HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 5/17/2012
Page 1 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
MINUTES
BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE
PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING
May 17, 2012
1. Call to Order Planning and Zoning Committee Business Meeting: Chairman
Rondeau called the public hearing to order at 3:47pm.
2. Roll Call: Jardine, Pocernich, Schultz, Miller and Rondeau – all present.
Others present were: Director-Karl Kastrosky, Doug Casina-AZA, Mike Furtak-AZA, and
Krystal Hagstrom - Secretary.
3. Presentation by Corp Counsel (Jack Carlson)
Carlson reviewed the items that should be taken into consideration when making
decisions. One being the legal standards that are outlined in the zoning ordinance. When
making decisions on conditional use permits it is good to refer to the checklist Kastrosky
has drafted for the committee. Section 13-1-41 is the conditional use permit section of
the Zoning Ordinance. It is good to review this prior to meetings (he then went through
the section in the ordinance with the committee). Deliberate, talk about the facts that are
presented, and make a decision. After making a decision it is crucial to state the reasons
and rational for the decision that was made. A good example of this is in last month’s
meeting minutes (Excerpt from April 19, 2012 meeting minutes are as follows: Schultz
motioned to approve. Jardine seconded and also stated that the Town should have had
some input. Rondeau has a concern with the Town abstaining from voting. The
committee decided to govern from the bottom up to give the Town some decision.
Schultz stated the Town made their decision by not voting, they did not side with AT&T
or Norvado. Pocernich agrees. Kastrosky asked the Committee the reasons for
approval. Schultz explained coverage is needed in Bayfield County. Also the Town
made their decision and they did not back Norvado. Jardine explained he agrees with
the higher tower idea and the fact that it will cover more area with less towers. Rondeau
explained this is a huge decision and with the Town being so concerned they should
have made a decision. Kastrosky again stated that the reason for approving this request
is [1] The area needs more coverage [2] The Town had the opportunity to make a
decision and chose not to [3] The higher tower will decrease the number of other towers
in the area. Pocernich agreed with all those decisions. No further discussion. Motion
carried). It is important to have a discussion first and talk about the facts that were
presented then make a motion and state why the committee is making the particular
motion. It can either be discussion before the motion or after the motion but make sure
the issues that are talked about then the committee amends the motion. Take these
processes and procedures that are in front of you into account with every decision. With
ordinance text amendments, if the committee denies a request the Committee must state
its reasons and rational for the denial to the County Board.
4. Temporary Adjournment of Business Meeting:
5. Call to Order of Public Hearing:
6. Roll Call: Jardine, Pocernich, Schultz, Miller and Rondeau – all present.
Page 2 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
Others present were: Director-Karl Kastrosky, Mike Furtak-AZA, and Krystal Hagstrom -
Secretary.
7. Affidavit of Publication: Kastrosky showed the audience the May 1st and May 7th
affidavit of publication and the certified mailing receipts.
8. Review of Meeting Format – Chairman Rondeau explained the procedure of the
meeting. He asked everyone who wished to speak to fill out a form; and stated they will
be asked to come forward and speak into the microphone.
9. Public Hearing:
A. Town of Drummond (Drummond) – campground/EIA, Campground will utilize a [8.4–
acre parcel contained within a 40-acre parcel (ID# 04-018-2-45-07-32-105-002-50000),
described as a parcel in part of the NE ¼ SE ¼, Section 32, Township 45 North, Range
7 West, Town of Drummond, Bayfield County, WI]
No one spoke in support or opposition. Furtak explained this proposed site is right
downtown Drummond behind the bank just to the South. There is no critical habitat
there.
File Report: Kastrosky stated Dick Fredricks called asking if he needed to be at the
meeting. Fredricks explained the bids came in high and this is not a time sensitive issue.
Town recommended approval and consistent with Town plan also is good for the
economics of the Town. EIA is complete and thorough. It appears that the construction is
going to be done in two phases but permitted as one phase. No letters of support or
opposition in the file. Jardine again stated the Town Board approved based on
economic benefits. Furtak explained this is to be an ATV campground with a ramp and
access to the trail system. Jardine asked if they are going to have an attendant and the
answer was no. Kastrosky stated it is right down town Drummond also there will be
public sewer system.
Discussion ended.
B. Don & Barbara Henderson (Grand View) – reclamation plan on a [21.56–acre parcel
(ID# 04-021-2-44-06-26-2-05-002-01000) located in the NE ¼ NW 1/4, Section 26,
Township 44 North, Range 6 West, Town of Grand View, Bayfield County, WI]
Chris Elkins, representing Don Henderson who could not attend for medical reasons,
explained Don would like his permit renewed. Furtak explained this pit is in existence.
One change is that prior to having the aerial map technology, this originally was
permitted on the wrong property but that is corrected now. He is sure the rec plan is a
restatement of the previous. Jardine asked if the owners have been following up with the
rec plan. Furtak stated they have not had to do anything, this is not a new pit and it is
only 1 or 2 acres and it is mostly personal use and only sell a little.
File Report: Kastrosky stated there is no approval from Land Conservation. There is a
note that if this is a renewal, then Land Conservation approves the existing plan but if
this is a new pit they need to approve a new rec plan. Furtak explained this is in the
same location just the legal has been corrected. Kastrosky stated if it is the same site
then Land Conservation approves.
Page 3 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
Discussion ended.
C. Don & Barbara Henderson (Grand View) – non-metallic mine on a [21.56-acre parcel
(ID# 04-021-2-44-06-26-2-05-002-01000) located in the NE ¼ NW 1/4, Section 26,
Township 44 North, Range 6 West, Town of Grand View, Bayfield County, WI]
Chris Elkins explained they would like the permit renewed and change the hours to be 8
am to 6 pm. Furtak asked if Elkins is an adjoining property owner and the answer was
yes. He also asked if he has any concerns or problems with the pit and the reply was no.
Jardine asked if the hours are 6 days a week or 5 days and week and Elkins responded
with 6 days a week, no Sunday’s.
File Report: Kastrosky stated the Town recommends approval with the change of
hours based on Comp Plan. There is a letter of opposition from John Stack with
concerns with the hours of operation and wants hours changed to 8 am to 4 pm.
Discussion ended.
D. A petition by Karl Kastrosky, Director of Planning and Zoning, on behalf of the
Bayfield County Planning and Zoning Committee, requesting amendments to the
Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance including the following:
Proposed Amendment to Section 15-1-10 Regarding the Sanitary & Private Sewage
Code
Section 1. Subsection (c) of Section 15-1-10 [Limitations] of Article B [General
Requirements] of Chapter 1 [Sanitary & Private Sewage Code], Bayfield County,
Wisconsin is hereby amended to read as follows, with additions highlighted by a double
underline feature (additions) and deletions highlighted by the strike out feature
(deletions):
(c) A holding tank may be used as a POWTS unless soil and site conditions allow
the installation of any of the following POWTS components within 300 feet of the
structure being served:
(1) At Grade
(2) In-Ground non-pressurized system
(3) In ground pressure
(c) A holding tank may be used as a POWTS “system of choice” only under the
following conditions:
(1) The daily maximum wastewater flow generated from the structure to be served by
the system is 150 gallons per day and the system will serve a structure or property that is
intermittently or seasonally inhabited and not an owner’s or occupant’s permanent
residence. The owner must provide, with the sanitary permit application for a holding
tank, an affidavit recorded with the Register of Deeds agreeing to install another suitable
system if there is any change in the duration of occupancy or use which results in a
design wastewater flow which exceeds 150 gallons per day.
Page 4 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
(2) Soil and site conditions throughout the property are suitable for only a mound
system.
(3) In the event neither of the previous conditions is applicable, a holding tank may
still be installed as a system of choice unless soil and site conditions within a 300 foot
radius of the structure being served allow any of the following POWTS components to be
installed:
(a) At-Grade
(b) In-ground non-pressurized
(c) In-ground pressure
No one spoke in support or opposition.
Kastrosky explained from a department standpoint, that the WI code states an owner
can install holding tanks as a system of choice. Bayfield County decided that holding
tanks are not a good system of choice due to the clay soil. Also having it as a system of
choice would create a lot of raw sewage and the county did not have the capability to
land spread that much sewage. The cost to maintain a holding tank is high and they
have to be maintained more often than another system. Plumbers and pumpers are
interested in this change but no one came tonight to state their suggestions. Not sure
this is the best change for our County. The department drafted the changes stating that if
it is less than 150 gallons a day an owner can install a holding tank. 150 gallons a day is
only a one bedroom cabin. It is hard to measure what property is seasonal and what is
full time. How would the County track that? Furtak explained the “system of choice” has
been with us for 12 years. There is a letter here from someone that has a small 2
bedroom cabin and has to put in a mound which is $4000 more than what he wants to
spend. He is not going to do it. He would put in a holding take which is cheaper. The
cabin isn’t worth installing a mound system. Kastroky stated some statistics that there is
13 million gallons of holding tank waste pumped since January 2011. 25 percent of
required systems are holding tank in the County. If holding tanks were allowed the
County could state that they have to put a two compartment tank that if a different
system were to be placed there later it could. Regular sewer systems are easy to track
holding tanks are not. Basically, Bayfield County is more restrictive than the state of WI.
Recommendation would be to install a two compartment tank if a holding tank is installed
or have a grey water system. The easy part is knowing if someone has a seasonal cabin
and put them on a delayed schedule, but the families of four that have holding tanks and
haven’t pumped for 8 months is the problem. Miller stated that these families of four
should install a mound for what it would cost to pump a holding tank every 3 months.
Schultz thinks this a good step for people who want to control their waste. Kastrosky
explained that the wording could say that if an owner cannot install a conventional
system then a holding tank is ok, why would the County encourage a holding tank.
Rondeau asked if Kastrosky is comfortable with this amendment and the reply was no
because of the 150 gallon a day waste water load that eliminates a 2 bedroom home.
Also would like to see it say you cannot put in a holding tank if you can put in a
conventional system, or put in a double compartment tank then someone can install
mound or other system later. Miller stated who is going to monitor people when
seasonal change to full time residence. He thinks this would be revised and come back
next month, additions being what Kastrosky mentioned earlier. Pocernich explained
Page 5 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
that each individual’s situation is different and the County has hindered people already
and agrees with change but not these specific changes.
10. Adjournment of Public Hearing:
Jardine made a motion to adjourn, Schultz seconded. Motion carried. Adjourned at
4:55 pm.
11. Call to Order of Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Rondeau called the
meeting to order at 4:55 pm.
12. Roll Call: Jardine, Pocernich, Schultz, Miller and Rondeau –all present.
Others present were: Director Karl Kastrosky, Mike Furtak, AZA, and Krystal Hagstrom -
Secretary.
13. Minutes of Previous Meeting(s): Rondeau stated the minutes are from the December
15, 2011 meeting.
Jardine motioned to approve, Miller seconded. No further discussion. Motion
carried.
Rondeau stated the minutes are from the April 19, 2012 meeting.
Jardine motioned to approve, Miller seconded. No further discussion. Motion
carried.
14. Business:
A. Town of Drummond (Drummond) - campground/EIA, Campground will utilize a [8.4-
acre parcel contained within a 40-acre parcel (ID# 04-018-2-45-07-32-105-002-50000),
described as a parcel in part of the NE ¼ SE ¼, Section 32, Township 45 North, Range
7 West, Town of Drummond, Bayfield County, WI]
Jardine motioned to approve based on Town Board recommendation, comp
plan, and economic benefit. Miller seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried.
B. Don & Barbara Henderson (Grand View) - reclamation plan on a [21.56-acre parcel
(ID# 04-021-2-44-06-26-2-05-002-01000) located in the NE ¼ NW 1/4, Section 26,
Township 44 North, Range 6 West, Town of Grand View, Bayfield County, WI]
Jardine motioned to approve only if it is a renewal of the old plan and Land
Conservation approves. Miller seconded. Schultz is curious why Ben Dufford did not
answer the emails from earlier today. He should have responded to emails. No further
discussion. Motion carried.
C. Don & Barbara Henderson (Grand View) - non-metallic mine on a [21.56-acre parcel
(ID# 04-021-2-44-06-26-2-05-002-01000) located in the NE ¼ NW 1/4, Section 26,
Township 44 North, Range 6 West, Town of Grand View, Bayfield County, WI]
Schultz motioned to approve, it meets the comp plan, relevant public input, and
Town Bard approval with the condition of hours from, 8 am to 6 pm Monday through
Page 6 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
Friday and Saturday 8 am to 4 pm. No Sunday’s or Holidays. Pocernich seconded.
Motion amended to add a duration of 10 years. Ok with second. No further discussion.
Motion carried.
D. A petition by Karl Kastrosky, Director of Planning and Zoning, on behalf of the
Bayfield County Planning and Zoning Committee, requesting amendments to the
Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance including the following:
Proposed Amendment to Section 15-1-10 Regarding the Sanitary & Private Sewage
Code
Section 1. Subsection (c) of Section 15-1-10 [Limitations] of Article B [General
Requirements] of Chapter 1 [Sanitary & Private Sewage Code], Bayfield County,
Wisconsin is hereby amended to read as follows, with additions highlighted by a double
underline feature (additions) and deletions highlighted by the strike out feature
(deletions):
(c) A holding tank may be used as a POWTS unless soil and site conditions allow
the installation of any of the following POWTS components within 300 feet of the
structure being served:
(1) At Grade
(2) In-Ground non-pressurized system
(3) In ground pressure
(c) A holding tank may be used as a POWTS “system of choice” only under the
following conditions:
(1) The daily maximum wastewater flow generated from the structure to be served by
the system is 150 gallons per day and the system will serve a structure or property that is
intermittently or seasonally inhabited and not an owner’s or occupant’s permanent
residence. The owner must provide, with the sanitary permit application for a holding
tank, an affidavit recorded with the Register of Deeds agreeing to install another suitable
system if there is any change in the duration of occupancy or use which results in a
design wastewater flow which exceeds 150 gallons per day.
(2) Soil and site conditions throughout the property are suitable for only a mound
system.
(3) In the event neither of the previous conditions is applicable, a holding tank may
still be installed as a system of choice unless soil and site conditions within a 300 foot
radius of the structure being served allow any of the following POWTS components to be
installed:
(a) At-Grade
(b) In-ground non-pressurized
(c) In-ground pressure
Page 7 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
Jardine motioned to postpone until next month. Miller seconded. No further
discussion. Motion carried.
Agenda Review and Alteration
E. Salem Baptist Church (Drummond) – food shelf, outreach center, and church on a
[3.19–acre parcel (ID# 04-018-2-45-07-32-4-03-000-07100), described as Lot 1 of CSM
# 1748 (located in SW SE) , Section 32, Township 45 North, Range 07 West, Town of
Drummond, Bayfield County, WI]
Furtak stated this is the building located on the corner of Highway 63 and D. It has been
converted to a church/outreach center and in order to have this in a commercial zone
you need a special use permit. Kastrosky stated in the file the Town recommended
approval and the “introduction of the church and food shelf to our community is welcome.
Good will and charity to our residence is needed”.
Schults motioned to approve and it meets Town Board approval and comp plan
and it creates good will and charity to the residence is needed. Jardine seconded. No
further discussion. Motion carried.
F. Sammi Pohl-Bletsch (Drummond) – home-based business (vet clinic, no boarding
of animals) on a [1.123–acre parcel (ID# 04-018-2-45-07-33-2-04-000-06000),
described as a parcel in S ½ of the NW ¼ , Section 33, Township 45 North, Range 07
West, Town of Drummond, Bayfield County, WI]
Pohl-Bletsch explained she would like to have a vet clinic at her residence in
Drummond located behind the school. There will be no boarding of animals Miller asked
if animals will be staying the night due to sickness would that be under the boarding rule.
Furtak stated that there will be no boarding of animals unless the dog is sick then a dog
could stay the night. No kennels outside for dogs. Jardine asked if Neil Paulsen was at
the Town Board meeting and the reply was no. Also asked how close he lives to her and
the reply was across the street and the house is a ways off the road. Schults stated that
in the letter from Neil stats that if the clinic closes then the permit should be canceled.
Kastrosky stated that sometimes the permit is issued to the land but in this case it
should be issued to the owner so if they leave the next owner cannot have a clinic there
as well, Pohl-Bletsch is ok with this.
Schultz motioned to approve with the condition that it is issued to the person
applying, not the residence, and that there is no overnight boarding of animals for
convenience, only animals that need medical assistance can stay overnight at the facility
and the County strongly supports home based businesses and the area needs a vet
clinic. Jardine seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried.
15. Other Business
G. Discussion and Possible Action on Comprehensive Planning
Kastrosky said Town of Lincoln amended plan, and should get approval from Madison
soon.
H. Discussion and Possible Action on NR115
Page 8 of 8 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – May 17, 2012
Kastrosky noted he will put his resignation in. There is a new Act 170 that is more
restrictive than the County. There will be some amendments coming soon.
Kastrosky apologized for not having an agenda item on the agenda for Schultz about
the permitting process, will have to be added next month.
16. Monthly Report
Kastrosky commented up on permit volumes and revenue. Schultz asked what
extortion money was and Kastrosky explained that $100 of every sanitary goes to the
state. Schultz wanted to know what NR 135 was and the reply from Kastrosky was
non-metallic mining.
Miller motioned to approve, and receive and place on file. Jardine seconded.
No further discussion. Motion carried.
17. Budget and Revenue
Kastrosky asked the committee, it’s about time to start working on the budget and
asked if the committee had and preconceived notions that if the department asked for
more staffing in the secretarial department would he be wasting his time. Rondeau
stated it should be asked and discussed. Kastrosky explained that the person before
Krystal was hired 70 percent time and here 5 days a week. Krystal is 50 percent and
here 2 days in winter and 3 days in summer and it is not enough and not the same as
being here 5 days a week. And a few hours in the morning would not be enough time to
get in the groove of issuing permits. Miller stated it should go to personal. Pocernich
stated don’t approach him, he would consider at decreasing hours. Schultz explained
the money going out in some of the departments is mind boggling.
18. Adjournment
Rondeau called adjournment at 5:15 pm.
Prepared by kmh on 5/18/2012; given to KK 5/18/2012 at 4pm
Approved by KLK on 6/7/12
Final Approval on 7/19/2012
cc: (after final approval)- (8) Supervisors, Cty Admin./Clerk, DNR, Web
k/zc/minutes/2012/#5 May