Random Lake commission asks staff to study commercial fencing, discusses nonconforming‑use examples

During its April 13 meeting the Plan Commission of the Village of Random Lake discussed an agenda request about commercial fencing and reviewed examples for nonconforming uses; the commission tabled consideration of a Dilapidated Property Ordinance until its next meeting.

Clerk/Treasurer Stephanie Waala told the commission that the requestor for the commercial‑fencing item, Aaron Sennhenn, did not have to be present for the commission to proceed. Member Barbara Ruege said she wanted staff to investigate the issue further by identifying which properties are involved, their current zoning, and what types of businesses the request might apply to. Member Peter Lederer asked whether industrial properties should be included in that review. Member John Schluechtermann suggested the commission start by creating a list of properties and then narrow which zoning districts should be considered.

On nonconforming uses, Chairman Duane Urbanski said the village attorney requested specific examples to be included in the ordinance. Commissioners suggested several example rules and clarifications for the draft: allowing repairs within an existing variance footprint; permitting the remaining portion of a house to keep a matching setback to square off a structure; requiring replacement of a garage when one previously existed but not requiring a new garage where none existed before; and allowing stair or step encroachments if necessary for code compliance and ADA accessibility.

Chairman Urbanski tabled the Dilapidated Property Ordinance to the next meeting. The commission listed storage land use and the Dilapidated Property Ordinance as future agenda items.

Next steps: Staff were asked to identify affected properties and zoning categories for the commercial‑fencing request and to return with findings at a future meeting. The nonconforming‑uses examples will be refined per the attorney’s request.