
there were a number of upcoming development projects and the Department is staying
very busy.
Street-Parks Superintendent – Written report provided. Scott Turner mentioned the Town
received approval from the Marathon County Infrastructure Committee to deed the
Gulliver’s Landing property back to the Town. Turner also noted he included additional
background information on the deed restrictions for portions of the Rookery Park
property.
Deputy Clerk– Written report from the Town’s interim Finance Director Pat Kluz was
provided.
Code Enforcement Officer - None
Park Commission –Turner noted they met last week going over the project list and is
awaiting the results of the Stewardship grant application. Klein asked for the status of the
agreement for the landowner with the garden within Town Park property. Turner noted he
has found a few examples on hold-harmless agreements that could be used.
Finance Personnel – Supervisor Klein stated the Committee has not met since the last
Town Board meeting. Rhoden noted a couple of the Town Board agenda items were a
result of the last Committee meeting.
Public Safety Committee – Supervisor Kachel noted they had not met since the last Town
Board meeting, but suggested scheduling a meeting prior to the next Town Board
meeting.
Public Works Committee – None
Walkable Community Committee – Rhoden noted they would not be doing the Bike
Rodeo this year; rather, it’s going to be part of the summer recreation program at both
South Mountain and Rib Mountain Elementary schools.
General Comments – Carole Knapp, 1604 Lily Lane, noted people walking their dogs near the
new Doepke Park Trail are doing so with their dogs off of the leash and do not have control of
their animals. Ms. Knapp noted she fears for her and her neighbor’s safety. In addition, Ms.
Knapp mentioned issues with fecal material from animals walking along the trail. Attorney
Dietrich noted he would review the Town ordinance regulating the leashing of animals and get
back to the Board. Harlan Hebbe noted the hard part of those rules is enforcing them.
Adjourn – Motion by Kachel/Legner to adjourn at 8:42 p.m. Carried 4:0.
4
June 16, 2015
Steve Kunst
Community Development Director
Note: These minutes are not to be considered official until acted upon at an upcoming regular
meeting, therefore, they are subject to revision.
5
STATE OF WISCONSIN
MARATHON COUNTY
)
)
)
REPORT BY
___________________________________________________
STATE OF WISCONSIN
COUNTY OF MARATHON
)
) SS
)
RESOLUTION
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
FROM:
June 18, 2015
DATE:
SUBJECT: Request for rezoning to Unified Development District (UDD) and General Development Plan
(GDP) Approval for the Rib Mountain Travel Center property
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
MP-3 Development LLC
Rib Mountain Travel Center
PROPERTY ADDRESSE(S): 4600, 4610, and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive
REQUEST: Rezoning from Urban Commercial to UDD and GDP approval for potential redevelopment of the
Rib Mountain Travel Center.
ZONING: Urban Commercial (UC)
ADJACENT ZONING: UDD (North); UC (East); UC (South); and Right-of-Way (West)
FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Commercial
NARRATIVE:
Following up on the June 10th pre-application discussion, MP-3 Development LLC is seeking to rezone the Rib
Mountain Travel Center site located at 4600, 4610 and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive to UDD as well as approval for
a General Development Plan. The proposal includes a retail building on the west portion of the property adjacent
to I-39/US 51 and a smaller building identified at the last meeting as a restaurant to the east, adjacent to Rib
Mountain Drive.
ZONING STANDARDS NOT MET BY THE PROPOSAL:
The RMMC requires the listing of zoning standards not being met by a proposed UDD request for the purpose of
helping the Plan Commission by providing information necessary to determine the relative merits of the project in
regard to the private vs. public benefits. Below is a list of the staff identified code non-compliances:
 Parking as depicted on the plan sets are at a 5 foot setback, code calls for 10 feet
 Signage
o The east building elevation of the retail structure exceeds the code maximum
o Retail and free standing sign areas appear to be substantially in excess of typical code allowances
o Initial sign plans for the proposed restaurant structure appear to be in excess of code allowances
 Proposing multiple signs on all four sides of the structure
 Also proposing window signage
PUBLIC BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSAL:
 Redevelopment of an older site along the town’s primary retail corridor
 Removal of a nonconforming pylon sign along I-39/US HWY 51
 Improved pedestrian and bicycle access through connection with existing multimodal trail to the west
 Improved pedestrian and bicycle safety through new sidewalks and pavement markings
 Increased tax base and employment opportunities
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
With this being a multi-phased approval process (GDP/Rezone followed by a Precise Implementation Plan (PIP)),
staff identified a number of items still needed for a final approval, including:
 Identifying any outdoor display areas
 A lighting plan detailing photo metrics of the site
1
4b-1





Detailed landscaping plan (for PIP) including charts/tables of points required by code vs. the points
provided with the proposal
Detailed stormwater management plan and subsequent approval from the Town Engineer (for PIP)
A development erosion control plan showing site coordination with other site businesses (Days
Inn/McDonalds)
Provide bicycle and pedestrian accommodations from the existing trail tunnel along I-39/US-51 DOT
right-of-way, southeast to the south property line and easterly to the signalized intersection. The
accommodations should include an 8 foot wide path/sidewalk to the Days Inn access. From this point
east, an 8 foot wide sidewalk will connect at the intersection
The access road shall be a minimum of 30 feet wide with the curb and gutter and storm sewer parallel
with the south property line. The access road will need to utilize the access easement south of the site
east-west property line. Assess road pavement marking, turn lane, lengths, bicycle and pedestrian
accommodations will be reviewed by the Town’s traffic engineer.
*It is anticipated that most of the above noted questions/concerns will be addressed at the PIP public hearing,
requested for July 8th, 2015.
POSSIBLE ACTION
1. Recommend approval of the GDP and rezoning to UDD for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650
Rib Mountain Drive
2. Recommend approval of the GDP and rezoning to UDD with conditions/modifications for the properties
addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive
3. Recommend denial of the GDP and rezoning to UDD for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650
Rib Mountain Drive
4b-2
2
FROM:
July 10, 2015
DATE:
SUBJECT: Precise Implementation Plan for the Rib Mountain Travel Center redevelopment proposal
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
MP Development 3 LLC
Rib Mountain Travel Center LLC
PROPERTY ADDRESSE(S): 4600, 4610, and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive
REQUEST: Request for Precise Implementation Plan approval for redevelopment of the Rib Mountain Travel
Center. Parcel #(s) 34.152807.001.013.00.00 and 34.152807.001.014.00.00
NARRATIVE:
The Plan Commission recommended approval on June 24th and Town Board subsequently approved the GDP and
rezoning request on July 7th for the Rib Mountain Travel Center. The applicant now seeks a recommendation on
the Precise Implementation Plan (PIP) for the proposed development. Part of the Plan Commissions responsibility
is to determine whether the PIP is reasonably consistent with the previously approved GDP.
ZONING STANDARDS NOT MET BY THE PROPOSAL:
Rib Mountain Municipal Code (RMMC) requires the listing of zoning standards not being met by a proposed
UDD request for the purpose of helping the Plan Commission by providing information necessary to determine
the relative merits of the project in regard to the private vs. public benefits. Below is a list of identified code noncompliances:
Parking
The Zoning Code calls for a 10 foot setback from parking areas to the property line. The proposal calls for 5 feet.
Building Height
The proposed Dicks Sporting Goods east elevation is proposed at 42 feet in height. The Urban Commercial
zoning district has a maximum height of 35 feet. RMMC allows for the maximum height to be extended to 45 feet
via conditional use approval.
Signage
Signage for commercial properties can be determined through a number of different methods and is split into two
separate categories; business and free standing. Every lot is allowed to hold one group freestanding sign. The
proposal calls for two lots, meaning two freestanding signs could be allowed for the development. Total allowable
business signage is determined by whichever method (street frontage, building frontage, or building façade) yields
the highest numeric value. Business signage has been split below for each proposed building.
Dicks Sporting Goods:
 Allowable – 484 ft2 per Building Frontage Method
 Proposed – 434 ft2
Red Robin
 Allowable – 122 ft2 per Street Frontage Method
 Proposed - 431 ft2
Total Free Standing Signage: 305 ft2
1
Landscaping
A landscape plan was supplied as part of the PIP submittal. Staff has asked that revised plans be submitted
identifying the points required and points provided for each applicable section of the landscape code. In addition,
it was asked that these be broken up by each proposed parcel as it is understood the development will result in
separate parcels for each building. The original submittal calculated the provided points for the entire
development, rather than two parcels. Depending on where lot lines fall in relation to proposed landscape features,
there may be a need for some form of maintenance agreement.
Photometric - RMMC limits the amount of illumination as a result of exterior lighting to 0.5 footcandles at the
property line. As proposed, the development exceeds the Town maximums on the south, east and north property
lines. Considering the commercial nature of the area, staff does not see a major issue; however, consideration
should be made for the hotel property to the south.
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE GDP AND THE CURRENT STATUS:
As part of the General Development Plan review, staff identified a number of items necessary for the PIP. Below
is the list of items and the current status.
 Identifying any outdoor display areas
o The developer provided the locations of proposed outdoor display areas at the previous
Plan Commission meeting.
 A lighting plan detailing photo metrics of the site
o A detailed photometric plan has been provided. Please note the submitted plan exceeds the
Town maximum requirements (0.5 footcandles) on nearly every side. However, considering
the commercial nature of the area, this may not be a major concern.
 Detailed landscaping plan including charts/tables of points required by code vs. the points provided with
the proposal
o A landscape plan was submitted to staff showing total landscape points provided by the
entire development. Staff subsequently requested a revised plan to identify the specific
points provided for each required area as well as code required points for each property.
This allows for identifying where the proposal meets, exceeds, or does not meet code
requirements. In addition, it is assumed the buildings will be on separate lots, so it makes
sense to point out the specific landscaping points provided by each parcel.
 Detailed stormwater management plan and subsequent approval from the Town Engineer
o Staff received a detailed stormwater management report and is awaiting the outcomes of
the review from the Town engineering consultant. Staff does expect to receive input from
the consultant early next week.
 A development erosion control plan showing site coordination with other site businesses (Days
Inn/McDonalds)
o Construction plans including erosion control and site coordination have been submitted.
The Town Streets and Park Superintendent is to working closely with project engineers to
finalize these plans.
 Provide bicycle and pedestrian accommodations from the existing trail tunnel along I-39/US-51 DOT
right-of-way, southeast to the south property line and easterly to the signalized intersection. The
accommodations should include an 8 foot wide path/sidewalk to the Days Inn access. From this point
east, an 8 foot wide sidewalk will connect at the intersection.
o Staff has met with adjacent property owners to the south regarding this idea, as anything
constructed in this area will require approval of all parties (due to existing shared
ingress/egress easements). This project is considered outside the scope of the proposal.
 The access road shall be a minimum of 30 feet wide with the curb and gutter and storm sewer parallel
with the south property line. The access road will need to utilize the access easement south of the site
east-west property line. Assess road pavement marking, turn lane, lengths, bicycle and pedestrian
accommodations will be reviewed by the Town’s traffic engineer.
2
o
The PIP plans do include the increased access road width as well as curb and gutter. The
Town Streets and Parks Superintendent is working with project engineers on various site
plan specifics.
FINDINGS OF FACT
RMMC states the PIP shall be reviewed per the requirements of a conditional use ‘Findings of Fact.’ Below,
please find the six questions representing the Plan Commission’s finding of fact along with initial staff
interpretation.
1. How is the proposed conditional use (the use in general) in harmony with the purposes, goals, objectives,
policies and standards of the Town of Rib Mountain Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter, and any other
plan, program, or ordinance adopted, or under consideration pursuant to official notice by the Town?
The Town’s Comprehensive Plan discusses commercial uses generally in a number of sections.
Applicable examples include: revitalizing older industrial and commercial areas within the Town,
encouraging new commercial development in appropriate locations, and proactively planning for
commercial uses.
2. How is the proposed conditional use (in its specific location) in harmony with the purposes, goals,
objectives, policies and standards of the Town of Rib Mountain Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter, and
any other plan, program, or ordinance adopted, or under consideration pursuant to official notice by the
Town?
The Future Land Use map within the Town’s Comprehensive Plan identifies the project area as
‘Commercial.’ In addition, the proposal represents a redevelopment effort of one of the Town’s
older, intensive uses along its primary commercial corridor. The Comprehensive Plan includes
goals and objectives specifically related to redevelopment, including: identifying areas to target
for redevelopment, directing more intensive future growth to areas that are contiguous to
existing developed areas, directing heavy commercial uses to locations that will note degrade the
Town’s natural or residential living environment, and establishing commercial areas that
provide goods and services in a convenient, safe, and attractive environment.
3. Is it likely that the proposed conditional use, in its proposed location and as depicted on the required
site plan (see (3)(d), above), will have an adverse impact on the use of adjacent property, the
neighborhood, the physical environment, pedestrian or vehicular traffic, parking, public improvements,
public property or rights-of-way or other matters affecting the public health, safety, or general welfare,
either as they now exist or as they may in the future be developed as a result of the implementation of
the regulations or recommendations of this Chapter, the Comprehensive Master Plan, or any other plan,
program, map, or ordinance adopted or under consideration pursuant to official notice by the Town or
other governmental agency having jurisdiction to guide growth and development?
The proposed redevelopment of the Travel Center includes a number of overall property and
public improvements. Proposed stormwater management is an improvement from the existing
site, both for Rib Mountain Drive and neighboring properties. Improved bicycle and pedestrian
access from the existing trail are being proposed through sidewalk and pavement markings. The
combination of interior traffic flow and Town sponsored improvements to Rib Mountain Drive
will also provide improved vehicular movement throughout the area. It is not anticipated that
the proposed uses will result in adverse impacts to adjacent properties or the neighborhood as a
whole. The proposed uses are more consistent with existing uses throughout the corridor.
3
4. Does the proposed conditional use maintain the desired consistency of land uses, land use intensities,
and land use impacts as related to the environs of the subject property?
As mentioned previously, the proposed uses are more consistent with the existing uses
throughout the Rib Mountain Drive corridor. Retail and restaurant uses better match the fabric
of the area in comparison to the existing truck stop operation.
5. Is the proposed conditional use located in an area that will be adequately served by, and will not
impose an undue burden on, any of the improvements, facilities, utilities or services provided by public
agencies serving the subject property?
The project area is adequately served by sewer and water and is located along the Towns
prominent commercial arterial. In addition, the Town’s Street and Parks Superintendent
continues to work with project engineers to coordinate this proposal with the upcoming Rib
Mountain Drive improvements (traffic signage, pavement markings, stormwater, sewer, water,
curb and gutter, etc.).
6. Do the potential public benefits of the proposed conditional use outweigh any and all potential adverse
impacts of the proposed conditional use (as identified in Subsections 1. through 5., above), after taking
into consideration any proposal by the Applicant and any requirements recommended by the Applicant
to ameliorate such impacts?
The proposal is to redevelop one of the Town’s older, intense commercial uses with uses more
appropriate for the area. Additional improvements associated with the proposal include,
stormwater management, traffic flow, bicycle and pedestrian access, and parking.
POSSIBLE ACTION
1. Recommend approval of the Precise Implementation Plan for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and
4650 Rib Mountain Drive
2. Recommend approval of the Precise Implementation Plan
properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive
with conditions/modifications for the
3. Recommend denial of the Precise Implementation Plan for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650
Rib Mountain Drive
4
July 15th, 2015
Vice-Chairman Harlan Hebbe called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. Other
Plan Commission members present included Christine Nykiel, Ryan Burnett, Tom Steele, Jim Hampton,
and Laura McGucken. Kevin Mataczynski was excused. Also present was Community Development
Director, Steve Kunst and Building Inspector, Dan Dziadosz.
MINUTES:
Motion by Tom Steele, seconded by Jim Hampton to approve the minutes of the June 24th,
2015 Plan Commission meeting, as presented. Motion carried 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING
a. MP Development 3, LLC. Request Precise Implementation Plan approval for the properties
addressed 4600, 4610, and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive; parcel(s) #34.152807.001.013.00.00
and 34.152807.001.014.00.00. Docket #2015-13
Steve Kunst noted staff considered the materials submitted as part of the Precise Implementation Plan
(PIP) to be in substantial conformance with the previously approved General Development Plan. Kunst
identified the zoning code non-compliances associated with the proposal, as outlined in the zoning code.
These non-compliances related to parking setbacks, building signage for the Red Robin site, landscaping,
the east elevation of the Dick’s Sporting Goods building, and photometrics at the project property lines.
Plan Commissioners questioned the amount of signage on the Red Robin building, noting it greatly
exceeded typical code allowances. Ed Bowen, of MP Development 3 LLC, presented on behalf of the
development. Bowen asked for clarification on the sign definition as it related to two logos proposed to
be painted on the Red Robin building. Kunst read the sign definition from the Zoning Code aloud to the
group. It was determined the code definition identified the painted logo as a sign. Christine Nykiel asked
whether Red Robin has used this building prototype elsewhere. Bowen noted this was the new
prototype and mentioned it is being used in suburban Milwaukee and urban Minneapolis.
Jim Hampton suggested selecting a more reasonable number of square feet for allowable signage at the
Red Robin development and providing the company the ability to assign signage accordingly. Laura
McGucken noted she would like to see the proposed pylon sign stay within the 35 foot maximum height
requirement in accordance with the recent sign code amendments. McGucken noted a significant
amount of existing signage is going away with the proposal. Tom Steele noted the Plan Commission
needs to supply the developer with an allowable number for the Red Robin signage. McGucken noted
some additional checks and balances should be in place in addition to the maximum number, suggesting
staff approval. Bowen noted he and the Red Robin representatives should have enough time to come up
with something in advance of the next Town Board meeting.
Discussion took place regarding the height of the pylon sign along I-39/US HWY-51. Bowen noted they
attempted to keep the same vision plane with the Texas Roadhouse pylon sign to the south. Bowen also
mentioned pylon sign height can be a thorny issue when dealing with national retail users. Nykiel noted
she did not necessarily have a problem with the proposed pylon height.
1
Kunst read a number of minor site plan comments from Streets and Parks Superintendent, Scott Turner.
Kunst pointed out REI, the engineering consultant for the project, has been working closely with Turner
on a number of items related to the Town’s Rib Mountain Drive improvement project. Kunst noted a
stormwater management plan had been submitted and approved by the Town engineering consultant
for the development.
Kunst went through the six questions found within the zoning code, also applicable to conditional uses,
described as the ‘findings of fact,’ along with staff considerations. Nykiel noted she concurred with the
staff input to the findings of fact, including the nature of the project, its benefits, and consistency with
the Town’s planning.
Motion by Tom Steele, seconded by Christine Nykiel to recommend approval of the Precise
Implementation Plan for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650 Rib Mountain Drive with the
following conditions: 1) Allow up to 250 ft2 of signage for the Red Robin building, subject to staff
approval; and 2) Final resolution of engineering issues by staff. Motion carried 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS: NONE
OLD BUSINESS:
a. Discussion and possible action regarding a ‘Pubic Comment’ standing agenda item
Kunst noted the recommendation from the previous meeting regarding this item was to bring back the
documented Town Board rules for their similar standing agenda item. Kunst noted he consulted with
the Town Administrator and Clerk and was informed the Town Board does not have any documented
procedures for Public Comment. Kunst noted some common rules include limiting the amount of time a
person may speak, having speakers sign in, and reinforcing the fact that this is a comment period, not a
question and answer session.
Nykiel noted comments would not have to relate to specific agenda items. Hebbe noted the sign in
requirement typically deals with the comments at the beginning of a meeting related to specific agenda
items. Hampton noted he believes any public organization should listen to its citizens. The decision was
to place a ‘Public Comment’ agenda item at the end of the Plan Commission agenda for the remainder
of the calendar year.
Kunst noted he had been approached by a resident looking to hold quiet yoga classes in their backyard
and was wondering whether that would be permitted. Kunst noted the code mentions health and fitness
establishments as ‘Indoor Commercial Entertainment,’ which is a conditional use in all commercial
districts and not permitted in residential areas. Kunst noted he was looking for Plan Commission
direction, as a quiet yoga session could be viewed slightly differently than other forms of health and
fitness establishments. Nykiel asked if this is considered a home based occupation. Kunst noted that is
2
why he is bringing this to the Plan Commission, because other than auto repair shops any use can be
applied for as a home occupation through the conditional use process. McGucken noted she is not in
favor of commercialism in residential districts. Nykiel noted under the indoor commercial entertainment
use, the operation would have to be indoors as well. Kunst noted that was correct. The general
consensus was a this is a commercial venture and would not be looked upon favorable in residentially
zoned areas.
Kunst mentioned he had received a number of inquiries from local nail salons looking to obtain a liquor
license. Kunst noted most, if not all, establishments serving alcohol in Rib Mountain are considered as
‘Indoor Commercial Entertainment’ within the Zoning Code and are a conditional use in all commercial
zoning districts. Kunst noted he believes this to be a change of use in most instances, meaning either it
would require a conditional use in commercial zoning districts or a modification to an approved UDD.
McGucken noted the nail salons are not really in the business of selling alcohol, it would be more of an
accessory use, unless they would actually install a bar. Nykiel asked that staff find out how the City of
Wausau handles similar situations, Hebbe agreed. Burnett noted customers wouldn’t be sitting at a nail
salon all night drinking; it would simply be during the time they would be at the salon otherwise. Dan
Dziadosz noted the Department of Revenue’s stance on licensing was as long as establishments serve
two, three ounce pours of alcohol, they would not need a full liquor license. The general consensus was
to only require conditional use approval for those electing to pursue a full liquor license.
Burnett brought up the topic of ‘hybrid’ zoning districts between residential and commercial zoning
districts. This would essentially limit the types of uses to professional type services and office buildings.
Burnett noted this sort of idea may help limit the sort of applications, like the Kwik Trip proposal,
adjacent to residential areas. McGucken noted the Town doesn’t have any regulations related
specifically to 24 hour operations, but it’s something that should be addressed.
ADJOURN:
Motion by Tom Steele, seconded by Laura McGucken to Adjourn. Motion Carried 6-0. Meeting
Adjourned at 8:53 p.m.
3
July 28, 2015
Vice Chairman Fred Schaefer called the July 28, 2015 regular meeting of the Rib Mountain
Town Board to order at 6:33 p.m. at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center, 3700 North Mountain
Road, Wausau, WI. Supervisors present were Jim Legner, Pete Kachel and Gerry Klein.
Also present were Administrator Gaylene Rhoden, Attorney Dean Dietrich, Streets/Parks
Superintendent Scott Turner, Building/Zoning Administrator Dan Dziadosz, Community
Development Director Steve Kunst, Deputy Clerk Michelle Peter and Fire Chief Matt Savage.
On July 24, 2015 copies of the meeting notice were made available to the media, Town Board,
Town Attorney and posted at the Rib Mountain Municipal Center.
Comments from the Public Related to Town Board Agenda Items – None
Approve Minutes of 7/7/2015 Regular Town Board Meeting – Motion by Klein/Legner to
approve the minutes of the 7/7/2015 Regular Town Board. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Plan Commission Daft Minutes – Reviewed only.
Plan Commission Report & Recommendations – MP Development 3, Precise Implementation
Plan for the properties addressed 4600, 4610 and 4650 Rib Mountain Dr. Dkt# 15-13 – Mr.
Kunst stated the Plan Commission recommended approval of the PIP request subject to a
maximum 250 sq ft of signage and resolution of engineering matters.
Vice Chairman Schaefer spoke about the enhanced bike/pedestrian accommodations to this area
and working with the developers. A representative of MP Development 3 spoke on their
willingness to work together on the project and work through potential options. Motion by
Klein/Legner to approve the Precise Implementation Plan subject to the completion of
bike/pedestrian accommodations, maximum of 250 square feet for signage and final
resolution of engineering issues with staff. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Approval of New Hires:
Seasonal Public Works – Street Superintendent Turner stated that Mr. Schertz has already
begun employment with the department to fill a vacancy. Motion by Legner/Kachel to
approve the new hire Tyler Schertz for seasonal summer employment at the approved
wage of $10.88/hour. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Director of Finance/Clerk – Administrator Rhoden stated the Town Board had meet in
closed session tonight pertaining to employment of Jessica Trautman for the position. Motion
by Klein/Kachel to approve the hiring of Jessica Trautman at the starting wage of $62,000
at Grade 13. In addition the recommendation is to provide 10 days for vacation and 12
days for sick leave. The offer of employment is subject to successful background check
including a credit check and pre-employment physical. Questioned and carried 4:0.
1
July 28, 2015
Authority for Street/Parks Superintendent to Approve Change Orders for Rib Mountain Dr,
Phase 1.5 Project - Motion by Kachel/Legner to authorize the Street/Park Superintendent
to approve change orders for the Rib Mountain Drive, Phase 1.5 project not to exceed
$5,000. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Approval of Mountainberry Ct Developers Agreement– Vice Chairman Schaefer stated the
Public Works Committee met earlier this evening. The agreement includes a letter of credit that
will automatically renew for the repayment period of six years. Mr. Shnowski was in attendance
and stated he would get a credit letter within a week. Motion by Kachel/Legner to approve the
Developers Agreement for Mountainberry Court. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Approval of Approval of Mountainberry Ct Stromwater Easement -.This item was reviewed
tonight also. The Town is seeking the easement for maintenance of the stormwater drainage
area. Motion by Kachel/Legner to approve the Mountainberry Court Stormwater
Easement for the Town to conduct maintenance of the facilities. Questioned and carried
4:0.
Approval of Pavement Bids –
Robin Lane West – Motion by Kachel/Legner to approve the contract for Robin Lane
West Road Improvements to American Asphalt in the amount of $60,060. Questioned and
carried 4:0.
Mountainberry Court – Motion by Kachel/Legner to approve the contract for
Mountainberry Court Road improvemnets to American Asphalt in the amount of $25,634.
Questioned nad carried 4:0.
Approval of Purchase of Right of Way for Rib Mountain Drive, Phase 1.5 –Tabled
Approval of Operator License(s) – Attorney Dean Dietrich noted no concerns with the
applicants.. Motion by Klein/Legner to approve the operator licenses for Kyle Bowman,
Cynthia Carpenter, Bradley Chartier, Michelle Hartel, Amanda Kuhn, Amy McCaslinFink, Terrah Revoir and Nicole Turner-Hall. Questioned and carried 4:0.
Reports Chairman – None
Town Board –None
Other Agencies –Chief Matt Savage, of SAFER, provided a run packet for the month of
June. The new ambulance has arrived.
Town Attorney – No formal report. He is still working through the State Budget for
interpretation.
Supervisor Klein left 6:50.
2
July 28, 2015
Town Administrator – Written report provided. Finance meeting scheduled for next
Tuesday.
Community Development Director – Written report provided. Mr. Kunst stated the staff
will be reviewing options for filling the building inspector position.
Street-Parks Superintendent – Written report provided.
Deputy Clerk– Interim Finance Director provided a report.
Code Enforcement Officer – None
Park Commission –None
Finance Personnel – Meeting scheduled for next Tuesday.
Public Safety Committee – None
Public Works Committee – Met tonight.
Walkable Community Committee – Rhoden noted the committee revised the bike rodeo
this year which was incorporated into the Summer Playground program. It was a huge
success.
General Comments – None
Adjourn – Motion by Kachel/Legner to adjourn at 6:53 p.m. Carried 4:0.
Submitted by
Michelle Peter
Deputy Clerk
Note: These minutes are not to be considered official until acted upon at an upcoming regular
meeting, therefore, they are subject to revision.
3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Land Conservation and Zoning Committee (LC&ZC)
FROM:
Dean Johnson, Zoning Administrator
DATE:
September 1, 2015
SUBJECT:
QUESTION: WHY DO WE ZONE IN MARATHON COUNTY?
At a recent Land Conservation and Zoning Committee (LC&ZC) meeting, it was asked “Why do we
zone?” A good question. The intent to zone should be taken seriously because any regulation that
requires prescribed behaviors, and limits of the freedom of residents, is viewed as an exercise of
governmental force and possibly contentious. In Marathon County there should be strong rationale to
invoke the use of zoning in the context of creating the safest, healthiest, and most prosperous
community that is a “preferred place”. Please note that in Wisconsin, it is required that the objectives of
zoning are clearly and consistently supported by a locality’s comprehensive plan.
The basic objectives of zoning include:
1. Improve the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of its citizens. Examples
include concepts of requiring that lots be large enough to allow for the safe disposal or treatment
of waste effluent and requiring that homes be spaced far enough apart that fires will not spread.
2. Protect or maintain property values. Zoning can protect the value of property by assuring
that incompatible uses will be kept apart.
3. Support economic development goals of the community.
4. Plan for the future development of communities to ensure that transportation systems are
carefully planned. This could include rural routes to carry products to market or process
centers, mass transit opportunities, emergency service needs, etc.
5. Develop new community centers with adequate highway, utility, health, educational, and
recreational facilities.
6. Provide residential areas with healthy surroundings for family life. The concept of
designing livable communities with trails, farmer markets, urban-fringe agriculture, etc.
7. Preserve agricultural and forest land. In Wisconsin, this is especially important in regional,
economically competitive areas called “clusters”.
8. Designation of best use. Some land is best left to be cultivated because of its unique soil
characteristics. Other land may be ideally suited for commercial development because it is
located near a major highway. Or, for example land, located near a railroad or airport may be
prime land for an industrial park.
\\co.marathon.wi.us\county\CPZ\Common\LCZ_comte\Agendas\2015\9-1-15Packet\Memo_WhyDoWe Zone_09012015.doc
Conse
ervation, Plannin
ng and Zo
oning De
epartmen
nt
210 River Drive
D
• Waussau, Wiscon
nsin 54403-5
5449
Phone: 715-261-6000
0 •• Fax: 7
715-261-6016
Witthin Marathon C
County: 1-800--236-0153
[email protected]
marathon.wi.us
•• www.coo.marathon.wi.uus
Date: Augustt 25, 2015 To: Town Chairs, Clerkss and Supervisors of Countty Zoned Tow
wns From: Rebecca J. Frisch, D
Director RE: Zoningg Comprehensive Revision As you are
e aware, Marrathon Countyy is in the pro
ocess of revis ing the countty zoning code. Since Janu
uary 2015 the Zoning Comp
prehensive Re
evision Task Force (see backk for memberss) has been deeveloping a new code. An update and information o
on the draft code was pressented at the Joint Town’ss Association meeting in July. As maany of you heard, we would like to startt meeting witth your town to share informatio
on about the new draft co
ode, work with you to deveelop your new
w zoning map
p, and receivee your feedback on the code language. In the nexxt few days yo
our Town Cle
erk will receivve a package from our dep
partment whiich will includ
de the following: 1) Copy of proposed district descriptions an
nd general prrovisions (setbacks, lot sizee) 2) Copy of proposed permitted uses and co
onditional usees in districts
3) Copy of your zoning map sh
howing curren
nt districts, a nd a draft maap of new zon
ning districts
The weekk of August 31
1st our office w
will be in conttact with youur Town to staart schedulingg meetings in
n Septembe
er and/or Octtober with the
e Town Board
d and/or Tow
wn Planning Co
ommittee and/or anyone else you wish tto have workk on the zonin
ng map and re
eview the prooposed code ssections. Prio
or to the meeeting, we would
d like you to rreview the diistricts, uses, and your draaft zoning maap so you can
n comment an
nd make anyy changes you
u think may be
e needed. The initiall meeting willl be a joint meeting with aat least one otther adjoiningg Town. The adjacent citiees and/or villlages will be invited so the
ey can learn aabout the new
w code and b
be informed o
of what the proposed zoning may b
be along their boundaries. The meeting agenda w
will consist of: A) Overview of di
O
istricts, permitted uses, an
nd conditionaal uses (formeerly special exxceptions) B) Comments and
d suggestionss on code langguage C) Overview of m
O
mapping proce
ess D) Overview of ad
O
doption proce
ess/timeline
E) Physical review
w of proposed
d zoning map
p We know our meeting with you will require the TTown to postt the meetingg due to a quo
orum. We will supply you with a noticce to post on your website
e and at your Town Hall to
o cover the po
osting requireme
ents. If you havve any questio
ons or concerrns, please co
ontact Dean Joohnson ([email protected] or 715‐261‐60
031 ) or Jeff P
Pritchard ([email protected] or 715‐2611‐6042 ). This is you
ur code. We are looking fo
orward to wo
orking with yoou for a smoo
oth transition from the old
d code to the new
w code on ou
ur way to beco
oming the he
ealthiest, safeest and most p
prosperous co
ounty in the SState. cc: ZCR Task Force, Dep
puty Zoning Adm
ministrators, Land
d Conservation aand Zoning Com
mmittee O:\CPZ\ZONING
G\2015_Zoning_Rewrrite\Zoning_Compreehensive_Revision\Toown Correspondencee\ZCR‐TnMeetingMeemo.docx MEMORANDUM
TO:
Land Conservation and Zoning Committee (LC&ZC)
FROM:
Andy Johnson, Environmental Resources Coordinator
DATE:
September 1, 2015
SUBJECT: IMPLEMENTATION OF EASTERN LAKE MANAGEMENT PLANS: SEEKING
SUPPORT OF CONTRACTED ASSISTANCE.
In 2011, Marathon County entered into a three (3) year agreement with the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point College and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to conduct physical,
chemical, and social studies on eleven (11) lakes located in the Eastern Lakes region. Leveraging over
$150,000 of donated professional support and hours of volunteer local civic support, the Conservation,
Planning and Zoning (CPZ) Department secured $350,000 of state funds.
In August 2015, the Environmental Resources Committee (ERC) accepted the final lake management
plans for all lakes that were part of the Eastern Lakes Project. Subsequently, the County Board of
Supervisors accepted the lake plans (findings and recommendations) by resolution. As part of the action
taken by the ERC and County Board, the lake management plans are to be presented to the LC&ZC
with a request to develop a strategic and tactical plan to implement the plans’ recommendations.
At the September 1, 2015 meeting, I will provide the LC&ZC with a presentation on the Eastern Lakes
Project with focus upon three (3) critical watershed planning concepts:
 Leadership: Building collaborative partnerships;
 Importance of natural and social science to define the concerns and strategies;
 Building community capacity to implement strategies.
The work of developing an implementation plan will require us to define the following elements of policy:
1. What services can/should Marathon County uniquely provide?
2. Who will receive our services (targeting)?
3. At what cost/investment (and source) will Marathon County support the services?
At this meeting I plan to discuss the capacity of staff to support your administrative work with the policy
considerations. CPZ does not have readily available staff able to provide plan development support. To
address this staffing gap, we are seeking the LC&ZC’s support to secure contracted services for
the purpose of developing the strategic and tactical plan. I will discuss the scope of services,
estimated costs and the timeliness of the work to coincide with grant cycles that Marathon County may
access.
\\co.marathon.wi.us\county\CPZ\Common\LCZ_comte\Agendas\2015\9-1-15Packet\Memo_EasternLakesPlan_Implementation_09012015.doc
Marathon County
Eastern Lakes
Project
Marathon County Conservation, Planning and Zoning Department in partnership with
UW – Stevens Point and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Project Goals & Objectives

Understand the physical and natural conditions

Understand the social dynamics of the people that
use and enjoy the lakes

Understand Community Capacity.
◦ How does local governance work?
◦ How do people engage in management decisions?
◦ How does behavior change?

Utilize the data to make informed decisions
Project Funding

DNR: Lake Protection Grants: $350,000

In-kind matches: approximately $150,000
◦ UW – Stevens Point
◦ CPZ staff and
◦ Citizens and sporting groups
Project Phases – Three Phase Project
Phase 1 – Collect Scientific and Social Data

Data collected includes: water quality, aquatic macro-phytes, shore
land vegetation, fisheries, land use, and groundwater.
Phase 2-Lake Management Plan development
Management Plans:
 Mayflower Lake
 Pike & Rice Lakes
 Big Bass & Wadley Lakes
 Lost, Lilly and Mission Lakes
 Bass, Mud and Norrie Lakes
Phase 3 – Plan Implementation

Water Quality and Land Management

Shorelands

Aquatic Plants and Aquatic Invasive Species

Fisheries and Recreation

Communication and Organization
Water Quality

Goal 5: Maintain and improve current
water quality conditions in the lake.
◦ Objective 5.1: Reduce non-point runoff of nutrients
Shorelands
◦ Protect quality habitat and existing healthy
shoreland vegetation.
 Explore options for protecting existing shoreland habitat, including
wetland complex on the northwestern end of the lake.
Alyssa DeRubeis
Elements of Watershed Planning
Role of Marathon County:

Leadership: Building private and public
partnerships

Science Based Strategies: Natural and Social

Building “Community Capacity”
Conservation, Planning and Zoning Department
210 River Drive • Wausau, Wisconsin 54403-5449
Phone: 715-261-6000 •• Fax: 715-261-6016
Within Marathon County: 1-800-236-0153
[email protected]
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
•• www.co.marathon.wi.us
Plumbers, Soil Testers & Pumpers
Dale Dimond, On-Site Waste Specialist
Existing POWTS Evaluation: Property Transfer
August 24, 2015
As you may be aware, the recent state budget bill (2015 Wisconsin Act 55) included changes which restrict local time of sale
requirements.
Therefore, effective July 14, 2015, Marathon County will no longer enforce section 15.12 (1, 2 & 3) of the Private Sewage
Systems Ordinance which requires an evaluation of existing POWTS prior to a transfer of property.

If a property transfer occurs on or after July 14, 2015, an evaluation of the existing POWTS will not be required by
Marathon County.

If the property transfer occurred before July 14, 2015, submittal of a complete Existing POWTS Evaluation Report is still
required. It is important that you verify the transfer date (the date the deed was signed by the seller/grantor) before
advising a property owner that an evaluation is no longer needed.
Marathon County will continue to review and approve Existing POWTS Evaluation Reports which are completed in
accordance with section 15.25 of the ordinance.

While we will not require evaluation of an existing POWTS for property transfers occurring after July 14th, we do
recommend that if/when you evaluate an existing POWTS you continue to follow procedures outlined in Section 15.25 of
our ordinance, including submittal of the completed report to this office. Doing so will allow the report to be used for other
purposes (reconnection, verification of maintenance, etc.) and reports submitted according to 15.25 are the only ones which
will receive county review, written county approval, and be maintained with sanitary permit records.
Please be reminded that Wisconsin Statutes define a “failing private on-site wastewater treatment system” as one which
causes or results in any of the following conditions:
a. The discharge of sewage into surface water or groundwater.
b. The introduction of sewage into zones of saturation which adversely affects the operation of a private on-site
wastewater treatment system.
c. The discharge of sewage to a drain tile or into zones of bedrock.
d. The discharge of sewage to the surface of the ground.
e. The failure to accept sewage discharges and backup of sewage into the structure served by the private on-site
wastewater system.
Soil testing is necessary to determine whether conditions a, b or c exist.

We will continue to review Existing POWTS Evaluation Reports, completed in accordance with Section 15.25, which are
voluntarily submitted to us. There is no fee for review and filing of these reports (fees will continue to apply to soil
evaluations).
As many of you may recall, prior to the county’s requirements for an evaluation prior to a transfer of property, there was
much confusion created by inadequate, inconsistent, and inaccurate reporting. We are hoping that by providing this
voluntary review everyone will be able to properly assess the condition of the existing septic system.

Although submittal of an evaluation report for a property transfer occurring after July 14th is voluntary, please note that we
will require replacement if an Existing POWTS Evaluation Report or related soil evaluation report is (or has already been)
submitted to us which identifies a failing system.

With the exception of Section 15.12 (1, 2 & 3), all other portions of the Marathon County Private Sewage System Ordinance
remain in effect.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us at 715-261-6000.
Conservation, Planning and Zoning Department
210 River Drive • Wausau, Wisconsin 54403-5449
Phone: 715-261-6000 •• Fax: 715-261-6016
Within Marathon County: 1-800-236-0153
[email protected]
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
•• www.co.marathon.wi.us
Realtors, Financial Institutions, & Mortgage companies
Dale Dimond, On-Site Waste Specialist
Septic System Inspection: Property Transfers
August 24, 2015
As you may be aware, the recent state budget bill (2015 Wisconsin Act 55) included changes which restrict local time of sale
requirements.
Therefore, effective July 14, 2015, Marathon County will no longer enforce section 15.12 (1, 2 & 3) of the Private Sewage
Systems Ordinance which requires an evaluation of existing private sewage (septic) systems prior to a transfer of
property.

If a property transfer occurs on or after July 14, 2015, an evaluation of the existing POWTS will not be required by
Marathon County.

If the property transfer occurred before July 14, 2015 (date the deed was signed by the seller/grantor), submittal of a
complete Existing POWTS Evaluation Report is still required.
Marathon County will continue to review and approve Existing POWTS Evaluation Reports which are completed in
accordance with section 15.25 of the ordinance.

While we will not require evaluation of an existing private sewage system for property transfers after July 14th, we do
recommend that if/when an evaluation or inspection is needed you request an evaluation and report which follows
procedures outlined in Section 15.25 of the ordinance. This will assure that the evaluations are consistent, thorough and
provide important information, such as a site plan and soil evaluation*.
*Please be aware that Wisconsin Statutes define a “failing private on-site wastewater treatment system” as one which
causes or results in any of the following conditions:
a. The discharge of sewage into surface water or groundwater.
b. The introduction of sewage into zones of saturation which adversely affects the operation of a private on-site
wastewater treatment system.
c. The discharge of sewage to a drain tile or into zones of bedrock.
d. The discharge of sewage to the surface of the ground.
e. The failure to accept sewage discharges and backup of sewage into the structure served by the private on-site
wastewater system.
Soil testing is necessary to determine whether conditions a, b or c exist.

We will continue to review Existing POWTS Evaluation Reports, completed in accordance with Section 15.25, which are
voluntarily submitted to us. Reports submitted according to 15.25 are the only ones which will receive county review,
written county approval and be maintained with sanitary permit records. We will not review or approve any report which is
not completed in accordance with section 15.25. No fee will be required for review or approval of the evaluation reports
(fees will continue to apply to soil evaluations).
As many of you may recall, prior to the county’s requirements for an evaluation prior to a transfer of property, there was
much confusion created by inadequate, inconsistent and inaccurate reporting. We are hoping that, by providing this
voluntary review, you will be able to properly assess the condition of the existing septic system.

Although submittal of an evaluation report for a property transfer occurring after July 14th is voluntary, please note that we
will require replacement if an Existing POWTS Evaluation Report or soil evaluation report is (or has already been) submitted
to us which identifies a failing system.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us at 715-261-6000.
O:\Zoning\Dale\BudgetBillChanges\RealtorMemo-FINAL-Ltrhd.docx
COUN
NTY AGREE
EMENT TO P ARTICIPAT
TE
Marrathon Cou
unty agree
es to participate in the WDACP vvenison do
onation prrogram in 2
2015 and to adm
minister the
e program as set fortth in the W
Wisconsin D
Deer Donattion Countty Informattion Packet. The WDNR WDACP agre
ees to fully reimburse
e the countty for all administrattive and veenison he deer do
onation pro
ogram. proccessing cossts associatted with th
Signed
d: _______
_________
__________
_________
_____________ Datee: _________________________
___ Title: __________
_________
_________
__________
_____________ Statte of Wisco
onsin Dep
partment o
of Natural R
Resources For the Secrettary Signed
d: ______
_________
__________
_________
______________ Datte: __________________________ Directtor, Bureau
u of Wildlife Managem
ment USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services
Wisconsin Wildlife Damage Abatement
and Claims Program 2014 Summary Report
Prepared by:
United States Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Wildlife Services
INTRODUCTION
The Wildlife Damage Abatement and Claims Program (WDACP) was enacted in 1983 by the State of
Wisconsin. The purpose of the program is to assist producers with agricultural losses caused by white-tailed
deer, black bear, Canada Geese, Wild Turkey, elk, and mountain lions. Mountain lions were added to the
WDACP in 2012 through the signing of ACT 280 by the Governor. Sandhill Cranes may become eligible for
the WDACP services if the Wisconsin Legislature authorizes a hunting season. (Note: Gray wolves are not
included in the WDACP their management and any damage claims are funded through separate sources).
While the WDACP provides financial compensation, the program emphasis is one of abatement. The state
placed a $1.00 surcharge on hunting licenses to help fund the cost of program administration, abatement, and
compensation. By 1991, requests for assistance by producers with crop damage by the eligible species had
expanded throughout the state, with deer complaints leading the way. To offset the increased costs, the state
began charging $12 for resident, $20 for non-resident bonus antlerless deer tags with the proceeds going to the
WDACP. In 2005, the license surcharge was increased to $2.00 ($4.00 for patron licenses) to help offset
reduced funding levels coming from the bonus tag sales. A reduction in funds resulted from changes to the deer
season structure that reduced bonus tag sales and legislation expanded the use of WDACP funds for the Deer
Donation Program, Chronic Wasting Disease Management, and the Urban Wildlife Grant Program.
The State of Wisconsin requires the WDACP to be implemented by county government, thus assuring local
oversight. Enrollment into the WDACP is voluntary, however, for producers to receive assistance their county
must fully participate in the program. Currently there are 70 counties participating in the WDACP statewide.
There is no direct program cost for counties that participate in the WDACP because it is funded by the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) from hunting license sales and from Federal cost share
in those counties that contract with United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) Wildlife Services (WS) (USDA-WS). The WDNR role is to coordinate the
WDACP statewide, including administration and distribution of program funding.
As wildlife populations identified in the WDACP continue to grow in the state, so did interest in the WDACP.
The WDACP started consuming a significant amount of county staff time. Numerous counties were
experiencing increased requests for crop appraisals, which required significant commitment of time and training
for their staff. In the mid 1980’s the counties were afforded another option for implementation of the WDACP
when the USDA-WS, opened two offices in the state. USDA-WS brought wildlife damage management
expertise and federal cost-sharing to the WDACP. For those counties that wished to offload the day-to-day
field administration and implementation of the WDACP to relieve county staff of these tasks, USDA-WS has
been a viable option.
COOPERATIVE PARTNERS
In 1986, USDA-WS began work in Wisconsin with the opening of a state office in Sun Prairie and a district
office in Waupun. In 1987, USDA-WS entered into Cooperative Service Agreements (CSA) with three
Wisconsin counties (Dodge, Fond du Lac, and Green Lake) to administer the WDACP on their behalf. A year
later, USDA-WS opened a second district office in Rhinelander and signed a fourth CSA to administer the
WDACP for Langlade County. In 2014, USDA-WS administered the WDACP on behalf of 52 Wisconsin
counties (Figure 1).
2
Figure 1. Wisconsin Counties enrolled in the WDACP and their method of implementation in 2014
3
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS
During 2014, USDA-WS offices were contacted by over 1,300 agricultural producers who reported wildlife
damage to their crop(s). After initial consultation and site visits, 807 producers enrolled in the WDACP.
Producers with farms ranging from only a couple of acres to over 3,200 acres participated. Enrolled acres
totaled 182,087 (Table 1).
WILDLIFE DAMAGE TO AGRICULTURE
USDA-WS verified damage to 56 different agricultural crops (including livestock) by white-tailed deer, black
bear, Canada Geese, or Wild Turkeys (Table 2). The number of agricultural crops reported included, 45 crops
verified as deer damage. Fourteen crops verified as bear damage, four crops verified as goose damage, and
seven crops verified as turkeys damage.
White-tailed Deer
White-tailed deer range throughout the state, as a generalist they adapt to most
habitat types in Wisconsin. Their ability to live in close proximity to people
has allowed deer to flourish in environments with increasing human
development, thus the agriculture damage they cause is no longer restricted to
traditional rural areas. WDNR’s 2014 pre-hunt estimate was at 1.44 million.
During 2014/2015 the department changed their management objectives
strategy and system. No longer will the pre-hunt/post-hunt numbers be used to
report deer herd numbers. Instead the WDNR will seek to maintain a deer herd in balance with its range and at
deer population goals reasonably compatible with social, economic and eco-system management objectives for
each deer management unit. Each DMU will be managed to either increase, maintain, or decrease the
population based on County Deer Advisory Council recommendations and WDNR staff input. Regardless of
the population management system used to regulate hunter harvest, deer will likely continue to create conflicts
for agricultural producers. Deer damage complaints outnumber the other five eligible species combined. Corn,
soybeans, sweet corn and hay account for the majority of acreage damaged by deer.
Black Bear
The majority of Wisconsin’s black bear population inhabits the northern twothirds of Wisconsin and bear damage occurs most often in these areas.
However, the black bear population is expanding and bears may be found in
many of the southern counties. An increasing number of bear damage
complaints are coming from counties in the expanded range. Black bears
frequently inhabit areas close to people if a food source is available. The
majority of agricultural bear damage complaints are associated with corn,
stored crops, and apiaries (beehives). Currently, the black bear population is estimated to be about 28,700.
Canada Geese
Canada Geese can be found throughout Wisconsin where suitable habit exists.
Within the state, goose populations are grouped into one of two categories,
migratory geese (those that migrate through the state) or resident geese (those
that nest in the state). Generally, larger wetland complexes associated with
migration corridors will attract higher numbers of birds. Agricultural crops in
close proximity to these areas are an attractive food source for both populations
of geese. Traditionally, the southeast and eastern portion of Wisconsin has
received the majority of goose damage complaints. However, with increasing
resident goose populations, damage reported in other areas of the state is
4
becoming more common. The WDNR current statewide breeding Canada Goose population is estimated at
between 126,000 and 145,000 birds.
Wild Turkey
The Wild Turkey population has increased significantly since their
successful reintroduction in 1976. There are now huntable turkey
populations inhabiting the entire state. Turkeys are diurnal, thus they are
readily seen in agricultural fields during the day. Agricultural producers
often blame turkeys for damage because of their presence in a field that
may have been damaged by other species or causes. The agricultural crops
that are most susceptible to turkeys are ginseng, emerging corn, and stored
feed/crops. Although the WDNR does not currently obtain an estimate of
the number of Wild Turkeys in the State, the percentage of statewide respondents reporting turkeys on their
property had increased fairly steadily between 1988 and 2006, but remained generally stable since 2007.
Regionally, reported sightings of Wild Turkeys have generally increased, as much as 20-fold in the Northern,
Northeast, and Southeast regions. WDNR predicts that the winter of 2014 had virtually no impact on the Wild
Turkey population throughout any part of the state.
Elk
Elk were reintroduced in Wisconsin in the Clam Lake area of the
Chequamegon National Forest in 1995. With a herd as large as 175 animals in
2013, the elk population suffered dramatic losses during the winter of
2013/2014 because of winter severity in the Clam Lake area, and more losses
throughout the spring and summer due to the worst mosquito year in memory.
This high mosquito infestation caused great stress in an elk population that
was already under duress after the extreme winter. As a result, the Clam Lake
herd dropped to only about 120 animals by late March, 2015. Conditions
during the winter of 2014/2015 were much better and DNR elk researchers are hopeful that the herd
survivability and productivity will revive herd population numbers in 2015. The WDNR and its
partners/supporters are working on a 53 acre elk habitat development project, increasing the acreage of young
forests, forage and predator escape cover for elk in the Clam Lake area. Through the cooperative efforts of
WDNR staff, members of the Ho-Chunk Nation, Jackson County staff, and representatives from the Kentucky
Fish & Game Commission 29 Kentucky elk were captured, 26 of which were translocated to Jackson County
for further health testing are schedule for release in June, 2015. Wisconsin has negotiated to receive a total of
150 elk, with half going to the Clam Lake Elk range over the next four years.
To date, USDA-WS has not received any elk damage complaints from any counties within the existing elk
range; however, damages were verified in Ashland County and a claim was paid in the amount of $893.00 by
WDNR through the Wildlife Damage Abatement and Claims Program. The long-term goal is for up to 1,400
elk in the Clam Lake herd and up to 390 in the Black River State Forest. Agricultural damage is expected to
increase in established elk herd areas as the elk population rises, requiring abatement measures to be developed
and implemented.
Mountain Lion
In 2012, mountain lions (a.k.a., cougars) were added to the WDACP through ACT 280 that was signed by the
Governor on April 26, 2012. There were no confirmed mountain lion depredations in WI during 2014.
Currently, rules allow a landowner or anyone with the landowner’s permission (without a hunting license or
DNR permit) to shoot a mountain lion in the act of killing, wounding, or biting a domestic animal. Animals
killed under this authority shall be reported within 24 hours to a department conservation warden and the
carcass of the mountain lion shall be turned over to the department. Enrollees must follow all WDACP rules,
5
except for the public hunting access requirement given there is no hunting or trapping season for mountain lions
in WI. In 2014, USDA-WS investigated three reported mountain lion complaints; however, none were verified
as being caused by a mountain lion. The WDNR does not have a numerical estimate of the mountain lion
population, as Wisconsin lions are considered rare dispersers from known western populations. A resident
population has not been documented.
Non-WDACP Wildlife Species
While the six species listed above are eligible for assistance through the WDACP, not all damage to crops are
caused by these species. Annually, USDA-WS responds to damage complaints that implicate eligible species
only to be verified as non-wildlife related or caused from an ineligible wildlife species. For example, it is
common for USDA-WS to receive complaints of corn damage by deer or bear, only to verify that raccoons are
the cause. Less common are those complaints that are non-wildlife related, including weather, insects, and/or
crop management issues. In these two instances, USDA-WS provides technical assistance to the producer so
they can alleviate their wildlife damage or they are directed to an appropriate professional so they can address
the non-wildlife issue. As mentioned, Sandhill Cranes may become eligible for WDACP assistance once they
become a huntable species. Each year, USDA-WS receives many Sandhill Crane complaints with the majority
of damage associated with corn, wheat, and potatoes. The reported damages in excess of $1.16 million is only a
small representation of all damages occurring throughout the state.
INTEGRATED ABATEMENT
USDA-WS incorporates an integrated approach when recommending abatement strategies to reduce ongoing
wildlife damage to crops. The goal of the WDACP is to recommend abatement methods that are successful in
minimizing the damage, practical to the producer, and cost-effective to the program. The abatement methods
that were recommended and/or utilized during 2014 include pyrotechnics, propane cannons, flagging, effigies,
exclusion/fence systems (including temporary electric, temporary plastic woven and permanent woven wire),
stored-crop armor, agricultural shooting permits, culvert traps, cage traps, foot snares, habitat modification,
relocation of stored feed/crop, and changing crop variety (Table 3).
White-tailed Deer
USDA-WS received deer damage complaints in 50 of the 51 administered counties, enrolling 509 agricultural
producers in the WDACP. In response to these damage complaints, USDA-WS distributed 60 flags. USDAWS also loaned 100,923 feet of temporary electric or plastic mesh fence, 44 energizers, two coyote effigies,
nine stored-crop armor bags, and four propane cannons (Table 3). USDA-WS recommended 477 shooting
permits which resulted in the harvest of 2,588 deer, and conducted annual inspections on 84 permanent hightensile woven wire fence projects totaling 498,143 linear feet of fence. USDA-WS also recommended and
provided oversight on the installation of 4 new permanent woven wire fences during 2014, totaling an
additional 20,975 linear feet of fence protecting stored crops, apple trees/apples and Christmas trees.
Black Bear
USDA-WS received agricultural bear damage complaints in 30 of the 51 administered counties, enrolling 191
agricultural producers in the WDACP. In response to these damage complaints, USDA-WS loaned 43,905 feet
of temporary electric fence, 478 energizers, (Table 3), and captured 434 bears (411 relocated, 17 freed on
location and six were euthanized). Shooting permits were recommended for 11 cooperators, which resulted in
the harvest of 14 bears. USDA-WS received 69 complaints requesting bear trapping assistance for agricultural
damage from nine counties in which the USDA-WS does not administer the WDACP but has agreements to
provide those services. In these counties, USDA-WS captured and relocated 153 bears from agricultural sites
(included in previous total of 434 bears).
6
Canada Geese
USDA-WS received goose damage complaints in 27 of the 51 counties administered, enrolling 93 agricultural
producers in the WDACP. In response to these damage complaints, USDA-WS distributed 1,166 rounds of
pyrotechnics and 30 flags (Table 3). USDA-WS also loaned 5,575 feet of temporary plastic mesh fence and
two propane cannons (Table 3). In addition, 62 shooting permits were recommended, resulting in the harvest of
289 geese.
Wild Turkey
USDA-WS received turkey damage complaints in 19 of 51 counties administered, enrolling 68 agricultural
producers in the WDACP. In response to these damage complaints, USDA-WS loaned 74,140 feet of plastic
mesh fence, 300 rounds of pyrotechnics, three stored-crop armor bags, and three propane cannons (Table 3). In
response to these complaints, USDA-WS also recommended 42 shooting permits which resulted in the harvest
of 121 turkeys.
ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGE
Annually, USDA-WS assess loss on a diverse variety of agricultural crops. In 2014, producers in 40 of the 51
administered counties requested appraisals on 30 different agricultural crops/commodities (Table 4). The
appraised crops were associated with standard, certified organic, fresh market, canning, wholesale, and/or retail
production. Appraisal requests also included livestock, apiaries, and/or other commercial commodities. These
requests resulted in USDA-WS appraising 37,819.19 acres, and appraised losses totaling $716,046.02 (190
separate claims). Total appraised loss due to damages caused by white-tailed deer in 2014 was $633,815.40
(158 claimants), for damages caused by black bear losses totaled $52,025.92 (23 claimants), for damages
caused by Canada Geese appraised losses totaled $23,502.58 (17 claimants) and for damages caused by Wild
Turkey appraised losses totaled $6,702.12 (27 claimants)(Table 5). Note: Several claimants incurred losses
from multiple species.
DEER DONATION
The Deer Donation Program celebrated its 16th year, and continues to receive support at the local and state
levels since it first began in 2000. Annually, the WDACP county committees approve participation in the
program, hunters voluntarily donate surplus deer, and those in need continue to utilize the venison provided by
their local food pantries.
The program, which is funded through the WDACP, allows hunters to donate deer to participating processors
free of charge. Participating processors are reimbursed through the WDACP at a rate of $55.00 or $65.00 per
deer. (Processors that agree to take in deer harvested from counties inside the CWD affected areas receive the
higher rate per deer due to increased costs incurred for handling and storing the deer requiring testing.) The
donated venison is then distributed to local food pantries to help feed those in need.
USDA-WS coordinated the administration of the Deer Donation Program on behalf of 40 counties (Table 6).
Eighty-three (83) processors from within these counties agreed to participate in the 2014 program. These
processors received 1,183 donated deer, resulting in 47,892 pounds of ground venison distributed to charitable
organizations to help feed the needy people in Wisconsin. Statewide, there were 57 participating counties,
1,622 deer donated during 2014. Since the inception of the program, 87,000 deer have been donated by
Wisconsin hunters, resulting in nearly 3.9 million pounds of venison utilized by food pantries throughout the
state.
7
PROGRAM BENEFITS
USDA-WS continues to see significant participation in the WDACP from a diverse and expanding group of
agricultural producers. While this agricultural diversity presents challenges with regard to wildlife damage
management, it has afforded USDA-WS the opportunity to modify/develop methods to address abatement and
claims issues associated with the WDACP. This effort has allowed USDA-WS to not only better assist
producers in the 51 WDACP cooperating counties, but has benefited the statewide program as well.
Given Wisconsin’s strong dedication to both agriculture and natural resources, wildlife damage issues will
continue to be at the forefront. With statewide populations of deer, bear, geese, and turkey either stable or
trending upwards and land-use changes that inhibit hunting access, the demand for the WDACP is expected to
remain high. The cooperative partnership between WDACP counties, USDA-WS, and WDNR will continue to
be the foundation in managing wildlife damage issues associated with Wisconsin agriculture.
8
CONTACT INFORMATION
State Office:
USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services
732 Lois Dr.
Sun Prairie, WI 53590
1-866-4-USDA-WS
(608) 837-2727
District Offices:
Northern District (Rhinelander Office)
P.O.Box 1064
Rhinelander, WI 54501
(800) 228-1368
(715) 369-5221
Administrative Staff
Willging, Bob
Ruid, Dave
Engstrom, Pam
Wildlife Specialist
Alberg, Chad
Irish, Jeremy
Mielke, Ross
Tharman, Jim
Zydzik, Ed
Northern District Staff
Phone
Title
715-369-5221
District Supervisor
715-369-5221
Assistant District Supervisor
715-369-5221
Program Support
Phone
WDACP Counties Covered
715-822-3227
Barron, Chippewa, Dunn, Pepin, Pierce, Washburn
800-228-1368(ext 15)
Forest, Florence, Langlade, Lincoln, Vilas
715-360-6596
Marinette
800-228-1368 (ext 21)
Marathon, Oneida
715-428-2133
Pierce, Rusk, Taylor
Southern District (Waupun Office)
1201 Storbeck Dr.
Waupun, WI 53963
(800) 433-0663
(920) 324-4514
Administrative Staff
Lovell, Chip
Koeck, Laurie
Specialist
Benson, Barry
Burg, Mike
Holden, Josh
Krueger, Steve
Maedke, Brian
Peterson, Phil
Snobl, DeWayne
Terrall, Dave
Southern District Staff
Phone
Title
920-324-4514
District Supervisor
920-324-4514
Program Support
Phone
Counties Covered
800-433-0663
Adams, Portage, Waushara, Winnebago
800-433-0663
Dodge, Sheboygan, Washington
800-433-0663
Milwaukee, Racine, Walworth, Waukesha
800-433-0663
Fond du Lac, Green Lake, Marquette
800-433-0663
Calumet, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Outagamie
800-433-0663
Columbia, Juneau, Monroe, Sauk, Vernon
800-433-0663
Buffalo, Clark, Jackson, LaCrosse, Trempealeau
800-433-0663
Dane, Green, Iowa, Jefferson, Lafayette, Rock
9
Table 1. WDACP Species Enrollment and Total Acreage by County in USDA-WS Managed Counties
during 2014. D=Deer, B=Bear, G=Goose, T=Turkey
County
Adams
Barron
Buffalo
Total Enrollees
13
21
15
Number Enrolled
12-D, 1-T
8-D, 13-B, 3-G, 1-T
11-D, 4-B
Acreage Enrolled
4329
7046
5322
Calumet
Chippewa
Clark
Columbia
Dane
Dodge
Dunn
7
13
28
27
17
28
13
2-D, 6-G
5-D, 8-B, 1-G
12-D, 11-B, 3-G, 2-T
17-D, 5-B, 5-G
13-D, 1-B, 3-G
10-D, 19-G, 1-T
5-D, 8-B
934
1159
4169
5901
904
6115
2451
Florence
Fond du Lac
Forest
Green
6
8
5
1
4-D, 4-B, 1-G
8-D, 1-T
3-D, 3-B, 1-T
1-D
3297
916
552
13
Green Lake
Iowa
Jackson
Jefferson
Juneau
Kewaunee
La Crosse
16
14
20
6
4
15
8
15-D, 1-B
14-D
12-D, 8-B
4-D, 2-G
3-D, 1-T
5-D, 10-G, 3-T
5-D, 3-B
3421
3001
4138
1630
370
2083
1194
Lafayette
Langlade
Lincoln
Manitowoc
Marathon
Marinette
Marquette
Milwaukee
Monroe
Oneida
Outagamie
Pepin
Pierce
Portage
Price
Racine
Rock
Rusk
Sauk
Sheboygan
Taylor
Trempealeau
Vernon
Vilas
Walworth
Washburn
Washington
Waukesha
Waushara
Winnebago
2
12
9
14
73
41
15
2
19
9
24
3
16
22
9
1
4
15
16
2
16
20
66
7
7
9
18
6
11
9
2-D
4-D, 5-B, 2-G, 2-T
5-D, 3-B, 3-T
7-D, 7-G, 3-T
34-D, 11-B, 5-G, 36-T
39-D, 29-B, 1-G, 4-T
14-D, 1-B
2-D
15-D, 4-B,1-T
7-D, 5-B
22-D, 3-G, 1-T
2-D, 1-B
5-D, 12-B
17-D, 5-B, 3-G, 2-T
6-D, 6-B
1-D
1-D, 2-G, 1-T
2-D, 15-B, 1-G
13-D, 2-B, 1-G
2-G
11-D, 4-B, 1-G
15-D, 5-B
60-D, 5-B, 1-G
4-D, 3-B
7-D
5-D, 6-B, 1-G
16-D, 3-G, 3-T
5-D, 3-G
11-D, 1-G
8-D, 3-G, 1-T
354
3436
2062
1847
21710
15100
3368
29
2865
490
5197
215
970
4428
2113
74
146
8776
3676
76
5169
3909
10331
2406
768
3133
1733
293
2368
1125
Total
762
509-D, 191-B, 93-G, 68-T
177,112
10
Table 2. USDA-WS Verified Agricultural Crop Damage by WDACP Species during 2014.
Crops
Alfalfa
Alfalfa, mixed
Apiaries (beehives)
Corn, grain/field
Corn, silage
Corn, High-moisture
Feed, livestock
Fruit, apples
Fruit, blackberries
Fruit, blueberries
Fruit, grapes
Fruit, melons
Fruit, raspberries
Fruit, strawberries
Ginseng
Grass
Hay/haylage
Livestock, cattle
(calves &/or adults)
Livestock, chickens
Livestock, donkeys
Livestock, ducks
D
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
B
G
x
x
x
T
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Livestock, goats
Livestock, horses
x
x
Livestock, sheep
x
Livestock, swine
x
Nursery
x
x
Potatoes
x
Small grains, barley
x
56 total crops with verified damage
Crops
Small grains, oats
Small grains, wheat
Soybeans
Sweetcorn
Trees, apples
Trees, cherry
Trees, Christmas
Trees, peach
Trees, pear
Trees, standing (mixed)
Vegetables, asparagus
Vegetables, beans-pinto
Vegetables, beans-snap
Vegetables, beets
Vegetables, broccoli
Vegetables, cabbage
Vegetables, cucumbers
D
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Vegetables, lettuce
Vegetables, onions
Vegetables, peas
Vegetables, peppers-hot
Vegetables, pepperssweet
Vegetables, pumpkins
x
x
x
x
Vegetables, spinach
Vegetables, squash
Vegetables, Swiss chard
Vegetables, tomatoes
Vegetables, truck garden
x
x
x
x
x
45
B
x
G
x
x
T
x
x
x
x
x
x
14
4
7
Table 3. Equipment Distribution/Loaned by USDA-WS during 2014.
Deer
Bear
Geese
Turkey
Totals
Pyrotechnics
0
0
1,166
300
1,466
StoredCrop
Armor
Bags
9
0
0
3
12
Flags
60
0
30
0
90
Coyote
Effigy
Propane
cannons
2
0
0
0
2
4
0
2
3
9
11
Temporary
electric or
Plastic
mesh fence
100,923 yds
43,905 yds
5,575 yds
74,140 yds
224,543 yds
Permanent
woven
fence
Energizers
Permits
519,118
0
0
0
519,118
44
478
0
0
522
477
11
62
42
592
Table 4. Agricultural Crops Formally Appraised by USDA-WS during 2014.
Formal Appraisals
Conducted on Listed Crops:
Alfalfa (55)
Alfalfa, Mixed (6)
Apiaries, (beehives) (1)
Corn, Grain (140)
Corn, Silage (27)
Fruit, Apples (6)
Fruit, Melons (1)
Grass (1)
Haylage (2)
Livestock (1)
Nursery (2)
Potatoes (3)
Small Grains, Barley (2)
Small Grains, Oats (5)
Small Grains, Wheat (9)
Soybeans (103)
Sweet corn (14)
Trees, Apple (1)
Trees, Christmas (2)
Vegetables, Beans-Pinto (1)
Vegetables, Beans-Snap (4)
Appraised Loss
on Listed Crops
$51,835.61
$3,778.46
$196.03
$365,011.00
$23,937.58
$26,171.25
$285.00
$0
$1,542.80
$1,575.00
$14,713.00
$861.25
$2,981.82
$927.46
$2,546.78
$185,034.63
$46,178.12
$650.00
$29,419.25
$1,318.60
$1,0962.12
Acres Assessed
on Listed Crops
7,953.53
145.94
3.
16,046.88
1,380.43
155.
5.
16.
2.
1.
85.
1,094.5
40.0
105.20
229.50
7,261.91
2,847.
3.
58.
50.
210.5
Acres Damaged
on Listed Crops
815.93
21.25
3.
948.38
69.85
15.
1.
0.
2.
1.
2.
.25
21.
9.6
22.70
766.96
108.75
1.
9.
2.5
14.54
Vegetables, Broccoli (1)
$75.00
1.
1.
Vegetables, Cucumbers (1)
$115.57
2.
1.
Vegetables, Peas (1)
$3,527.28
20.
12.
Vegetables, Peppers-Hot (1)
$874.00
1.
1.
Vegetables, Peppers-Sweet(2)
$2,606.76
4.
3.
Vegetables, Pumpkins (3)
$9,154.75
54.80
7.
Vegetables, Squash (2)
$1,341.18
30.
4.25
Vegetables, Swiss Chard (1)
$3,413.73
8.
2.
Vegetables, Tomatoes (1)
$2,658.50
10.
2.
Totals (399) 30 different
$716,046.02
37,819.19
2,863.09
crops
Note: Formal appraisal (versus verified damage) is the actual measurement of loss that was
caused by one of the five WDACP species. *Assessed/damaged reflects incidents, not acres.
12
Table 5. USDA-WS Total Appraised Loss by Species and County during 2014.
County
Adams
Barron
Buffalo
Calumet
Chippewa
Clark
Columbia
Dane
Dodge
Dunn
Florence
Fond du Lac
Forest
Green
Green Lake
Iowa
Jackson
Jefferson
Juneau
Kewaunee
La Crosse
Lafayette
Langlade
Lincoln
Manitowoc
Marathon
Marinette
Marquette
Milwaukee
Monroe
Oneida
Outagamie
Pepin
Pierce
Portage
Price
Racine
Rock
Rusk
Sauk
Sheboygan
Taylor
Trempealeau
Vernon
Vilas
Walworth
Washburn
Washington
Waukesha
Waushara
Winnebago
Total
WT Deer (# of
Claims)
$14,754.62 (5)
$5,152.58 (3)
Black Bear
Canada Geese
$6,117.43 (2)
$6,551.06 (1)
$596.64 (2)
$3,296.44 (1)
$1,280.00 (1)
$6,173.50 (3)
$28,426.10 (6)
$6,555.39 (4)
$7,715.68 (3)
$12,081.25 (2)
$3,831.44 (2)
$4,103.81 (1)
Wild Turkey
$1,468.13 (1)
$3,312.25 (2)
$199.57 (1)
$4,821.42 (1)
$2,845.53 (2)
$2,743.66 (2)
$1,508.41 (2)
$1,756.39 (2)
$196.03 (1)
$1,272.03 (1)
$62,537.48 (7)
$11,006.82 (3)
$4,148.65 (1)
$1,126.40 (1)
$1,100.14 (2)
$2,767.62 (1)
$768.86 (1)
$2,875.46 (2)
$19,751.38 (3)
$71,963.51(13)
$99,679.76 (30)
$69,409.71 (6)
$22,091.08 (4)
$557.52 (1)
$67,021.46 (14)
$5,929.00 (1)
$1,589.20 (1)
$16,719.15 (8)
$2,951.70 (1)
$547.75 (2)
$285.00 (1)
$764.45 (1)
$1,440.59 (1)
$4,189.52 (3)
$1,081.90 (1)
$2,320.50 (1)
$2,531.43 (2)
$32,863.12 (10)
$2,601.09 (2)
$10,800.15 (4)
$12,303.87 (5)
$937.60 (1)
$11,598.82 (4)
$4,791.18 (2)
$14.85 (1)
$23,309.77 (7)
$11,441.79 (5)
$633,815.40 (158)
$175.04 (1)
$1,293.34 (1)
$52,025.92 (23)
$23,502.58 (17)
13
$6,702.12 (27)
Total Appraised
Loss (# of claims)
$14,754.62 (5)
$11,270.01 (4)
$0.00
$7,147.70 (2)
$4,576.44 (2)
$6,173.50 (3)
$28,426.10 (6)
$8,023.52 (5)
$11,227.50 (5)
$12,277.28 (3)
$5,103.47 (2)
$4,103.81 (1)
$0.00
$0.00
$62,537.48 (7)
$11,006.82 (3)
$4,148.65 (1)
$0.00
$1,126.40 (1)
$8,767.09 (4)
$2,767.62 (1)
$0.00
$768.86 (1)
$2,875.46 (2)
$24,251.43 (4)
$73,471.92 (13)
$100,512.51 (31)
$69,409.71 (6)
$0.00
$22,091.08 (4)
$557.52 (1)
$69,226.50 (15)
$5,929.00 (1)
$1,589.20 (1)
$16,719.15 (8)
$7,141.22 (4)
$0.00
$1,081.90 (1)
$35,183.62 (10)
$2,531.43 (2)
$2,601.09 (2)
$0.00
$10,800.15 (4)
$12,303.87 (5)
$0.00
$0.00
$5,728.78 (3)
$11,788.71 (4)
$0.00
$23,309.77 (7)
$12,735.13 (6)
$716,046.02 (190)
Table 6. WDACP funded Deer Donation Totals in Counties Managed by USDA-WS during 2014.
County
ADAMS (1)
BARRON (3)
BUFFALO (2)
CALUMET (2)
CHIPPEWA (6)
CLARK (2)
COLUMBIA (2)
DANE (3)
DODGE (3)
DUNN (2)
FOND DU LAC (3)
FOREST (1)
GREEN (2)
JACKSON (3)
JEFFERSON (2)
JUNEAU (2)
KEWAUNEE (1)
LA CROSSE (1)
LAFAYETTE (2)
LANGLADE (1)
LINCOLN (1)
MANITOWOC (1)
MARATHON (4)
MARINETTE (5)
MILWAUKEE (2)
MONROE (3)
ONEIDA (2)
OUTAGAMIE (2)
PIERCE (2)
PORTAGE (1)
RUSK (1)
SAUK (1)
SHEBOYGAN (2)
TAYLOR (1)
TREMPEALEAU (1)
VERNON (1)
VILAS (1)
WASHINGTON (2)
WAUSHARA (2)
WINNEBAGO (1)
USDA-WS participating Counties
Statewide Totals
Number of Deer Donated
15
57
72
27
19
2
37
118
14
39
66
2
26
63
10
39
9
37
38
4
3
7
27
76
9
21
4
58
54
62
4
4
16
13
18
45
4
16
39
9
1,183
1,622
Estimated lbs. of Ground Venison
500
1,932
2,886
952
1,345
96
1,520
5,140
665
1,540
3,034
30
840
1,401
255
1,340
378
2,095
1,369
197
204
301
1,513
3,842
160
643
272
2,191
1,806
1,710
200
160
617
512
762
2,300
717
885
1,374
208
47,892
64,880
57 Counties participating Statewide
40 Counties participating in program administered by USDA-WS
115 Processors participating Statewide
83 Processors participating in program administered by USDA-WS
14
TYE DRILL
MARATHON COUNTY HAS A TYE NO-TILL DRILL TO BE USED TO ENCOURAGE HIGH RESIDUE
MANAGEMENT IN ROW CROPS, WILDLIFE FOOD PLOTS AND FOR INTERSEEDING PASTURES.
THIS DRILL IS NOT TO BE USED ON FIELDS WITH LESS THAN 30% RESIDUE
TYE DRILL 7’ wide: The Tye drill which works great for interseeding clovers
& small seeded grasses into existing pastures that are not real dense or have
been set back with Roundup or very hard grazing.
COSTS You must fill out the enclosed reservation form and return it with your
payment to get on list to use drill.
No‐TillDrillOperatingAgreement
I agree to the terms and charges for use of the drill/seeder and to maintain the drill
when I use it. I understand that it is allowed only for use on land which is being used or will be used for rotational
grazing, and on lands which have not been tilled for row crops. I further understand the drill rental is only for 2 days
and if I keep the drill for additional days, I will be billed at $100/day. I agree to pay Marathon County for use of the
drill at the required rate before receiving the drill. I agree to grease and clean the drill after use.
PLUS $6.00 per acre
A.
$50 flat fee
Drill Rental Flat Rate
B.
x _________ acres =
TOTAL AMOUNT:
$ 50.00
+ $____________
=
Upland Chapter-Pheasants Forever
NO CHARGE*
Timber Country Cutters- Wild Turkey Federation Chapter
NO CHARGE*
NOTE: This drill was originally purchased by the Upland Chapter of Pheasants Forever with grant
assistance from the Timber Country Cutters Chapter. In 2015 it was donated to Marathon County
Conservation, Planning and Zoning. These chapters may use the drill at no charge, while individual
members may rent the drill at normal fees.
CIRCLE USE:
Interseeding Pastures
PLEASE
High Residue Planting
Food Plots
PRINT
Name
Address
Phone
Email:
Signature
Send check (payable to MARATHON COUNTY) along with this form to:
Marathon County CPZ, 210 River Drive, Wausau WI 54403-5449
Before using the drill, you must sign and return this agreement.
Bill Kolodziej 715-261-6038 [email protected]
O:\LAND\Grazing\Drill Rental\2015DrillRental\2015RentalAgrmntTYE.doc

land conservation and zoning committee

Transcription

Similar documents

Official Zoning Map - Town of Carlton Landing

MLK - Landcroc

Creekside at Berkeley Hills

Plus | Brooklyn Balı Amsterdam hina Whistler Australia

Användarinstruktion och tips

71 The Essex County seat, Tappahannock, is finally coming into its

11`$`#"1 - The Monadnock Shopper News

Building Section

03/23/2015 - Town of Perinton

Win with Hednesford Lotto! The Freedom of Hednesford October