Hartford Wal-Mart approval appealed
Decision was flawed, group says

By PHILLIP HERMANN - GM Today Staff

September 15, 2006

Hartford Citizens for Responsible Government, represented in the appeal by Madison-based Cullen Weston Pines & Bach law firm filed the action this week with City Clerk Lori Hetzel.

In seeking the appeal, attorney Kira E. Loehr of the legal firm, wrote that the approval is flawed for several reasons.

" ...(A) conditional use permit is required for ‘petroleum service stations.’ The proposed Wal-Mart at issue in this appeal willl have an oil and lube service center on the site. By definition, the word ‘petroleum’ includes fuel and lub-ricating oil. The oil and lube service center is clearly a ‘petroleum service station.’ Therefore, the City Plan Commission erred by not requiring Wal-Mart to submit an application for a conditional use permit and not following the requirements for conditional use permits... "

One of the requirements, Loehr states, are that structures issued such a permit are "in accordance with the purpose and intent of this ordinance and are found to be not hazardous, harmful, offensive, or other wise adv-erse to the environment or the value of the neighborhood or the community."

In citing the potentially negative impacts of the Wal-Mart Supercenter on the local economy, Loehr cited the stated purpose of the city’s zoning ordinance. She states it as being "to promote the comfort, health, safety, morals, prosperity, and general welfare of the residents of the City of Hart-ford, Wisconsin," and "(t)o en-courage a business use environment that is compatible with the residential character of the city."

Loehr further states in the request for appeal, "HCRG and many other residents of the City have demonstrated significant opposition to the proposed Wal-Mart because of the wide-range of negative effects the ‘Supercenter’ will have on the quality of life in Hartford and the residential character of the City. The Plan Commission did not demonstrate that it adequately considered those concerns when it approved the final site plan, nor was there substantial evidence supporting the decision with respect to fulfilling the intent and purpose of the ordinance."

Because the city requires that such an appeal be filed by "an aggrieved person," Loehr states that "HCRG’s participants include individuals who live in the downtown Hartford area and in the area of the proposed Wal-Mart. HCRG and its participants are aggrieved persons because they have a substantial interest that is adversely affected by the Plan Commission’s determination."

Those adverse effects include "increased traffic, stormwater runoff issues and contaminants emanating from the proposed oil and lube center."

The city’s Zoning Board of Appeals meets on an "as needed" basis. Members are Carl Hulbert, Perry Hahn, Micki Hoffmann, Kevin Volm and Kip Nelson (alternate). One seat on the board is currently vacant and an alternate position also is vacant.

The city has yet to review the request for an appeal. Once and if it has been deemed applicable, a date and time will be set for the hearing. City Administrator Gary Koppelberger said he anticipates the matter would be resolved by the end of October.

Koppelberger said the city must hire an attorney to represent the appeals board because City Attorney Karen Christianson has advised and will represent the city’s planning and development department at a hearing.

"In this case, we anticipate the cost would be $5,000 or more. I plan to ask both sides, Wal-Mart and the HCRG, if they’d be willing to split that cost evenly. Wal-Mart has indicated they would do so if the HCRG does," Koppelberger said, adding that it would be voluntary for both sides to split the costs. If that doesn’t happen, he said, the money must come out of the city’s budget.