Meetings for: March 6, 12, 22, 27 2008.

MAY 6, 2008                                     SPECIAL BOARD MEETING                                        4:30 p.m.

Meeting was called to order by Gary Beck at 28811 Blue Crane Court at 4:30 p.m.

Present:  Gary Beck, Town Chairman, Paul Beere, Supervisor #1, Mike Weinkauf, Supervisor #2, Christopher Birkett, Public Works Supervisor, John Tierney, Town Engineer, Betty Novy, Clerk-Treasurer.  Representing Premium Property Ventures (developer of Rookery Landing Estates Subdivisions):  Greg Reesman, Bob Riggs, Greg Governatori, Engineer.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss drainage plans affecting Blue Crane Court

Several possible solutions were discussed to address flooding that overtops Blue Crane Court during heavy rain events.  Consensus of those present was to attempt the following approach:

• Restrict the cross road culvert in line with Blue Crane Court at its intersection with Rookery Glen. 

• Install pipe in the western ditch line of Rookery Glen, approximately 30 feet south of tile inlet structure immediately south of its intersection with Blue Crane Court, to re-direct water into the low area between lots two and three of Rookery Landing Estates West subdivision.  This should slow the flow of water into the pond adjacent to Blue Crane Court and the resulting flooding of the road.

Mike moved, 2^nd by Gary to adjourn at 5:20 p.m.  Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty J. Novy, CMC

Clerk-Treasurer

MAY 12, 2008                                               REGULAR BOARD MEETING                                        7:00 p.m.

Meeting was called to order by Gary Beck at 7:00 p.m. with Supervisors Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.

Betty Novy, Clerk-Treasurer; Christopher Birkett, Public Works Supervisor; and John Tierney, Engineer; were also present.  

Pledge of Allegiance. 

Minutes.  Mike moved, 2^nd by Paul to approve minutes of the April 14, 2008 meetings.   Motion carried.

Paul moved, 2^nd by Mike to approve May disbursements as follows.   Motion carried.

Town General Fund Disbursements:

MAY 12, 2008                                               REGULAR BOARD MEETING                                        7:00 p.m.

Rochester Sewer Utility District #1 Disbursements:

Treasurer’s Report.   Betty read the report as follows: 

Betty reported on Town General CD#100194244.  Based on investments approved at the April meeting, the balance of the Certificate of Deposit will be transferred to the money market account when it comes due May 29^th. 

Also reported:

• The February 5th-6th snow event was declared a disaster by emergency management.  FEMA funds were applied for.  An aid payment of $6,405 is expected.

• A Joint Town/Village Board meeting needs to be scheduled prior to the Consolidation Public Information Meeting scheduled for May 28^th.    A meeting was set for Thursday, May 22^nd at 7:00 p.m.

• Tentative dates for a meeting with the Town Attorney regarding the Land Division Ordinance were discussed.  A meeting was set for Tuesday, May 27^th at 7:00 p.m.

• An invitation was received from the Village of Waterford to attend a Smart Growth Planning meeting Wednesday, May 21^st at 6:00 p.m.  Board members should report back if they plan on attending.

• Betty attended an intergovernmental meeting held Tuesday, April 29^th at the Waterford Village Hall.  The next meeting is scheduled for October 29^th.  Board members are to contact Rebecca Ewald, Village of Waterford Administrator, with any ideas for discussion at the meeting.

Sheriff’s Department.  A written report was submitted showing the following statistics for April:  zero accidents; eight speeding citations, four traffic citations, four parking citations and twenty-one warnings were issued.  Complaint statistics were as follows:  sixteen complaints originated through calls directly to the Sheriff’s Department; Deputy Prochaska assisted with sixteen additional complaints, originated twenty on his own and performed follow up on ten.  He reported sixteen work days, 138.25 hours and 1,527 miles driven.  Four foot patrols were conducted. 

Deputy Prochaska reported traffic volumes down, most likely due to the increase in gas prices.  There were some ATV issues in Honey Lake this past month.  Deputy Denman issued one citation.  Several street name signs have been taken down in the Honey Lake Area.  Deputy Prochaska asked that Mike submit a request to the district to get these replaced as soon as possible.  Officers unfamiliar with the area may have difficulty locating addresses without them.  Mike indicated several street lights are out in Honey Lake.  WE Energies told him they prefer that the Sheriff’s Department report outages.  Deputy Prochaska

MAY 12, 2008                                               REGULAR BOARD MEETING                                        7:00 p.m.

will record the pole numbers and report them to the Clerk to request repairs.  Construction on CTH D is expected to begin soon.  Gary questioned the placement of flags at the intersection of STH 36 and STH 20.  It was unknown what improvements the State Department of Transportation is planning.  Tierney indicated he would check into plans.

Public Works Department.   Christopher Birkett’s written report was reviewed as follows:   

• Lift Station-  Monthly exercise of lift station valves and generator.   Clean wet well with Pat’s Sanitary.  They were surprised by the volume of grease in the well.

• Sewers- Jeff Bratz located an unmapped sewer line on N. River Road.  The line is approximately 302’ long and seems to have a pretty good flow that is unexplainable.  Jeff also located a paved over manhole by the turn around on Evergreen Drive.  We will have to uncover it and have it raised.  The two manhole covers on the unmapped line are not sewer manholes and should have proper covers installed.  Will be working with Jeff to resolve issue as economically as possible.

• By-pass water issue.  Received plan from DOT for improvement/ collection and diversion to get water to drain in a proper fashion.

• Roads.   Finished pothole filling.  Right of way mowing options.  First cut to Donnie North.  Second cut to Johnson.  Partial mowing in August could utilize Racine County.  Next year open for whole job bids.  Crackfilling.  I was unable to connect with the service provider this past month.  Will have information for next meeting.  N. Honey Lake bank is still not stable; going to try another approach to establish ground cover.

Chris indicated the Village of Rochester is contracting with Visu-Sewer to televise their sewers.  He would like to have the Town’s unmapped sewer line televised at that time.  Consensus of the Board was to approve the televising.  There was discussion on the different types of mowers utilized for right of way mowing.  Racine County has a fourteen-foot cut mower; whereas Johnson and North have six to eight foot cut mowers.   Although Racine County has a substantially higher hourly rate, the work may get done faster.  Consensus of the Board was to have Donnie North do the first cut; Johnson do the mid-summer cut; and Racine County do the final cut in Fall.   

Engineering Report.  John Tierney’s report was reviewed as follows:

John reported working with Rookery Landing’s engineer on possible solutions to drainage problems on Blue Crane Court.  He received some preliminary plans and will forward them to Board members upon final review.  Betty reminded John and Board members that the developer for Rock Ridge Subdivision will be attending the regular Board meeting next month.  In November of last year, a date of June 30, 2008 was set to decide whether to require installation of the final surface of asphalt in the subdivision, or to require a deposit of escrow funds so that the Town may install the final surface at their discretion.  The Board will look to John for a recommendation on that topic.

MAY 12, 2008                                               REGULAR BOARD MEETING                                        7:00 p.m.

Application for Pond Permit (Revised):  Dassow Property, 31340 Academy Road

Betty reported on receipt of a revised set of pond plans for the Dassow site on Thursday, May 8th.  The original plan was approved in November of 2007 subject to Racine County approval and conditions.   Dionn Dassow addressed the Board.  He explained the revised plans do not differ substantially from the initial plan.   Racine County required a set of scale drawings before approving the permit.  Betty reported on technical reviews that had been performed since the revised plans were received.  Racine County Land Conservation performed an onsite review for soil erosion control.  Side slopes of both the proposed pond and earthern berms are not in compliance with Racine County requirements.  The revised plans were also reviewed by Heidi Hopkins of the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR).  The revised plan does not comply with conditions established in the wetland conservation/ pond permit issued for the site last year.  Heidi indicated if the pond is built to these specifications, it will be in violation of DNR provisions.  Betty indicated the Town cannot approve the pond due to these conflicts.  Dionn will have to obtain approval from both the DNR and Racine County on his revised plans before the Town will take an action.  Racine County’s Soil Erosion Control comments were provided to Dionn for consideration.

Steve Boulden, property owner to the west, addressed the Board.  Steve displayed copies of aerial photos and surveys showing the subject properties to illustrate the flow of water into the area between his and the Dassow properties.   Steve’s parcel is the root parcel from which the Dassow parcel was created.    In the past, Steve had a trench dug to address failure of a drain tile on what is now the Dassow property.  The trench was dug so that water could flow freely into a drain tile inlet near the center of the proposed pond.  This system worked adequately for many years.  When the Dassow home was constructed, a downstream section of the drain tile was broken by excavators.  Since then, water has backed up in the system.  The Dassows have moved a lot of dirt around on their property attempting to fix the problem.   Water has been flowing steadily over land through the Dassow property through the drainage ditch on and under Academy Road, eventually making its way into another drain tile that runs through several properties to the west of Weber Estates subdivision in the Village of Rochester, then back through several Town properties before eventually dumping into the Fox River.    Steve burned out three sump pumps trying to keep his basement dry in the past year.  All of this water previously drained underground through the drain tile system.  Now standing water is common along most of the properties tributary to both tile systems.

Dassow explained he opened up the drain tile where it was broken.  However, the water does not drain at an adequate rate.  It was noted that the system west of Weber Estates subdivision is overloaded and has not drained properly for years.  An aerial photograph showed how properties to the north, including Washington Avenue or County Highway “D”, are being affected.  Water has been standing on these properties for two or more years.   It was noted that this standing water is also affecting the road bed of County Highway “D” immediately west of the Village of Rochester. 

Steve stated no objection to a pond on the Dassow property.  However, he does have concerns over the proposed berms.  He feels the berms will block the natural flow of water across his property into the proposed pond area/ drain tile on Dassow’s property.   Dionn explained he only included berms in his design because the DNR told him he could not remove any excavated materials from the site.  He needs a place to put the material.

Judy Schaefer, property owner to the west of the Boulden’s, also expressed concern.  She questioned why the DNR allowed the Dassows’ to move so much dirt around in the wetland area.  She thought there were rules against that.  She also noted standing water in several areas that did not hold water prior to these happenings. 

Bob Willard, property owner to the north of the Dassows, also noted standing water in some of his fields that has not dried up at all in the past five to six years.   These are fields that used to drain.

Board members noted the Town pond permit could not be approved due to conflicts with other regulatory agencies.   Mr. Dassow was given direction to modify his plans to exclude the berms.  He was also directed to contact the DNR with his revised plans.

Request for interpretation:  “hoofed animal” ordinance

Betty reported on an inquiry from the Health Department regarding the property at 144 N. Honey Lake Road.  The Health Department received an anonymous complaint about the quantity of animals on the property, rats and junk.  Upon investigation, Andrea Yaeger, public health nurse, found a number of llamas and alpacas penned on the property.  While Andrea found the environmental complaints ungrounded, she questioned whether local ordinances limited the number of animals. 

The Town’s animal ordinance limits the number of hoofed animals on a parcel between two and five acres to one.  The subject parcel is 4.5 acres.  The ordinance does not include a legal definition of “hoofed animal”.  There was question on whether llamas and alpacas fall under that classification.   After discussion, consensus of the Board was that they were.  However, further

MAY 12, 2008                                               REGULAR BOARD MEETING                                        7:00 p.m.

discussion gave rise to the question of whether the limitation is reasonable.  Several properties throughout the Town were noted to be in violation of this ordinance.  The question of why five acres is the cut off also arose.  It was noted that as little as three acres could be sufficient for two horses.  However, this would be dependent on the type of land and several other factors.  

Gary moved, 2^nd by Mike to table consideration of the ordinance violation for 30 days while the clerk researches possible modification to the ordinance that may ease restrictions, with particular attention to possible special exception or permit provisions that would be subject to Town Board approval.  Motion carried.   It was suggested that the Town’s Association be consulted for model ordinances.

Discovery of unmapped sewer service off N. River Road;  possible infiltration source

This item was discussed under the Public Works Department Report.

Establish value for Sewer Replacement Fund; determine annual contribution amount

Betty reported on replacement values for the pumps currently installed in the Fox River Prairie lift station.  The current price per pump is $4,893.  Useful life was estimated anywhere between ten and thirty years depending on use and whether they are routinely maintained.  The pumps are currently five years old.  Several annual contributions scenarios to establish a replacement fund were discussed.  Consensus of the Board was to create a segregated fund with an annual contribution amount of $1,000.00.  Betty will have an ordinance or resolution drawn up to that effect for the June meeting.

Summer Newsletter presented for additions or corrections

Betty reported a front page article will be drafted after the public information meeting on consolidation is held.  Consensus of the Board was to approve the newsletter for distribution.

Application for Operator’s License:  David S. Murphy

Betty reported David’s responsible beverage server’s course completion certificate had been submitted and his criminal background check shows no alcohol or drug related charges.   Mike moved, 2^nd by Gary to approve an operator’s license for David S. Murphy.  Motion carried.

Period for Public Comment:  There was none.

Mike moved, 2^nd by Gary to adjourn at 9:05 p.m.  Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty J. Novy, CMC

Clerk-Treasurer

May 22, 2008                         JOINT TOWN/ VILLAGE BOARD MEETING                         7:00 p.m.

Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., with Chris Denman, Dean Stapleton, Russ Kumbier, Jim Henning, Bill Weidert, Dave Pattengale and Mark Tamblyn present from the Village Board;  Gary Beck and Mike Weinkauf present from the Town Board.  Town Supervisor Paul Beere was absent.

Betty Novy, Clerk-Treasurer, was also present.

Technical Revision:  Land Use Plan Map

Novy reported on a revision to the Joint Land Use Plan map proposed by both Racine County and Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Committee.  A parcel on English Settlement Road (CTH J) is classified “Other Public Open Space”.  Racine County sold the land last year.  It is currently being used as a gravel pit.  SEWRPC recommended changing the classification to “Extractive”.  Consensus of both Town and Village Boards was to approve the revision to the map.

Installation of gravel base for parking area; south side of Municipal Building

Denman reported on Village Board approval for Community State Bank to install a gravel base for their parking lot this year.  This is a lot that will be shared by the bank and the municipal building.  The bank will not be paving until either late fall- or early spring next year because the foundation area of the house previously sited on the lot is settling.  A quote was solicited to install a gravel base in what will be the Town and Village’s area of the lot.  Denman indicated the Village would like to obtain additional quotes, but questioned whether the Town Board was agreeable to installing the gravel base this year.  Consensus of the Town Board was that this is agreeable and to forward information on additional quotes when it becomes available.

Installation of concrete sidewalk on west side of building.

Denman reported on several Village projects that will involve concrete work this year.  Due to minimum concrete orders, the Village is proposing to install a sidewalk from the new parking lot around the west side of the building to the side entrance with these projects.  The estimated cost for the concrete is $2,000.   The Village’s request is for the Town to donate $650 towards the sidewalk. 

Gary Beck moved, 2^nd by Mike Weinkauf to approve installation of the sidewalk with the Town contributing $650 towards the cost.  Motion carried.

Russ Kumbier moved, 2^nd by Bill Weidert to approve installation of the sidewalk to coincide other Village concrete projects.  Motion carried.

Establish format for consolidation public information meeting.

Board members indicated the brochure that was mailed to citizens explained many of the more common questions heard on the consolidation issue.  However, it was noted there may be some issues Board members have not yet heard.   Those present were encouraged not to try to answer questions without knowing the answer.  Unknown answers can be researched, with a response given either individually, in the next community newsletter or at the planned October information meeting.

The Clerk was directed to have additional copies of the (mailed) brochure available at the meeting.  In addition, both municipality’s zoning maps, the Joint Land Use Plan map and the budget example from the brochure should be put on display.   These images should also be available for projection as well.  The agenda for the meeting was for the Clerk to provide a summary of the consolidation process to date, followed by open discussion on the topic.

Mike Weinkauf brought up the issue of representation.  He reported being questioned by several individuals about how many residents that now live in the Town will be on the new Village Board.  It was noted the question could not be answered because it will depend on who decides to run for Village President and Village Trustee positions.   It was noted the population of what is now the Town is twice that of the Village.  Representation will depend on people’s willingness to run.  The consolidation ordinance was set up so that positions would be elected “at large” from the community.  Districts could be assigned in the future if it is found to be the will of the combined community.

May 22, 2008                         JOINT TOWN/ VILLAGE BOARD MEETING                         7:00 p.m.

Jim Henning questioned what happens to unincorporated areas once re-classification as a Village occurs.  Honey Creek and Honey Lake areas were specifically mentioned.  The clerk is to research this topic in advance of the public information meeting.

Mike Weinkauf reported serving as the Town’s representative on the Honey Lake Protection and Rehabilitation District.  He noted some resentment by individuals living in Honey Lake.  They have private roads which they pay to maintain through extra tax dollars to the Honey Lake District.  Some residents do not feel that arrangement is fair considering they pay the same town taxes as residents who live on roads maintained by the Town.  Gary Beck reported a brief history of the issue, indicating Honey Lake roads are very narrow and improving them to meet Town standards would mean that many front yards would be lost.  When the Town explored taking over those roads in the past, residents did not want to give up their yards in exchange for public roads.  Chris Denman reported several private road developments in the Village that pay for upkeep of their own roads.  He considered this a similar arrangement.  A representative of the new Village Board will have to be a liaison to the Honey Lake Protection and Rehabilitation District.

There was also a question about gravel pits in the Town and how operations will be regulated when and if the municipality incorporates.  It was noted that the Town has a permit requirement that regulates operations.  Gravel pit restoration requirements are regulated by the Department of Natural Resources.  The responsibility to administer and enforce those regulations will stay with Racine County.

Gary Beck moved, 2^nd by Russ Kumbier to adjourn at 8:19 p.m.  Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty J. Novy, CMC

Clerk-Treasurer

MAY 27, 2008                                               SPECIAL BOARD MEETING                                7:00 p.m.

Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.

Sandi Swan, Deputy Clerk and John Hotvedt, Town Attorney were also present.

Review land division ordinance provisions with particular attention to rural density requirements for residential development recommended by the Land Use Plan for the Town and Village of Rochester

John Hotvedt stated that he read through Town Board minutes and talked with Betty Novy and feels he has a general direction to create an ordinance as to amend the provisions in the land division ordinance. He stated that he laid out some guide posts of what he thought needed to be addressed to further the goals of the board.

He felt it came down to two sections of Chapter 27 that would require detailed review and modifications. First, Section 27.303 entitled “Subdivision Development Yield Analysis” also known as “Density” and Section 27.700 entitled “Conversation and Conventional Subdivision Requirements” would both require amendments.

Both sections mentioned break down land divisions into six categories. Hotvedt went through the categories with the Board.

A.      Conservation (PUD) non-sewered subdivision

-         Minimum 3 acre density (Section 27.303 Sub paragraph b. and Section 27.714 subparagraph b.)

-         60% open space (section 27.303 subparagraph b. and Section 27.714 subparagraph b.

B.      Conservation subdivision in a sewered district

The Land Division Ordinance currently requires, at Section 27.303 subparagraph B, that the density associated with type of division be consistent with the Land Use Plan for the Town and Village of Rochester 2020. Additionally, the ordinance requires that any such land division maintain not less 40% open space (Section 27.702 subparagraph a. and section 27.714)

C.      Conventional subdivision in a non-sewered dist

The Land Division Ordinance requires, at Section b. 27.303 subparagraph c.,that land divisions of this nature maintain not less than 5-acre density.

D.      Conventional subdivision in a sewered district

The Land Division Ordinance requires, at Section 27.303 subparagraph d., that the density in any such land division be consistent with the Land Use Plan for the Town and Village of Rochester 2020 as amended time to time.

E.       Minor land division in a non-sewered district

The Land Division Ordinance requires, at Section 27.603 subparagraph c.1., that any such division maintain a minimum density of not less than five acres.

F.       Minor land division in a sewered district

The Land Division Ordinance requires, at Section 27.603 subparagraphc.2, that the density of any such land division be consistent with the Land Use Plan for the Town and Village of Rochester 2020 amended from time to time.

After reviewing each category and incorporating the changes that best fit the wishes of the Board. Weinkauf moved, 2^nd by Beck to direct Atty. John Hotvedt to amend the Land Division ordinance to require a minimum density of 3 acres in non-sewered land division categories and to remove any such reference to open space requirements. Motion carried.

Discussion was held about how to protect land that has been classified by SEWRPC as un-developable. Consensus was to not specify changes in that area at this time.

Motion made by Beck, 2^nd by Weinkauf to adjourn at 7:49 p.m. Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted by,

Sandi Swan 

May 28, 2008                         Consolidation Public Information Meeting                                 7:00 p.m.                                  

Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. with Town Chairman, Gary Beck, Town Supervisor #1, Paul Beere, Town Supervisor #2, Mike Weinkauf, Village President, Chris Denman, Village Trustees, Dave Pattengale, Russ Kumbier, Dean Stapleton, Jim Henning, Mark Tamblyn and Bill Wiedert.

Also present were Clerk-Treasurer, Betty Novy, Deputy Clerk-Treasurer, Sandi Swan and Town Attorney John Hotvedt.

In the audience were approximately 50 residents of the Village and Town of Rochester.

Summary of Consolidation Events to Date

Novy read aloud a summary of the Consolidation Events to date.

Open Discussion/Question and Answer Period

Some the questions and concerns that were raised during the Question and Answer Period are as follows:

Municipal Water Service

Novy mentioned in her summary that a committee was formed to study the feasibility in consolidating the two municipalities. The committee created a pros and cons list of consolidation on that list, future water service and sewer expansion was listed among many other things.

Patty Gerber stated that the mention of water service makes her very apprehensive in supporting consolidation and wanted a better explanation of that.  Betty stated that the Committee looked at the need for future water service as a potential result of commercial growth along the Hwy 36 corridor. She stated that water service would not be a result of consolidation and the committee just felt that if the need were there, it might be easier to support it as a combined community.

Novy explained it would be a utility district and it would be supported by the users only. Hotvedt explained that there are two ways to achieve water service and that is two set up a utility district that would have to be passed by an affirmative vote and supported by the users in that district or to have a developer come in and set up the infrastructure and dedicate it to the municipality. Patty Gerber questioned that as a property owner in the Hwy 36 corridor would she have a say as to whether she wants water service or not. Novy explained that a sewer utility can only be achieved by referendums, hearings and voting by the people that would be affected.

Denman stated that there is nothing on the docket presently to achieve water service in the Village of Rochester. It is just one issue that the Village would have to consider if a major commercial development would consider coming to Rochester.

Annexation Choice

Dennis Acker questioned if the Town and Village were to consolidate aren’t the rights of property owners who might want to annex being taken away.  It was explained that as a property owner you always have a right to attached to another municipality. This is called “detachment” and requires the consent of both municipalities whereas “annexation” only requires the consent of the receiving municipality.  Some residents feel the detachment requirement is a plus because it gives Rochester more control over development. However, in both scenarios you must have a viable reason to detach or annex, such as you can’t get a service in Rochester that you can get in the other. The decision also must make sense as far as the location of the parcel you cannot have a parcel in the middle of Rochester in the middle of a subdivision and decide you want to annex or detach from Rochester. Most parcels that annex into other municipalities are already bordering the receiving municipalities and need certain services that Rochester cannot provide i.e. water.

Boards

Representation was also a concern. If there is an affirmative vote for consolidation at the November election there would be an interim board combining the Village and the Town Board until the following spring election when some board seats will be up for reelection.  Some residents indicated a preference for those individuals currently in office and hesitate to change the makeup of that representation. It was explained that Town Supervisors and Village Trustees seats can be elected in and out every two years depending on candidates running.

May 28, 2008                         Consolidation Public Information Meeting                                 7:00 p.m.                                  

The only way to ensure that representation reflects the best interest of the Community is to get involved either by voting, running for office or by following meetings and providing input to elected officials.

Zoning

It was explained that zoning will not change as a direct result of consolidation and the zoning that is in place now will stay in place until such time as a zoning code and map that encompasses the combined Village would be adopted by the new “Village Board”. Assumably the new map and code will closely mimic what is currently in place. 

Taxes

Some residents were concerned about consolidation and the effect it may have on their tax bills.  It was explained that tax and budget impacts of a combined government will be minimal as Town and Village are partners in several intergovernmental agreements that already benefit from cost sharing.

The public information meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sandi Swan