My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016/10/18 - OTHER - (NA) - Note
Burnett-County
>
Property Files
>
TOWN OF SCOTT
>
18874
>
2016/10/18 - OTHER - (NA) - Note
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2020 9:11:57 AM
Creation date
9/28/2017 3:51:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Property Files v2
Document Date
10/18/2016
Document Type 1
OTHER
Document Type 2
(NA)
Document Type 3
Note
Tax ID
18874
Pin Number
07-028-2-40-14-36-5 05-002-013000
Legacy Pin
028413603000
Municipality
TOWN OF SCOTT
Owner Name
DANIEL R & JULIA Y LINAHON
Property Address
27468 HILL RD
City
SPOONER
State
WI
Zip
54801
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
October 7, 2016 <br /> Page 2 <br /> First, under (I f)(a), a county may not require a person to establish a buffer on "previously <br /> developed land." In this case, the land was developed before July 14, 2015 (as you noted <br /> in your inspection three days later) and therefore the establishment of a buffer cannot be <br /> required. Second, even if the buffer existed on July 14, 2015, the maintenance of such a <br /> buffer can only be required if the county has a zoning ordinance that complies with Wis. <br /> Stat. § 59.692(lf)(b). The Burnett county ordinance does not comply with those <br /> requirements. Finally, even if Bumett county complied with the new law, Wis. Stat. <br /> § 59.692(1 d))(a) provides, "An ordinance enacted under this section may not regulate a <br /> matter more restrictively than the matter is regulated by a shoreland zoning standard." <br /> Burnett County requires a buffer 50 feet inland with a viewing corridor limited to 30 feet <br /> but NR 115.05(1)(c)2 provides for a buffer of only 35 feet and allows the viewing <br /> corridor to be 35 feet wide for each 100 feet of frontage. <br /> Based on the foregoing, we do not believe you have the authority to require any <br /> vegetative restoration. However, my client wants to come to an amicable resolution. They <br /> would propose to leave the rock wall and establish a vegetative buffer 35 feet deep with a <br /> 35-foot viewing access corridor. We would also need to review an appropriate mix of <br /> native vegetation. I would be glad to discuss this with you further at your convenience. <br /> Very truly yours, <br /> Paul G. Kent <br /> PGK:mai <br /> cc: Julie and Daniel Linahon <br /> L:\[XJCSW29226W000OINCORROBB1358 DOCX <br /> 1007160910 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.