The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022 Comprehensive Planning Committee - Minutes - 3/15/2023 1 Bayfield County Clerk Lynn M. Divine, County Clerk Kim Mattson, Accountant Jeran Delaine, Deputy Clerk Gail M. Reha, Bookkeeper Paige Terry, Clerk III Ph: 715.373.6100 ● Fx: 715.373.6153 ● Email: Lynn.Divine@bayfieldcounty.wi.gov ● 117 E. Fifth Street, PO Box 878, Washburn, WI 54891 Minutes of the: Comprehensive Planning Committee Meeting March 15, 2023 9:00 a.m. Meeting Held in the Bayfield County Emergency Operations Center (EOC), Annex Building, Washburn, WI & Remotely The meeting of the Comprehensive Planning Committee was called to order at 9:10 a.m. by Committee Chairman, Steve Sandstrom. Members Present: Steve Sandstrom, Charly Ray, Jim Crandall, Bob Anderson, Kellie Pederson, Barb Thorpe (virtually), Keith Koenning, Nicole Boyd (virtually), Travis Tulowitzky (on behalf of Ben Dufford), Cole Rabska, Jason Laumann (virtually), Emily Nelson, Megan Mader, and Paige Terry Members Excused: Lynn Divine, Douglas Smith, Jason Bodine, Mary Dougherty, Ben Dufford, Ruth Hulstrom, and Mark Abeles-Allison Others Present: Bruce Moore- Member of the Chequamegon Chapter of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby, Fred Strand- County Board Vice-Chair, Jeff Silbert- County Board Supervisor, Kim Bro- Town of Washburn Planning Commission, Kelly Westlund-UW Extension Bayfield County Housing Educator 2. Introductions: Introductions of the committee members were made. 3. Public Comment: None. 4. Discussion and Possible Action, Minutes February 15, 2022: Motion by Crandall, seconded by Rabska to approve the minutes from the February 15, 2023, Comprehensive Planning Committee meeting with the recommended change. Motion carried. 5. Existing Land Use Map Amendments/Corrections Update: Nelson informed the committee that Northwest Regional Planning Commission received corrections from the Town of Bayfield and the Town of Clover. The link to submit mapping changes will be closing at the end of March and towns will no longer be able to submit changes. Koenning stated that the existing land use map exercise may be overwhelming to towns that are not familiar with completing the exercise. Nelson suggested that another notification be sent to town clerks and town planning commissions. The committee agreed. Terry volunteered to ask Hulstrom to send out another notification. Kim Bro, Town of Washburn Plan Commission, reported that the Town of Washburn’s Plan Commission has reviewed the map, came up with a list of changes, and have brought it forward to the Town Board the night before. Nelson asked if the deadline for the existing land use exercise should be pushed back to April. Laumann stated that there is no reason the deadline for both maps can’t coincide and suggested both deadlines be open until May. The committee agreed to extend the existing land use mapping exercise to May. Bro informed the committee that the Town of Washburn Town Board had concerns regarding Abeles-Allison’s presentation at the Town’s Association meeting at stated that the examples of density presented matched what currently exists in the plan and did not reflect what is in the land use chapter of the plan. Bro brought up concerns regarding the town board process and Laumann explained that the 2 Town Board comprehensive plan process is a separate process from the County’s comprehensive planning process. 6. Future Land Use Map Mailings and Updates, Discussion Regarding Need for Town Follow Ups: Nelson informed the committee that each of the towns received a memo regarding the exercise, an existing land use map, a future land use map, and a future land use mapping exercise FAQ. 7. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Workgroup Action Plan Review for Four Workgroups: Sandstrom informed the committee that the Intergovernmental Cooperation group was not ready to present at the meeting. Nelson stated that Economic Development would be ready to present if there was enough time. a) Land Use: Ray reviewed the changes that have made to the Land Use section of the plan which include revision of the mission statement, emphasis on the maintenance of the rural landscape of the county and included additional goals and action items added to the plan. Laumann asked that action 1 of objective 2 for goal 1 in the section be listed more as a policy than an action item. Ray explained why the workgroup listed the item as an action item. Laumann stated an action item gives more valuative criteria to evaluate a potential development proposal. Ray suggested rewording the action item, so it followed more of the action item criteria. Discussion took place regarding the difference between action items listed under the objectives and policies. The committee reviewed the SMART criteria that the workgroups followed to make their action items measurable with the attendees. Bayfield County Board Vice-Chair, Fred Strand, mentioned that the towns were very involved with the comprehensive planning process back in 2008-2010 and explained that each of the towns’ plans were included as brochure plans in the county’s comprehensive plan. Laumann stated that there is no reason that the towns cannot be included and explained he is unaware of any statements that were previously made in the old comprehensive plan. Strand stated that the Town of Oulu will be mentioning in their comprehensive plan that it is included in the county’s plan and asked that the county do the same. b) Housing: Pederson reviewed changes made to the housing section draft which included updating the objectives, actions, and responsible parties. Bayfield County Conservation Technician, Travis Tulowitzky, asked Pederson if there was an objective or action item within the section pertaining to the encouragement of multi- unit developments within existing infrastructure. Pederson reviewed objective one and objective three with the committee and reviewed their relevance to the question. Discussion took place regarding the definition of density and how it impacts the county. c) Hazard Mitigation: Anderson reviewed the revisions to the hazard mitigation section of the plan. Anderson explained that the formatting for the section has been changed. Sandstrom asked if Bayfield County as an EMS agency should be mentioned in the section. The committee agreed that it did not need to be mentioned. Pederson suggested that citizens or residents be mentioned in the section’s vision statement. Laumann suggested adding an element regarding evaluating, reviewing, or considering natural and technological hazards as part of the development approval process. d) Economic Development: Rabska reviewed the edits made to the economic development section. Rabska stated that some of the dates in the section may be changed to make the more achievable. 8. Resources: Nelson informed the committee that the existing land use review exercise is available on the NWRPC website. 3 Pederson asked what will come next after this exercise is completed. Nelson explained that additional revisions and refinements will be made to the presented sections based on comments made at the meeting. The remaining workgroups will present at the next meeting. Laumann informed the committee that it will have to ultimately approve each section for inclusion in the final Comprehensive Plan. Laumann stated that the missing information from the Future Land Use exercise will play a big part in finalizing the documents and finishing the plan. 9. Comprehensive Planning Calendar: a) May 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. b) June 21, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. c) July 19, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. 10. Next Meeting: a) Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 10:00 AM (rescheduled to April 26, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in the EOC) 11. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before the Bayfield County Comprehensive Planning Committee, Chairman Sandstrom adjourned the meeting at 10:52 a.m. Respectfully submitted, LYNN M. DIVINE Bayfield County Clerk LMD/pat