DC PR&D approves continued use of existing access easement in Town of Sherman rather than 66-foot wide road
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By LeAnn R. Ralph
MENOMONIE — The Dunn County Planning, Resources and Development Committee has approved the continued use of an existing 20-foot-wide access easement instead of requiring a 66-foot wide road for a property in the Town of Sherman.
Scott and Anita Sykora own 33 acres on 410th Street in the Town of Sherman that has an existing house, outbuildings, well and septic with a 20-foot wide perpetual access easement to 410th Street and no direct access to a public road, said Tom Carlson, Dunn County surveyor, at the Planning, Resources and Development committee’s February 22 meeting.
The Sykoras are proposing to parcel off the existing improvements with 10 acres and are proposing to access the new lot with the existing 20-foot-wide access easement. The easement was granted in 2003, he said.
Using the 20-foot-wide access easement with the newly-created lot does not meet the 66-foot-wide road requirement in Dunn County’s new land division ordinance, Carlson said.
The role of the PR&D committee is not to approve the Certified Survey Map (CSM), but rather, to determine the suitability of the existing 20-foot-wide easement and what conditions, if any, need to be met to provide for adequate access to the proposed new lot, he said.
Under the county’s land division ordinance, “existing public or private roads or easements that are proposed to provide access to newly created lots shall meet the requirement of this section. If a road does not meet such requirements, the subdivider shall meet with the town and [PR&D] committee to determine the suitability of the existing road.”
The Sherman Plan Commission and the Sherman Town Board have approved the CSM and a note added to the CSM indicates the need for public town road access to the remaining land if the lots should ever be proposed to be built upon, Carlson said.
Scott Sykora explained to the PR&D committee that his daughter and her husband are planning to purchase the 10 acres with the house and other improvements, and “we are downsizing.”
The daughter and son-in-law are not in a financial position now to be able to purchase the entire 33-acre property, so that is why there is the proposal for the 10 acres with the house and other improvements, he said.
There is “zero intention” to sell the remaining 23 acres or build on the 23 acres, and the daughter and son-in-law will purchase the remaining acres when they are in a financial position to do so, Sykora said, noting that is why he is comfortable with the decision of the Sherman Town Board to add a note to the CSM stating that if the remaining property is developed, a 66-foot-wide road built to town standards will be required.
The town board and the plan commission had extensive discussions and had the same concerns about the access and the county’s land division ordinance, said Chase Potter, chair of the Sherman Town Board.
The plan commission and town board would typically not approve a CSM under these circumstances, but board members believe the note added to the CSM prevents future development until the town road is extended, he said.
How many?
Gary Bjork, county board supervisor from Colfax, asked how many lots all together are using the 20-foot-wide access easement.
Two properties to the south use the 20-foot easement, and other property to the east has access to another public road, Carlson said.
According to the county’s land division ordinance, there can be four lots with private access easements, and more than four lots would require building a road to town standards, he said.
Bjork also wondered about snow plowing in the winter and noted that with a 20-foot-wide access easement, the snow would have to be plowed onto private property.
Sykora said most of the snow that is plowed goes onto his own property on the north side of the easement.
Snow removal is not an issue, he said, adding that he takes care of snow removal along the easement for his neighbors, too.
Why okay
Carlson said, in his opinion, it would be acceptable to approve the continued use of the 20-foot-wide easement with the note included on the CSM about requiring a 66-foot wide road for further development.
If the PR&D committee decides the easement is not acceptable for the intended use, the house will still be there and someone will still live there, he said.
What is the difference if the house and improvements are on the existing 33 acres or are on 10 acres? Carlson asked.
The Sykoras are not going to be required to move the driveway based on the decision of the PR&D committee, he said.
Extending 410th
Bjork asked whether the Sherman Town Board is opposed to extending 410th Street.
The town board is not necessarily opposed to extending the road, but extending the road would require taking land away from the adjacent landowners, Potter said.
Extending the road is not feasible, and the landowners would either have to grant a road easement to the Town of Sherman, or the town would have to obtain the property through imminent domain, he said.
The town road is not likely to be extended for a long time, if ever, and the land is not likely to be developed, Potter said.
The Dunn County Planning, Resources and Development Committee approved the 20-foot-wide easement as suitable for the intended purpose given the restriction on the CSM by the Town of Sherman.
PR&D committee members voting to approve the motion were Tom Quinn (chair), James Anderson, Mike Kneer and Diane Morehouse.
Bjork voted “no” on the motion.
