Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022 Comprehensive Planning Committee - Minutes - 4/26/2023 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 April 26, 2023 10:00 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 10:00 a.m. by Committee Chairman, Steve Sandstrom. Members Present: Emily Nelson, Megan Mader, Clem Larson (on behalf of Jason Laumann), Steve Probst (on behalf of Jason Bodine), Ruth Hulstrom, Steve Sandstrom, Mary Dougherty, Kellie Pederson (arrived late), Charly Ray (arrived late), Ben Dufford, Jim Crandall, Cole Rabska, Keith Koenning, Mark Abeles-Allison, Nicole Boyd (virtual), and Paige Terry Members Excused: Lynn Divine, Douglas Smith, Jason Bodine, Bob Anderson, Barb Thorpe, and Jason Laumann Others Present: Fred Strand- County Board Vice-Chair (virtual), Kim Bro- Town of Washburn Planning Commission, Kelly Westlund-UW Extension Bayfield County Housing Educator (virtual), Sara Wartman- Bayfield County Health Director (virtual), Bruce Moore- Member of the Chequamegon Chapter of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby (virtual) Introductions: Introductions of the committee members were made. Public Comment: None. Discussion and Possible Action, Minutes March 15, 2023: Motion by Rabska, seconded by Dougherty to approve the minutes from the March 15, 2023, Comprehensive Planning Committee. Motion carried. 10:03 a.m. – Kellie Pederson and Charly Ray joined the meeting. Existing Land Use Map Amendments/Corrections Update: Clem Larson with the Northwest Regional Planning Commission explained that he has received multiple edits from the Towns of Bayfield and Clover. Towns have until May 12, 2023, to submit their edits. Larson reviewed the process for submitting a change for the existing land use map. The committee discussed the land use update process. Abeles-Allison recommended reaching out once more to local officials reminding them of the exercise and the deadline and questioned the validity of a town’s land use map if the town has not submitted any edits by the deadline. Town of Washburn Plan Commission representative, Kim Bro, suggested that the committee take action to include the town in the update process before the final plan is formally adopted. The committee discussed the different levels of engagement experienced by the towns. Hulstrom stated that communication action needs to be taken to further engage the towns the next time the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated. Future Land Use Mapping Exercise Updates and Discussion Regarding the Need for Town Follow Ups: Larson reported that some towns have completed the exercise while others are still in progress. The deadline to complete the future land use mapping exercise is May 12, 2023. Larson informed the 2 committee that a Q&A Workshop is scheduled for later in the afternoon that will give the towns the opportunity to ask questions about the exercise. Bro stated that the Town of Washburn found the five- acre inclusion in the Forestry and Agriculture categories to be useless. Larson explained how some categories are more suited to some towns than others. Assistant Forest Administrator, Steve Probst, spoke on behalf of the Town of Iron River and stated that the entire update process has been frustrating as the town was first informed to budget for the update process two years ago, but the town did not receive further communications from the county until recently. Probst expressed concern regarding the town being able to meet all of the necessary deadlines to submit a future land use map to the county before the exercise deadline is met. Bro asked if the county would agree to amend the future land use map of any town that was not able to submit a map before the plan is adopted. The committee discussed the county Comprehensive Plan being a living document that would allow the towns to update their future land use maps later and submit the new document to be added to the county Comprehensive Plan through the approval of the County Board. County Board Vice-Chairman, Fred Strand, explained that the Town of Oulu participated in the Comprehensive Plan update process back in 2010 and the town wanted to make changes to their digital map in 2015 but were denied access to the map and Strand stated that the town would like access to their map in the future for potential updates. Larson stated that the map would be made available to the town and the NWRPC will be able to update any maps. Pederson questioned the follow up on mapping categories to make sure they follow the categories that the county desires. Abeles-Allison asked if action should be taken on contacting the towns regarding Pederson’s statement earlier. It was decided that communication with the towns was not needed. Probst asked if the NWRPC would alter a town’s existing land use map to best fit the county’s categories present in the Comprehensive Plan. Nelson informed the committee that, if a town has not submitted a future land use map by the deadline, the NWRPC would utilize the existing land map to alter the categories to best fit the county future land use map. The committee suggested using a town’s present future land use map to convert it to the county’s future land use mapping categories and submit the map to the towns to be approved at their next town board meeting. Discussion took place regarding the importance of developing a process to keep towns up to date with the Comprehensive Plan update process. Nelson explained that the Wisconsin Department of Administration keeps a repository of updated town Comprehensive Plans as well as dates of when the plans were updated. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Workgroup Action Plan Review for Four Workgroups: a) Agricultural, Natural, & Cultural Resources: Dufford reviewed the changes to the Agricultural, Natural, & Cultural Resources action plan which included some additional goals and actions regarding zoning development standards. The committee discussed the language presented in Goal 1, Objective 2, Action 3 “improve zoning development standards to reduce potential for new development to exacerbate erosion of steep slopes.” The language will not be changed. Dufford reported that Gus Smith is working on language pertaining to the protection of Lake Superior. The workgroup is still in the process of working through the language and updating the timelines for the action items. Bro suggested that the conservation opportunities map and actions for specific species and habitats section be added to the background information of the section. Sandstrom brought up the topic of how to determine if the actions and goals for each section are being met. Nelson suggested adding an action plan to the implementation section of the plan that could explain how to ensure each action is being met. Pederson reiterated that triple bottom line thinking is crucial while updating the plan and stated this section appears to focus primarily on ecological thinking and less on social and economic thinking. Ray suggested a strong narrative and introduction in each section of the plan may be more important to explain the interconnectedness of the entire plan. The committee discussed how to expand social and economic thinking in each of the sections. b) Intergovernmental Cooperation: Sandstrom explained that reorganization was prioritized in the Intergovernmental Cooperation action plan such as changing some objectives to action items. 3 c) Transportation: Dougherty reviewed the changes in the Transportation action plan. The section was brought before the Transportation Coordination Committee for input. Access was a primary change made to the action plan. d) Utilities & Community Facilities: Dougherty reviewed the changes for the Utilities & Community Facilities section. The goals did not change, but some of the objectives under goal 1 were changed to action items. Dougherty brought attention to Goal 2, Objective 2, Action 2 “Develop and implement a Health in All Policies ordinance,” and stated that the action item may be deemed aspirational but urged its importance, stating it should be included in the plan. The committee discussed the needs of the aging population of the county, how these needs play into each section of the plan, and how to fulfill those needs. Pederson raised the question of the lack of general amenities included in the section. Dougherty explained that the section was a broad section, and the workgroup was unsure how to incorporation facilities that are not owned by Bayfield County into the section, so collaboration between the county, non- profits, municipalities, etc. will be needed. Dougherty suggested that senior care facilities, such as Northern Lights, and childcare facilities be listed in the section as critical infrastructure. The committee agreed that language pertaining to senior facilities and childcare facilities being critical infrastructure in the county. Discussion took place regarding facilities that may be needed in the future for the aging population as well as the younger, working population of the county. Ray suggested that a list of example community facilities be added to the section. Dougherty replied that the narrative of the section has information regarding what is a community facility. Committee members stated that a comprehensive list would quickly become obsolete. Pederson asked if there is a deadline to submit the action plans to the NWRPC with all the necessary edits and if an event that would allow public input and participation in reviewing the plan should be added to the calendar. Nelson replied that the committee could hold a public open house to allow the committee to present and review the plan with the community as well as a Q&A session. Nelson continued and stated that the future land use exercise is an outstanding item that will need to be added to the next month’s agenda. Bro suggested holding multiple open houses throughout the county. Nelson suggested drafting an action plan for the implementation section of the plan that would add accountability to track the progress of the goals outlined in the plan. Nelson further suggested including a “Assessment of Future Needs” section to each of the plan sections. The deadline to submit the action plans complete with edits, review/add an “assessment of future needs” and policies, as well as the element narrative is May 10, 2023. Committee members raised concerns regarding the ability to meet all necessary deadlines while implementing adequate public input into the plan’s revision and the possible need for an extension. Abeles-Allison suggested that the committee work towards the original goal of completing a solid draft of the document by July but possibly use an extension to work on the implementation and adoption of the plan. Nelson stated that a time-only extension is very possible. Pederson suggested adding an item to the next meeting’s agenda to discuss the public participation component of the plan update. The committee decided to maintain the July deadline for the completion of the draft plan but use the following meeting to create a timeline for the remaining components needing to be completed and decide on a time for public input. Resources 4 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. Next Meeting: a) Thursday, May 17, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in the County Board Room. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before the Bayfield County Comprehensive Planning Committee, Chairman Sandstrom adjourned the meeting at 12:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, LYNN M. DIVINE Bayfield County Clerk LMD/pat