TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2010
TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
September 15, 2010
Present:
Chairman David Valentine, David Flowers, Ralph Luedtke, William Henke, Paul Waldo,
Mark Brunner
Excused:
Edward Downey
Also Present:
Jim Culotta, Town Administrator, Brad Hoeft, Town Attorney, Eric Ryer, Director of
Recreation & Planning
1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Valentine called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting began with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
2. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS:
Ralph Luedtke moved and William Henke seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting on August 18, 2010. The motion carried unanimously.
3. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Public hearing to take comment on a conditional use permit application by Chris Labinski
for the property located at 10609 Crestview Drive to operate a kennel (up to 6 dogs) [1.15
acres, zoned R-2 Single-Family Residential District, SW ¼ of Section 29]
Chris Labinski of 10609 Crestview Drive would like to gain approval for a kennel license to allow for
the keeping of up to six dogs on his property. § 95-22. Limitation on number of dogs. of the Town
Code notes that residential properties are limited to three dogs. Three of the dogs would be there all
the time; they are Coon Hounds, weighing roughly 40-55 pounds. The other three dogs would live
there only occasionally; one dog would live with the applicant while being trained, while the other
two dogs are his parents’ and would be on the property when his parents travel. All dogs have bark
collars, and the applicant has an 80’ x 24’ enclosure in the back yard.
Jon Szpiszar of 10608 Crestview Drive spoke in support of the application, and explained that he has
not had any problems with the applicant’s dogs in the past.
Richard Larson of 10583 Crestview Drive noted the dogs have bark collars on and did not have a
problem with the application.
Susanne Merrill of 662 Starlet Drive objected to the application and felt the neighborhood was not
the place for such a dog kennel, and questioned what a kennel would do to property values.
Director of Recreation & Planning Ryer then read a letter of opposition from Carol Larson of 10583
Crestview Drive, citing among concerns: barking, possible aggressive behavior and dominant
characteristics of the breed, and the possibility of what would happen if the dogs were to get loose.
With no other comment from the public, Paul Waldo moved to close the public hearing. Ralph
Luedtke seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.
4. OLD BUSINESS
a. None
1
TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2010
5. NEW BUSINESS
a. Discussion and possible recommendation on a conditional use permit application by Chris
Labinski for the property located at 10609 Crestview Drive to operate a kennel (up to 6 dogs)
[1.15 acres, zoned R-2 Single-Family Residential District, SW ¼ of Section 29]*
This item continues from item 3a. Nicole Palkowski (resident at 10609 Crestview Drive) felt that it
was difficult to see the kennel from the street. Neighbors present disagreed with this sentiment. Ms.
Palkowski explained that the dogs stay outside, but wear bark collars. Ms. Palkowski also explained
they are not breeding the dogs.
Paul Waldo then clarified that the issue at hand is not whether or not they can or cannot have dogs,
the issue is whether or not the applicant may have more than three dogs.
Chris Labinski of 10609 Crestview Drive then explained that he is heavily involved in bear hunting.
His dogs have been spayed or neutered, so he would not breed the dogs. He treats his dog like
children. Mr. Labinski explained his recently installed kennel was properly installed to Town Code,
and has a doubled door system that does not easily allow dogs to get loose. Five apple trees in the
yard shield the kennel from view, and the lot abuts agricultural land to the south. The dogs live
outside in the summer and fall, and when temperatures dip below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the dogs
live in the basement. Mr. Labinski noted two of the dogs that would stay on a temporary basis are his
parent’s Labrador retrievers, and one other dog is a Coon Hound that he would train. The Labradors
would be there when his parents leave town to save them money instead of putting the dogs in a
professional kennel. Mr. Labinski explained they all wear bark collars, and that he would not have
more than three dogs on a permanent basis.
Chairman Valentine asked Mr. Labinski if he had reviewed the conditions in the proposed permit.
Mr. Valentine also pointed out that noise and nuisance ordinances would also apply if a problem
were to occur regarding the dogs and the kennel.
David Flowers asked staff to explain why this permit is necessary. Director of Recreation & Planning
Ryer explained that Mr. Labinski simply wanted to make sure that he is compliant with Town Code
at all times; the Town Code states that “No family shall own, harbor or keep in its possession more
than three dogs on any residential lot…” Mr. Flowers also commented that any conditional use
granted must meet requirements as outlined in the Zoning Code, in this case the applicable district is
R-2 single-family residential. Mr. Flowers looked to Attorney Hoeft to ensure that the zoning
requirements were met. Attorney Hoeft clarified that the Town Code outlines if a dog is on a
property for ten days it is presumed to be the owner’s dog.
William Henke then pointed out that Mr. Labinski’s three dogs are licensed. He questioned how long
Mr. Labinski’s parents’ dogs would stay at his house. Mr. Labinski stated that his parents’ dogs would
typically stay a few days to a week. Ralph Luedtke did not have any issues recommending the Town
Board grant the permit, as he was comfortable the Town has laws in place that would provide a
mechanism to correct any issues associated with the kennel.
Mark Brunner felt a neighborhood of this nature is not amenable to more than three dogs; he
suggested Mr. Labinski’s parents board their dogs in a professional kennel.
Paul Waldo referred to what types of activities were regulated within the proposed conditional use
permit. Staff clarified that, among other conditions, there would be no breeding, and the kennel
would not be for commercial purposes. Paul Waldo also noted that no more than three dogs would
stay outside overnight. He suggested increasing that number that to four dogs, as the Coon Hound
2
TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2010
Mr. Labinski would train would stay outside overnight, according to Mr. Labinski. The Commission
was also in favor of requiring the dogs wear bark collars when unattended outside.
Attorney Hoeft then explained that the Town Code states, “Kennel licenses may only be issued for
premises that have first received a conditional use permit for kennel operations under the Town
Zoning Code.” Chairman Valentine questioned if this application satisfies finding #6 the Plan
Commission must consider when recommending approval/denial of an application to the Town
Board (as below):
(6) Conform to zoning district regulations. The conditional use application shall conform to all
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
Attorney Hoeft explained that a conditional use listed under § 320-17. R-2 Single-Family Residential
District. is to “see 320-60.” § 320-60. Industrial and agricultural uses. lists the boarding of animals,
which in this case could be interpreted as the boarding of dogs, or a kennel, which would satisfy the
above finding #6. Paul Waldo then questioned if Mr. Labinski planned on building additional kennel
space, to which he answered “no.”
Following discussion, Chairman Valentine felt that the conditions (as amended below) in
combination with Town ordinances such as noise and nuisance ordinances offer protection for
residents; he also felt the facilities provided by Mr. Labinski are of good quality.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
The permit is for a non-commercial, non-breeding hobby kennel.
A fenced in enclosure of at least 70 feet by 20 feet must be provided for the dogs.
There shall be a maximum of six (6) dogs on the property at any one time.
No signage shall be allowed.
The permit is issued to Mr. Labinski only and does not transfer to future property owners or
tenants of 10609 Crestview Drive.
At most three four dogs are allowed to be kept outside overnight.
This permit is issued for a 36 month period. Following the 36 month period, the permit shall
be reviewed by the Plan Commission and the Town Board.
The issuance of this conditional use permit is contingent upon the submission of all required
rabies vaccination information by Mr. Labinski and issuance of dog licenses.
Mr. Labinski is required to license his dogs on an annual basis by April 1; if he does not, this
permit lapses and he will need to submit a new conditional use permit application for the
kennel.
When unattended outside, all dogs must wear bark collars at all times.
David Flowers then moved to recess for a few moments. William Henke seconded, and the motion
passed unanimously. After coming back into session, Attorney Hoeft noted that Plan Commissioner
Brunner lives in the vicinity of Mr. Labinski, and will not be participating in further discussion or any
possible vote to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Chairman Valentine then noted that the Plan Commission must see the findings below were present:
(1) Welfare. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will not be
detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare.
(2) Compatible with adjacent land. The uses, values and enjoyment of other Town property in
the neighborhood for purposes already permitted shall be in no foreseeable manner substantially
impaired or diminished by the establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use.
3
TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2010
(3) Not impede surrounding property development and improvement. The establishment of the
conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of the
surrounding Town property for uses permitted in the district.
(4) Adequate infrastructure. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary site
improvements have been or are being provided.
(5) Ingress and egress. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress and
egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
(6) Conform to zoning district regulations. The conditional use application shall conform to all
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
William Henke then moved that the Plan Commission has agreed the findings listed above are
present, and to recommend the Town Board approve the conditional use permit for Mr. Labinski
with the conditions as edited herein. Ralph Luedtke seconded this motion. The motion was then
approved on a 4-1 vote, with Mark Brunner abstaining from the vote.
b. Discussion and possible recommendation on proposed Ordinance 2010-15, “An Ordinance to
Amend Section 320-116, Fences and hedges., Town of Cedarburg Code of Ordinances,
Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, relating to picket and prohibited fences”*
Chairman Valentine and Administrator Culotta summarized that at their August 18th meeting, the
Plan Commission discussed the issue of how picket fences are currently prohibited in residential
districts within the Town. Although the Commission agreed that dangerous fences are not preferred,
the Commission also agreed that picket fences did not meet the definition of dangerous. It was a
consensus that the Town should not be restricting picket fences on private property. The Plan
Commission directed staff to come back to the September Plan Commission meeting with an
ordinance that would allow picket fences within the Town.
The Plan Commission was supportive of the proposed ordinance. David Flowers then moved that
the Plan Commission recommend the Town Board approve proposed Ordinance 2010-15, “An
Ordinance to Amend Section 320-116, Fences and hedges., Town of Cedarburg Code of Ordinances,
Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, relating to picket and prohibited fences.” Paul Waldo seconded this
motion, and the motion passed unanimously.
c.
Discussion and possible recommendation on proposed Ordinance 2010-16, “An Ordinance
to Amend Section 320-8, Jurisdiction and general requirements., Town of Cedarburg Code of
Ordinances, Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, relating to the regulation of municipalities, state
agencies, and Town lands or structures”*
The Town was recently contacted by Ozaukee County, who asked as to whether or not the Town
would be able to waive a permit fee for a project they would be completing within the Town. As staff
researched our ordinances and policies regarding this question from the County, staff contemplated
if our Code could be amended to better accommodate governmental uses and help streamline the
approval process. The proposed ordinance would amend the Code to work towards this end, with
particular regards to Town land, structures, facilities and uses.
Chairman Valentine explained that this ordinance would be in the best interests of the Town as
development occurs over time, particularly with regards to public improvements. David Flowers then
moved that the Plan Commission recommend the Town Board approve proposed Ordinance
4
TOWN OF CEDARBURG
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 15, 2010
2010-16, “An Ordinance to Amend Section 320-8, Jurisdiction and general requirements., Town of
Cedarburg Code of Ordinances, Ozaukee County, Wisconsin, relating to the regulation of
municipalities, state agencies, and Town lands or structures.” Paul Waldo seconded this motion, and
the motion passed unanimously.
6. ADJOURNMENT
Paul Waldo then moved to adjourn the meeting. Ralph Luedtke seconded, the motion carried
unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Eric Ryer
Director of Recreation & Planning
5