HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 6/17/2010Page 1
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
MINUTES
BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING / ZONING COMMITTEE
Board Room, County Courthouse – Washburn, WI
Public Hearing / Meeting – June 17, 2010 - 4:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER OF PUBLIC HEARING: By Chairman Brett Rondeau at 4:00 PM.
2. ROLL CALL: Jardine, Miller, Rantala, Rondeau, all present; Maki absent.
Others Present: Director Karl Kastrosky; L.U.S. Travis Tulowitzky; AZA Mike Furtak; Secretary
Marilyn Jaeger.
3. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION: Presented by Director Karl Kastrosky.
4. REVIEW OF MEETING FORMAT: By Chairman Rondeau.
5. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. GEORGE BARNES, MICHAEL BARNES, JAMES JOHNSON REZONE REQUEST (Forestry-1
to Agricultural-1) on 20-acre parcel (#04-004-2-45-09-28-2-04-000-10000) ), located in the E ½
of the SE ¼ of the NW ¼, Section 28, Township 45 N, R9 W, Town of Barnes.
Applicant(s) were not present. No one spoke in support / opposition. Director Kastrosky gave
the file report noting this request doesn‘t change density requirements or lot sizes but allows
different uses; is being pursued because the current and historical land use is agriculture,
therefore would be more compatible. No Town report received from Barnes; do not have an
indication of their position; no other correspondence on file.
B. STELLAR EAST & STELLAR WEST HOLDINGS, LP AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE
REQUEST: To exceed 35’ height restriction (requesting 41’) on 23.87–acre parcel (#04-018-
2-44-07-14-3-05-009-10000), described as part of Gov’t Lot 9, Section 14, Township 44 N,
Range 7 W, Town of Drummond.
Agent Randy Bjork presented some history of this application; another architect worked on
plans to begin with, the property changed hands and there was a mix-up with paperwork. It has
since been discovered the 35 ft. height requirement had been inadvertently missed (due to walk-
out basement plans). He reported that the Stewarts send their apologies—this was not
intentional at all. No one spoke in support or in favor.
Kastrosky said the proposed height is 41 ft. which is six inches taller than the ordinance
threshold; Town of Drummond approved this as being compatible w/ their land use plan; file
correspondence is from Michael Batten in support, and Pat Leighton listing no objections.
Kastrosky again explained that there was a series of events that brought this about (after-the-
fact) when the architect changed after the property changed hands. Chairman Rondeau said
this home is in hardwoods, height is considerably below tree line and not ‗apparent‘, he believes
this was an honest mistake.
C. MARIANNE MUELLER REZONE REQUEST (Forestry-1 to Commercial) on 5.19-acre parcel
(#04-004-2-45-09-33-1-04-000-30000), described as part of the N ½ of the SE ¼ of the NE ¼
(found to be an illegally created parcel), Section 33, Township 45 N, Range 9 W, Town of
Barnes.
Page 2
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
Applicant was not present; no spoke in support / opposition. Kastrosky reported nothing was
submitted from the Town of Barnes from their Tuesday evening meeting and no other
correspondence was on file.
D. GLEN W. HARVEY REZONE REQUEST (Residential-2 to Residential-1) on 1.23-acre parcel
(#04-012-2-43-08-35-1-01-000-04000) described as the W 107’ of E 407’ of N 500’ of the NE ¼
of the NE ¼, Section 35, Township 43 N, Range 8 W, Town of Cable.
Glen Harvey was present; it was noted that the rear parcel was missed when special
exemptions were done by the Town of Cable to correct/change zoning districts. No one spoke in
support / opposition.
Director Kastrosky reported the Town denied the request but states it fits w/ their current and
future land use plan and said many nonconforming parcels existed in Cable, approx. two years
ago a special exception was granted for these parcels in order that they didn‘t have to come
forward repeatedly for rezones. The Town is under the impression that we can include this in
with those others as it was missed at that time because they didn‘t know who owned the
property, however, the only way it can be done is to apply for a rezone. He said more discussion
would be held in the business section of the meeting when AZA Furtak would be present with his
input.
E. BILL / MARSHA WALSH CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: Operation of a two-unit short-
term rental w/ replacement of one of the two units in the future to construct a new
residence (request also encompasses the replacement of the residence on the parcel of land
which cannot be sub-divided). Property is a 1.70-acre parcel (#04-034-2-43-06-02-3-05-005-
60000) described at Lot 2 of CSM 81, Section 2, Township 43 N, Range 6 W, Town of
Namakagon.
Bill / Marsha Walsh said they recently purchased this property with a home and cabin on site;
former owner rented the cabin, they would like to do the same. Kastrosky reported there are
two dwelling units now, one may be torn down, and replaced w/ no net gain of units from the
current status. It was noted that the Town crossed out ―2‖ on the request form and wrote in ―1‖
as they want to see that the cabin is made habitable first. Furtak said the Town doesn‘t want
both rented until the smaller cabin is repaired and brought up to code. It was noted that the
owners can‘t rent it anyway until it is permitted by the Health Dept.
Walsh said the property is up for sale; he doesn‘t plan to tear one down just yet in case a new
prospective owner wants it for a year ‗round home. It was noted the Walsh‘s would have two
years to do this as a conditional use permit. Furtak reported one structure is now in useable
condition and one needs upgrading. Walsh said the septic checked out OK with each unit
having its own tank.
Speaking in Support / Opposition: None
File Report, Kastrosky: The Town wants to see the cabin repaired before giving approval.
Walsh said he is concerned the Town won‘t approve it after money is spent to fix it up, etc.
Furtak noted the Health Dept. won‘t issue an occupancy license if the building isn‘t safe or
doesn‘t pass inspection and it seems the Town is trying ―to be the Health Dept. here‖; he feels
the Town is ―over-thinking‖ this. Walsh reported that the Health Dept. is coming in the next week
to approve and set the occupancy limit, etc.; he also noted there is no lead based paint – he had
it tested.
F. WILLIAM / DENISE MARINCEL (Owners) & DAVE JOHNSON (Agent) CONDITIONAL USE
REQUEST: Construct / Operate Fish Farm (w/ processing, storage, and distribution on
Page 3
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
site and from the site; request also includes use of existing buildings to operate the
Crossroads Outreach Center [Transitional Ministry]). Property is 40-acre parcel (#04-020-2-
47-05-29-1-02-000-10000) described as the NW ¼ of the NE ¼, Section 29, Township 47 N,
Range 5 W, Town of Eileen.
Agent Dave Johnson (Agent / CEO of Aqua Farms) explained the project which has been over
a year in planning. He said Tim Johnson has an aquaculture background and will oversee that
portion; if approved, they have a contract for fish purchase to high end retail grocer who has
extremely high standards, basically along natural / organic lines. There will be tight regulations
on the process (hormone / chemical free process); eggs will be obtained from a certified supplier
in State of WA. Tanks are fiberglass; filters are from a reputable company w/ long history; there
will be about 12 months of phases to fill the tanks. They will work w/ the DNR to meet all their
requirements. Fish will be processed / packaged in the facility and transported out; they are
working with various companies with plans to utilize everything they possibly can; they will
practice good stewardship, being accountable to lenders and investors. Johnson said they
understand there is some skepticism and opposition, but their goal is to be a viable business,
presenting opportunities for the community.
There was discussion on wells; amount of water required, concerns about neighboring wells, etc.
Johnson said the issues and concerns are valid but believes they have been addressed; due to
the amount of water needed they don‘t believe they need higher capacity wells; existing well is
capable of about 4,000 to 5,000 gallons a day, the current dairy farm uses less than that and the
fish farm will be even less. Kastrosky stated that most wells in that area are flowing wells.
RE the Transitional Ministry portion of the request, Rich Larson spoke. He said this is a faith
based recovery program, not a prison, there will be no sex offenders or criminals but a one year
voluntary program for people already in the community who choose of their own free will to come
for help in their lives. There will be ―24-7‖ supervision; it is for those who want help to getting
their lives back on track, learn and practice some life skills, as well as spiritual growth. Larson
said Salem [Baptist Church] is behind this so the option of tax-free-status is available but they
aren‘t taking that option-- they will pay property taxes. This not a prison system, therefore ‗Huber
Law‘ won‘t be a factor; there will be five or six residents at a time; applicants for employment will
come from the community (possibly 30 employees).
Speaking in Support / Opposition: None
File Report, Kastrosky: The Town approved this as it is compatible with their land use plan; he
noted an e-mail from Keith and Donna Grubisic with questions which he felt were answered.
In further discussion, it was clarified by Larson that residents will be supervised 24/7 ―wherever
they are on site‖ and some employees in the fish farm itself will have an understanding of this
ministry and will supervise those in the fish facility. Miller was concerned that water volume be
metered.
G. BAYFIELD COUNTY (Owner) & NATHAN WARD (Agent) CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST:
Construct 199 ft. Telecommunication Multi-Use Tower & Facility Structure on leased
property described as a 5.754-acre parcel, 0.229-acre parcel, & 0.362-acre parcel (#04-004-2-
43-09-21-2-01-000-10000) located in part of the NW ¼ of the NW ¼, Section 21, Township 43 N,
Range 9 W, Town of Barnes.
Nathan Ward noted he was before the Committee in January re a parcel immediately south,
which didn‘t take place because they didn‘t come to terms w/ the property owners, therefore, this
location replaces that first application. The tower is designed to provide space for emergency, to
hold three or more (co-locaters), depending on loading requirements of providers.
Page 4
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
Support / Opposition: None
6. ADJOURNMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING: Motion by Jardine / Miller to adjourn at 5:01 PM; carried.
Chairman Rondeau called for a break at that time.
7. CALL TO ORDER OF PLANNING / ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING: By Chairman Rondeau at
5:06 PM.
8. ROLL CALL: Jardine, Miller, Rantala, Rondeau, all present; Maki, absent.
9. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING(S): Jardine / Miller made a motion to approve the May 20,
2010 minutes as prepared. Discussion: Kastrosky said he recently learned that if minutes are put
on the Web in draft form, until approved by the Committee, it must be noted as a ‗draft copy‘. He
also asked the Committee to pay specific attention to Items J., K., and L. on today‘s agenda. There
can be no discussion in the future as specific items must be presented ahead of time, noted, and
placed on the agenda. Miller then noted a correction on page 7 of the May minutes; he said the
percentage quoted in Item J, should be 45% not 50%. [―Nelson said 35 acres; 4 bldg sites with 50%
open space which is larger than it needs to be and some of the lots are 12 acres in size.‖].
Jardine/Miller amended the motion to change the above statement. Carried 4 yes / 0 no.
10. BUSINESS:
A. GEORGE BARNES, MICHAEL BARNES, JAMES JOHNSON REZONE REQUEST (Forestry-1
to Agricultural-1) on 20-acre parcel (#04-004-2-45-09-28-2-04-000-10000) ), located in the E ½
of the SE ¼ of the NW ¼, Section 28, Township 45 N, R9 W, Town of Barnes.
Furtak stated this has been used for pasture for many years; it was F-1 when Barnes adopted
zoning in 1973 but used agriculturally historically, as pasture today, and they want the zoning to
reflect both historical and current use. He noted there was no Town form on file and called
requesting it be faxed, however their fax machine is currently out of order. He said reported
approval with no conditions placed. Motion by Miller/Jardine to approve but contingent upon
receiving the TBA form in writing; carried 4 yes / 0 no.
B. STELLAR EAST & STELLAR WEST HOLDINGS, LP AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE
REQUEST: To exceed 35’ height restriction (requesting 41’) on 23.87–acre parcel (#04-018-
2-44-07-14-3-05-009-10000), described as part of Gov’t Lot 9, Section 14, Township 44 N,
Range 7 W, Town of Drummond.
Motion by Miller / Rantala to approve. Discussion: Jardine was unclear about reasons for this
being ‗after-the-fact‘ and Furtak explained an original / different architect drew up the plans; C&S
Design did the design for a tram down to the lake and undertook the staking out of the building.
The initial permit listed a basement but it didn‘t identify it as a walk-out basement and it didn‘t
appear to be a walk-out at that time. When he [Furtak] discovered it later, it changed the
dynamics of height measurement. Furtak said he does not believe anything was done
intentionally whatsoever and that they [Sam Johnson family / group] have always followed our
rules and have always sought to do things correctly. Motion then carried, 4 yes / 0 no.
C. MARIANNE MUELLER REZONE REQUEST (Forestry-1 to Commercial) on 5.19-acre parcel
(#04-004-2-45-09-33-1-04-000-30000), described as part of the N ½ of the SE ¼ of the NE ¼
(found to be an illegally created parcel), Section 33, Township 45 N, Range 9 W, Town of
Barnes.
Furtak said initially this property was sold to Ms. Mueller as an over-5-acre parcel which didn‘t
require a CSM but could just be recorded w/ the legal description in Register of Deeds, then
Page 5
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
transfer the property. She is now looking to develop a greenhouse / gift shop on the parcel, and
wanted to sell it but saw it is not 300‘ in width; 300 ‗is required in F-, therefore an illegal parcel
was created. He noted the problem is corrected by commercial zoning. Motion by Jardine /
Rantala to approve; no further discussion; motion carried; 4 yes / 0 no.
D. GLEN W. HARVEY REZONE REQUEST (Residential-2 to Residential-1) on 1.23-acre parcel
(#04-012-2-43-08-35-1-01-000-04000) described as the W 107’ of E 407’ of N 500’ of the NE ¼
of the NE ¼, Section 35, Township 43 N, Range 8 W, Town of Cable.
Kastrosky stated this is a complex issue. Furtak said it is unfortunate because the Town has a
whole block of R-2; this is a 1.23-acre parcel and there is no way to make the 75‘ setback from
the lot line; there is another parcel on the highway zoned ‗commercial‘ which has two small
cabins. They want to place an addition to create one residence (with the addition between) but
cannot do it because one parcel is substandard. If rezoned to R-1, they could configure three
lots which would work.
Furtak noted he Town didn‘t want R-1, considered it spot zoning, and others with larger lots
would want to create small lots. He said the Town is willing to approve this through the
variance process but a rezone was much less expensive to pursue first. The Town denied the
rezone. There was discussion about a letter on file from Town Chairman Ludzack. Furtak said
this could be interpreted as a ―hardship‖ but the final determination is made by the Board of
Adjustment. He stated the ‗special exemption‘, as was approved for Cable in the past when this
parcel was missed, won‘t work—it has to be an entirely new case.
Kastrosky suggested the possibility exists, instead of denying, to table this, see if some kind of
solution can be found so we won‘t have to charge the applicant another fee. He also hoped to
be able to work w/ the Town as they are slightly confused on the issue and tabling would give
more time to review this. He added it can still be denied in the future and there would be the
BOA option. Miller / Jardine made a motion to table this Item, send it back to Cable for
review, w/ the request that Kastrosky of Furtak attend the Town meeting. Discussion:
Tulowitzky mentioned that in rare cases conditions can be placed on rezones and that might
be an allowable possibility. Motion then carried 4 yes / 0 no.
E. BILL / MARSHA WALSH CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST: Operation of a two-unit short-
term rental w/ replacement of one of the two units in the future to construct a new
residence (request also encompasses the replacement of the residence on the parcel of land
which cannot be sub-divided). Property is a 1.70-acre parcel (#04-034-2-43-06-02-3-05-005-
60000) described at Lot 2 of CSM 81, Section 2, Township 43 N, Range 6 W, Town of
Namakagon.
Miller was concerned that the Town didn‘t approve this and asked if Namakagon wants it back
again. Walsh said they did approve one rental now. Kastrosky suggested this could be a two-
fold process: if the Committee is comfortable with approving the conditional use permit now for
two units w/ a condition that the applicants go back to the Town for approval of the second unit,
then they would not have to come before the Zoning Committee again. He reminded the
Committee that if one residence comes down and is rebuilt, this conditional use request also
encompasses replacement of the residence on a parcel that cannot be subdivided.
Miller / Rantala moved to approve operation of a two-unit short-term rental with
replacement of one of the two units in the future to construct a new residence (request
also encompasses the replacement of the residence on the parcel of land which cannot be sub-
divided) contingent upon the Town’s future approval of the second residence. Motion
carried 4 yes / 0 no.
Page 6
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
Town commented the following on their form: ―One unit is approved for short-term rental, second
unit and replacement unit not approved because plans are incomplete. No other structures or
vehicles, permanent or temporary, can be placed on this property for human habitation or
business until this short-term vacation rental permit is terminated.‖
F. WILLIAM / DENISE MARINCEL (Owners) & DAVE JOHNSON (Agent) CONDITIONAL USE
REQUEST: Construct / Operate Fish Farm (w/ processing, storage, and distribution on
site and from the site; request also includes use of existing buildings to operate the
Crossroads Outreach Center [Transitional Ministry]). Property is 40-acre parcel (#04-020-2-
47-05-29-1-02-000-10000) described as the NW ¼ of the NE ¼, Section 29, Township 47 N,
Range 5 W, Town of Eileen.
Travis Tulowitzky reported he was on site Monday; also today w/ John Spangberg from the
DNR. He said the property is about three acres; meets setback to stream / wetlands; there is a
navigable stream on site and this exceeds the required setback; there are no wetlands where the
building would be placed, it is currently an existing farm and purchase would be for the entire
farm. He said the ministry would be in the existing residence; if a high capacity well is needed
that would require DNR approval; stormwater management will need to be met.
Tulowitzky said the septic would be reviewed and the fish farm would need a system as well, or
one that covers both; five or six people will live in the house and others would be employees not
living on site. Miller felt water metering should be done. Tulowitzky stated if it is not a high
capacity well, it would not need metering. Johnson said there would be the elimination of two
farms and the Marincel water use. Miller didn‘t want to approve this without a water monitoring
system. Marincel reported the amount of water used daily for his 145 head of cattle is more
than would be used for the fish farm.
Kastrosky said there is a flowing well now with no draw-down in the water table. Marincel said
the well is 60‘; farm has been there for 102 years, he has farmed for 30 years without ever
having a well issue and if the fish farm will use approximately 6,000 gallons less, he doesn‘t see
the problem. He also reported there is a 4‖ casing, approved for/by grade A / USDA. Jardine
said he doesn‘t believe a monitoring system is needed and made a motion to approve; Rantala
seconded the motion and motion carried with 3 yes / 1 no (Miller was opposed).
G. BAYFIELD COUNTY (Owner) & NATHAN WARD (Agent) CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST:
Construct 199 ft. Telecommunication Multi-Use Tower & Facility Structure on leased
property described as a 5.754-acre parcel, 0.229-acre parcel, & 0.362-acre parcel (#04-004-2-
43-09-21-2-01-000-10000) located in part of the NW ¼ of the NW ¼, Section 21, Township 43 N,
Range 9 W, Town of Barnes.
After discussion regarding the ‗fall /collapse zone‘ it was decided structure meets the
requirements and motion was made by Miller / Rantala to approve; carried 4 yes / 0 no.
AGENDA REVIEW / ALTERATION:
H. MELISSA TUCEK SPECIAL USE REQUEST: Home-Based Business (Beauty Shop)
property described as 2.003-acre parcel (#04-012-2-43-07-18-2-00-116-10100) Lot 1, Block 14,
Assessor’s Plat 2, CSM 1293, Town of Cable.
Kastrosky reported Town approval was on file stating it meets their plan. Motion by Rantala /
Jardine to approve. Motion carried 4 yes / 0 no.
Page 7
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
I. LOUISE HOFFMAN SPECIAL USE REQUEST: Seasonal Hobby Farm (Five Horses – May 1
to October 31) located in the N ½, Govt. Lot 7, Section 12, Township 43 N, Range 8 W, Town of
Cable.
Furtak reported on the history of this case; past applications have been denied but he noticed
horses on site, an application was requested. After being denied by the Town in the past, horses
were brought on site with subsequent orders to remove them; following that a game of hiding
horses in various locations began; the Judge ordered removal. Furtak said the Town denied yet
said it is compatible with their land use plan; he noted upon investigation, fencing is in disrepair,
property is not in condition to house horses. Rondeau said the last time this came up, there was
no housing available for the horses and water was accessed by running a hose across the road;
it is not a good situation. Miller said if the Town stated this is compatible w/ their land use plan
it is not up to the Zoning Committee to decide. It was noted, however, the land is both R-1 and
F-1 with Cable Lake access there which is not appropriate.
Rondeau made a motion to deny, following the Town‘s request; second by Rantala; carried 4
yes / 0 no to deny.
J. MICHAEL LABREE SPECIAL USE REQUEST: Retail Landscaping Supply / Equipment
Sales &/or Rental on .708-acre parcel (#04-012-2-43-08-25-3-03-000-49999 & -03-000-50000)
located in Lot 1, CSM 669, part of the SW ¼ of the SW ¼, Section 25, Township 43 N, Range 8
W, Town of Cable.
Jardine / Rantala moved to approve; carried 4 yes / 0 no.
K. DEAN / ROBYNN TRZYNKA SPECIAL USE REQUEST: Home-Based Business (Machine &
Welding; General Repair: autos / trucks): on 4.67-acre parcel (#04-022-2-47-09-02-4 04-000-
12000) described as Lot 2, CSM 1545, in the SE ¼ of the SE ¼, Section 2, Township 47 N,
Range 9 W, Town of Hughes.
Dean Trzynka reported that adjoining property owners are in agreement w/ this venture.
Following discussion Rantala / Jardine made a motion to approve and then amended the
motion to include Town comments as part of the motion… ―No more than 2 unlicensed or
inoperable vehicles on site‖. Motion carried 4 yes / 0 no.
L. CITIZENS’ CONCERNS / INPUT:
[6:01 PM Jardine had to leave the meeting.]
Kastrosky reported that citizens have opportunity for input however decisions cannot be made;
if the issue is significant enough it can be placed on another agenda.
Kathy Wendling spoke in regards to Item M. below noting plans were presented to the Zoning
Dept. this week. She expressed concern about open space, Ag and Ag-related activities,
applicant liability, covenant language / development, privately owned open space. Mark
Wendling said this doesn‘t meet requirements of the Town of Russell, last year‘s revision was
seriously flawed; new language assured by the Town was an addition to, not replacement of
language. He said the current revised language allows owners to do what they want and makes
it highly fragmented instead of contiguous; allows unrestricted development. He suggested the
Committee set aside the application, and others pending, until thoughtful revised language
review has taken place, prior to taking to the Full Board.
Kastrosky encouraged the Wendlings to work on the plan / their concerns on the planning
commission level. He said he realizes this is an ongoing problem and was asked by the Town
Page 8
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Public Hearing/Meeting – June 17, 2010
chairman to help rewrite the Town‘s overlay; if it continues to be unmanageable, he
recommended they ―toss it‖. Kastrosky said there is merit to alternate development but there is
perhaps a better way to do it; he has talked to Corp Counsel about the issue; noted the ―bottom
line‖ is the Town wants open space, is not concerned who owns it, just that it is not built upon;
any maintenance plans need to be specific. Chairman Rondeau said there were many issues
and complications involved. Kastrosky will meet with Russell and further discussions will be
forthcoming.
M. DISCUSSION / POSSIBLE ACTION: Alternative Developments for Furmusa, Ronald
Nelson, Steven/Debra Nesheim
Kastrosky said he had hoped to have a concept map but the surveyor didn‘t return his call;
applications approved last month, stand unless someone chooses to appeal to the Board of
Adjustment or they choose to revisit them; clarification was asked for, thus the reason it is on
the agenda. He noted the issue is to advise the Committee of the problem noting the answers
may not have ‗been there last month‘, were in error or inaccurate.
Miller stated if the Town approved this then with the Town‘s comp plan it is up to them.
Kastrosky said they don‘t have the map / the ‗big plan‘ and the community is asked to address
the plans. He noted they are trying to work on a better system, w/ a checklist, hopefully agreed
upon by the Planning Commission, Town Board, Zoning Committee and County Board. He said
alternative development doesn‘t go to the County Board, it lies w/ the Zoning Committee.
Rondeau and Miller stated this needs to go back to the Town‘s Comp Planning Commission.
Rondeau asked Kastrosky and the Dept. to continue to work with the Town.
N. DISCUSSION / POSSIBLE ACTION: Comprehensive Planning
Kastrosky said the towns are doing ―a little better job‖ presenting information; there will be more
planning commission education in the future with the possibility that UW Extension will put on
training sessions.
Discussion followed to have a joint meeting with Land Conservation, having a representative of
Board of Adjustment present, rather than the entire board. Miller suggested the Zoning Dept.
run the meeting.
O. OTHER ITEMS THAT MAY COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE (Discussion Only):
Kastrosky reminded the Committee that this Item will no longer be on the agenda. Items must
be placed on the agenda prior to the meeting.
11. MONTHLY REPORT: Motion by Rantala / Miller to approve and place on file; carried 4 yes / 0 no.
12. BUDGET / REVENUE: Kastrosky said the Dept. is up-to-date on the budget timeline.
13. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 6:35 PM.
Karl L. Kastrosky, Director
Bayfield County Planning / Zoning Dept.
Prepared by mjj on 7/12/10
Approved by KLK on 7/13/10
cc: Committee; Full Board; County Admin., Clerk, Website; DNR
k/zc/minutes/2010/#6June