Trans 233.08 NoteNote: Technical figures 2, 3, 3m, 4, 4m, 5, 6 and 6m within Procedure 11-10-5 have various dates other than June 10, 1998 or are undated.
Trans 233.08(4)(4)The land division map shall show the boundary of a setback area on the face of the land division map and shall clearly label the boundary as a highway setback line and shall clearly show existing structures and improvements lying within the setback area.
Trans 233.08(5)(5)The owner shall place the following restriction upon the same sheet of the land division map that shows the highway setback line:
“No improvements or structures are allowed between the right-of-way line and the highway setback line. Improvements and structures include, but are not limited to, signs, parking areas, driveways, wells, septic systems, drainage facilities, buildings and retaining walls. It is expressly intended that this restriction is for the benefit of the public as provided in section 236.293, Wisconsin Statutes, and shall be enforceable by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation or its assigns. Contact the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for more information. The phone number may be obtained by contacting the County Highway Department.”
If on a CSM there is limited space for the above restriction on the same sheet that shows the setback line, then the following abbreviated restriction may be used with the standard restriction placed on a subsequent page: “Caution - Highway Setback Restrictions Prohibit Improvements. See sheet ______.”
Trans 233.08 HistoryHistory: Cr. Register, January, 1999, No. 517, eff. 2-1-99; cr. (2) (c), (d) and (3n), Register, January, 2001, No. 541, eff. 2-1-01.
Trans 233.105Trans 233.105Noise, vision corners and drainage.
Trans 233.105(1)(1)Noise. When noise barriers are warranted under the criteria specified in ch. Trans 405, the department is not responsible for any noise barriers for noise abatement from existing state trunk highways or connecting highways. Noise resulting from geographic expansion of the through-lane capacity of a highway is not the responsibility of the owner, user or land divider. In addition, the following notation shall be placed on the land division map:
“The lots of this land division may experience noise at levels exceeding the levels in s. Trans 405.04, Table I. These levels are based on federal standards. The department of transportation is not responsible for abating noise from existing state trunk highways or connecting highways, in the absence of any increase by the department to the highway’s through-lane capacity.”
Trans 233.105 NoteNote: Some land divisions will result in facilities located in proximity to highways where the existing noise levels will exceed recommended federal standards. Noise barriers are designed to provide noise protection only to the ground floor of abutting buildings and not other parts of the building. Noise levels may increase over time. Therefore, it is important to have the caution placed on the land division map to warn owners that the department is not responsible for further noise abatement for traffic and traffic increases on the existing highway, in the absence of any increase by the department to the highway’s through-lane capacity.
Trans 233.105(2)(2)Vision corners. The department may require the owner to dedicate land or grant an easement for vision corners at the intersection of a highway with a state trunk highway or connecting highway to provide for the unobstructed view of the intersection by approaching vehicles. The owner shall have the choice of providing the vision corner by permanent easement or by dedication. If the department requires such a dedication or grant, the owner shall include the following notation on the land division map:
“No structure or improvement of any kind is permitted within the vision corner. No vegetation within the vision corner may exceed 30 inches in height.”
Trans 233.105 NoteNote: Guide dimensions for vision corners are formally adopted in the Department’s Facilities Development Manual, Chapter 11, pursuant to s. 227.01 (13) (e), Stats.
Trans 233.105(3)(3)Drainage. The owner of land that directly or indirectly discharges stormwater upon a state trunk highway or connecting highway shall submit to the department a drainage analysis and drainage plan that assures to a reasonable degree, appropriate to the circumstances, that the anticipated discharge of stormwater upon a state trunk highway or connecting highway following the development of the land is less than or equal to the discharge preceding the development and that the anticipated discharge will not endanger or harm the traveling public, downstream properties or transportation facilities. Various methods of hydrologic and hydraulic analysis consistent with sound engineering judgment and experience and suitably tailored to the extent of the possible drainage problem are acceptable. Land dividers are not required by this subsection to accept legal responsibility for unforeseen acts of nature or forces beyond their control. Nothing in this subsection relieves owners or users of land from their obligations under s. 88.87 (3) (b), Stats.
Trans 233.105 NoteNote: In sec. 88.87 (1), Stats., the Legislature has recognized that development of private land adjacent to highways frequently changes the direction and volume of flow of surface waters. The Legislature found that it is necessary to control and regulate the construction and drainage of all highways in order to protect property owners from damage to lands caused by unreasonable diversion or retention of surface waters caused by a highway and to impose correlative duties upon owners and users of land for the purpose of protecting highways from flooding or water damage. Wisconsin law, sec. 88.87 (3), Stats., imposes duties on every owner or user of land to provide and maintain a sufficient drainage system to protect downstream and upstream highways. Wisconsin law, sec. 88.87 (3) (b), Stats., provides that whoever fails or neglects to comply with this duty is liable for all damages to the highway caused by such failure or neglect. The authority in charge of maintenance of the highway may bring an action to recover such damages, but must commence the action within 90 days after the alleged damage occurred. Section 893.59, Stats. Additional guidance regarding drainage may be found in Chapter 13 and Procedure 13-1-1 of the Department’s Facilities Development Manual.
Trans 233.105 HistoryHistory: Cr. Register, January, 1999, No. 517, eff. 2-1-99; am. (1), (2) (intro.) and (3), Register, January, 2001, No. 541, eff. 2-1-01.
Trans 233.11Trans 233.11Special exceptions.
Trans 233.11(1)(1)Department consent. No municipality or county may issue a variance or special exception from this chapter without the prior written consent of the department.
Trans 233.11(3)(3)
Trans 233.11(3)(a)(a) Special exceptions for setbacks allowed. The department, district office or, if authorized by a delegation agreement under sub. (7), reviewing municipality may authorize special exceptions from this chapter only in appropriate cases when warranted by specific analysis of the setback needs, as determined by the department, district office or reviewing municipality. A special exception may not be contrary to the public interest and shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of ch. 236, Stats., and of this chapter. The department, district office or reviewing municipality may grant a special exception that adjusts the setback area or authorizes the erection or installation of any structure or improvement within a setback area only as provided in this subsection. The department, district office or reviewing municipality may require such conditions and safeguards as will, in its judgment, secure substantially the purposes of this chapter.
Trans 233.11 NoteNote: The phrase “practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship” has been eliminated from the rule that was effective February 1, 1999, to avoid the adverse legal consequences that could result from the existing use of the word “variance.” The Wisconsin Supreme Court has interpreted “variance” and this phrase to make it extremely difficult to grant “variances” and in so doing has eased the way for third party legal challenges to many “variances” reasonably granted. See State v. Kenosha County Bd. of Adjust., 218 Wis. 2d 396, 577 N.W.2d 813 (1998). The Supreme Court defined “unnecessary hardship” in this context as an owner having “no reasonable use of the property without a variance.” Id. at 413. The “special exception” provision in this rule is not intended to be so restrictive and has not been administered in so restrictive a fashion. In the first year following revisions of ch. Trans 233, effective February 1, 1999, the Department granted the vast majority of “variances” requested, using a site and neighborhood-sensitive context based on specific analysis.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)(b) Specific analysis for special exceptions for setbacks. Upon request for a special exception from a setback requirement of this chapter, the department, district office or reviewing municipality shall specifically analyze the setback needs. The analysis may consider all of the following:
Trans 233.11(3)(b)1.1. The structure or improvement proposed and its location.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)2.2. The vicinity of the proposed land division and its existing development pattern.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)3.3. Land use and transportation plans and the effect on orderly overall development plans of local units of government.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)4.4. Whether the current and forecasted congestion of the abutting highway is projected to be worse than level of service “C,” as determined under s. Trans 210.05 (1), within the following 20 years.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)5.5. The objectives of the community, developer and owner.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)6.6. The effect of the proposed structure or improvement on other property or improvements in the area.
Trans 233.11(3)(b)7.7. The impact of potential highway or other transportation improvements on the continued existence of the proposed structure or improvement.