1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOARD) OF ADJUSTMENT - MinuLe ; April 28, 1983 Pa5e 5 (.) 2) . The property in question was duly registered in 1968-69 as required by the ordinance. Madison Sand & Gravel purchased the site with re- liance on the interpretation of the Zoning Administrator - that the property was a non-conforming mineral extraction site which could be utilized, and, the interpretation of the Dane County Board of Adjustment that the entire parcel owned by the registrant in 1968 was included. 3) . Mineral extraction sites are typically used when there is a need for the mineral in the general area of the site. Such practice provides a much lower cost factor because a substantial part of the cost is in the hauling. The site may otherwise be inactive for a considerabl- time until a need again arises. The majority of sand, gravel, lime etc. , extractors have operated in this manner over the years. 4) . The Zoning Administrator and related Zoning Committees, with an under standing of the mineral extraction mode of operation, have consistantly interpretated the ordinance to allow this sporatic operation of the non-conforming mineral extraction sites to continue irregardless of the time lapse when the site was inactive. 5) . Zoning Ordinance Amendment#2795, Section 10.21 (1) , effective 12-21-81 was added to the non-conforming use provisions at the re- quest of the Agriculture, Environmental and Zoning Committee and states that mineral extraction sites that were registered as non- C., conforming sites under ss 10.126 (2) (a) 5. shall not be considered as abandoned or discontinued if the site is inactive for more than one year. 6) . The site is obviously an area where mineral extraction (sand & gravel has taken place and was in' existance when the plat of Drover's Woods was recorded. Residents of the plat testified that they had been aware of the site, but, had thought or been advised (by other than county officials) that the site was abandoned or worked out. ' 7) . Residents of Drover's Woods testified of additional concerns, ie: noise, dirt and dust pollution, adverse effect on property values, possible adverse effect on the water table. CONCLUSION: 1. Although the Zoning Ordinance - does not specifically state that non-conforming mineral extraction could be continued regard- less of lapse of time, the nature of the use must be considered. A site not being used for periods of time, which may be substan- tial in some cases, is inherent to the nature of the business and so constitutes a normal, to be expected, use of these sites. 2. When the ordinance is notspecifically clear in its language, all ambiguity is to be determined in the free use of property. In this instance the nature of the use is evident; therefore, free use of the property for non-conforming mineral extraction must be supported. 1;01