Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 4/21/2016 Page 1 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 MINUTES BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING APRIL 21, 2016 1. Call to Order Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Director Schierman called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Schierman introduced and welcomed Silbert the newly appointed Committee Member. 2. Roll Call: Bussey, Pocernich, Rondeau, Silbert & Strand – all present. Others present were: Director Rob Schierman, Jennifer Croonborg-Murphy-AZA, Josh Rowley-AZA and Krystal Hudachek-Secretary. A. Election of Chairman B. Election of Vice Chairman Director Schierman announced election of Chairman and Vice Chairman will take place.  Election of Chairman Strand made a motion to elect Rondeau as Chairman; Pocernich asked for closure of the nomination and asked that a unanimous ballot be cast on the nomination. Motion carried.  Election of Vice-Chairman Bussey made a motion to nominate Pocernich as Vice Chairman and Strand moved to close the nomination and asked that a unanimous ballot also be cast on this nomination. Motion carried. 3. Adjournment of Zoning Committee Meeting: Bussey made a motion to adjourn at 4:03 pm, seconded by Pocernich. No further discussion. Motion carried. 4. Call to Order of Public Hearing: Chairman Rondeau called the public hearing to order at 4:03 pm. 5. Roll Call: Bussey, Pocernich, Rondeau, Silbert & Strand – all present. Others present were: Director Rob Schierman, Jennifer Croonborg-Murphy-AZA, Josh Rowley-AZA and Krystal Hudachek-Secretary. 6. Affidavit of Publication: Schierman showed the audience affidavit of publication and the certified mailing receipts. 7. 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. Page 2 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 8. Public Comment – for issues not already on the agenda [3 minutes per citizen] 9. Minutes of Previous Meeting (March 21, 2016) Bussey motioned to approve. Pocernich seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. 10. Public Hearing: C. Dirk Stolz, Jane Stolz & Copper Hills Hunting Preserve, LLC (Oulu) – game farm on 385 acres [Parcel #1 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26708), described as SE ¼ of the NW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #2 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26709), described as NE ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #3 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26710), described as NW ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #4 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 37342), described as SW ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #5 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26715), described as NW ¼ of the SE ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #6 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26700), described as SW ¼ of the NE ¼ in V. 1121 P. 943-944. Parcel #7 is a 35-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26701), described as SE ¼ of the NE ¼ less V. 333 P.94-95 in V. 1121 P. 943-944. Parcel #8 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26713), described as SE ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1121 P. 945-946. Parcel #9 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26716), described as SW ¼ of the SE ¼ in V. 1121-945- 946. Parcel #10 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34280), described as S ½ of the S ½ of the SW ¼ of the NW 1/4 in V. 1140 P. 61-62. Parcel #11 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34850), described as S 30 acres of SW ¼ of the NW ¼ less S ½ of the S ½ and less N ½ of the S ½ in V. 1140 P. 61-62. Parcel #12 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34851), described as N ½ of the S ½ of the SW ¼ of the NW ¼ in V. 1140 P. 61-62. All in Section 10, Township 48 North, Range 9 West, Town of Oulu, Bayfield County, WI] Dirk & Jane Stolz spoke in favor, handed out an aerial map of the property (which was already in the packet), explained the entire property was surveyed by Nelson Surveying. The fence will be located about 30 inches from the property line, the only part that will not be fenced in is about 1.3 acres on the East side of the property along the Muskeg Creek. The fence will be 10 feet but the DNR only requires an 8 foot fence. All the posts will be pressure treated posts that have twice the amount of chemicals in them. The DNR requires a 3 inch diameter post Stolz is putting in a 5-6 inch post. Once the fence is up there will be an apron fence which is a fence you unroll on the ground, cover with dirt and let the vegetation grow through which will be a predator barrier for bears not digging through. This is also not required by the DNR. On top will be a 10,000 volt hot wire which goes around the entire perimeter, if a tree falls on the fence it will short out that hot wire and turn on a light so you are notified immediately that there is something on the fence, this will also will keep predators from climbing over. Posts will be dug every 18 feet the DNR allows every 20 feet. Once the fence is up an opening will be left to push the wild deer out. Once this happens whatever deer can’t get out there will be a funnel fence set up around the residence and once in there they can’t get back out the funnel and will naturally run along the fence out of the property. Once the deer are out the warden will come to the property and do a fence inspection, then a winter check which will look for tracks in the snow to make sure there are no deer left in the fence. Once this happens then they will issue a fence certificate. Certificate is valid for ten years and every ten years they do an inspection. Then the department of agriculture is called and they will do an inspection with GPS coordinates from all corners to see if it meets the minimum of 80 acres. The deer that will be put in the enclosure are from Stolz own herd. 50% of the herd has been CWD tested. As long as the deer meet the 5 year CWD rule they are Page 3 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 allowed to come from anywhere, which means every three years all deer have to be tranquilized and blood drawn and tested. Every animal that has been harvested or died naturally have to be CWD tested. Yesterday the vet was at the farm and inspected every animal (vet record is a part of the application packet). Bussey asked how many deer they want to have and is there a maximum, Stolz answered the maximum is very high, in the thousands. They want no more than 100 and in stages of 10-15 per year. Silbert wanted to clarify that the information that was told to him over the phone by Stolz that there is no current test for CWD on live animals only on deceased animals. Stolz confirmed. Bussey asked about the 50% of their herd tested, what is meant by that. Stolz answered that in the past 19 years out of 171 animals 60 of those have been tested. These were all harvested animals, none died naturally. Pocernich asked about the tonsil test, Stolz stated there is and that is in the packet, Pocernich stated it was. There is a massive paper trail on every single animal. The animals that will be in the preserve will be microchipped. 50% of harvest animals have to be CWD tested and 100% of animals found dead need to be tested. Silbert asked if he will be operating the Tamarack Farm the same time he will be operating this farm. Stolz stated yes he will. He has three people that have applied for the part time position to maintain the fence and another that might live at the house. There are neighbors that are in favor and will help maintain the fence. This can also be hooked up to my iPhone to monitor with cameras. Silbert asked how often the fence line will be checked. Stolz stated after high winds, heavy snows, if the hot wire does not go off. Rondeau asked if people will pay to hunt there. Stolz answered yes, there will also a service that Vets will be able to hunt for free, or there is the hunt of a lifetime project. There are misconceptions of hunting preserves. There will be no baiting; people will still have to hunt the deer. They become nocturnal when they are fenced in since they learn very quickly that they are being hunted. Doe(s) will have to be brought in to get the bucks to move around during rut. Silbert asked hours of operation, Stolz answered around October 15th through the end of November and 15-20 hunts. No summer hunts. People will be spending money at hotels in town, gas stations, shops, restaurants, etc. this will help the economy. There may be photographers in the summer taking pictures. One neighbor was concerned about gun fire. There will be no unethical shots all shots will be up close from a food plot hopefully a one shot kill. If you look where the fields are located there is ¾ of a mile before the property line. Bussey asked if there will be more trees cleared, Stolz stated no, want to leave the landscape as natural as possible. These deer will have a constant food source of pellets and high quality hay, so they will not be eating any saplings or ruining the landscape. Strand wants to know the inventory. Stolz stated on a hunting preserve this does not have to be done but at the breeding facility there has to be an annual inventory and all deer brought from here to the preserve have to be tagged. There is an annual estimated inventory of the deer on the preserve. Bussey asked what happens when Stolz and his wife no longer want the preserve. Stolz answered, hopefully his kids. His daughter wants to be a veterinarian and does a lot of the artificial inseminating. She has a high interest in facility. Stolz added that the property has been taken out of MFL as of January. Pocernich asked when the property was purchased and the answer from Stolz was 2011 for the purpose of retirement. When purchased they checked with Zoning and there were no restrictions on game farms. There was one in the Town of Bayfield and one in the Town of Clover. Croonborg-Murphy stated that on the application it states elk, will there be any and how many? Stolz answered less than 12 if he does at all. Linda Coleman spoke; she noted that this is a conditional use for a game farm under our ordinance it would be considered either a game farm or a livestock farm. This is relevant because the property where this is proposed is zoned Ag-1 and F-1 and depending on the definition a permit is required for both or just the F-1 land. There are Page 4 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 two steps, first go through the 17 factors and if the committee determine that it would like to grant a permit or a permit with conditions then they need to determine the questions on whether this is defined as a game farm or a livestock farm according to the Counties ordinance. Rick Voytik, Eau Claire County WI, spoke in support; he read an article on the internet requesting people to come talk about CWD that there was a lot of opposition here. The comment that was made is that game farms are the reason there is CWD spreading throughout the state. CWD was found on his farm last year. There are a lot of rules pertaining to CWD on farms. There is a lot of testing. Voytik has been testing since the late 1990’s. Can only move deer within the state if you are part of a CWD test herd. When he depopulated his herd, they did a lot of testing. 240 animals were depopulated from his farm and 23 tested positive. The tests that were ran came back that is was contracted from the environment. There was no trace back or trace forward from his herd. It is spreading from the environment not from the farms. Colorado did a test that CWD is spread by crows, vultures, scavengers, and coyotes. In 2012 the state of Arkansas preformed a test, results came back that there was no CWD in the state and they were thankful because they don’t allow game farms. Turns out last year they found a CWD positive elk. These are just some of the facts. The point is that people are fighting about where the CWD is coming from and not doing enough testing. The research needs to happen. Laurei Seale, Taylor County and President of Whitetails in Wisconsin, spoke in support saying that Bayfield County is one of the most scenic places in the County. She understands why people would want to protect the area. She has been deer farming for 27 years and it is very rewarding and the people in the deer industry are great people and love what they do. There has to be more education on the deer farming. There are private property rights that the County should stand by. People should not have to defend their private property rights. Wisconsin has given up a lot of them. Texas is very much private property rights. The Stolz want to leave this land as Forestry but also service the agricultural industry. They are not changing anything. There is a huge economic impact from deer farming. Seale would like to thank Fred Strand for sending her the comprehensive plan for Bayfield County. (Seale then handed them to the committee members and went over the highlighted portions. See attachment A). A lot of these purposes encourage agricultural uses. Seale askes that the board votes for private property rights, votes to promote more agriculture, vote to encourage family businesses and vote to help rural America. Duane Lahti, land owner and lifetime resident of the town of Oulu, spoke in opposition. He stated there is no personal animosity towards the applicants. He is concerned about CWD since it is a growing concern and problem. More than 9% of the deer tested by the DNR tested positive this year and that is a 50% increase from last year. Several counties in Southern Wisconsin have CWD. Game farms do concentrate deer. Transmission can be by either direct or indirect contact. These prions especially bond to the clay soils which are in the proposed game farm. Fences will not stop the spread of this disease especially where there is flowing water. There is virtually an uninterrupted wildlife corridor in Bayfield County. The hunting culture in this area is not a high fence hunting culture. Lahti attended the Town Board meeting where this was denied 3/1. This committee should deny based on towns recommendation. There were mentions of private property rights and the residents here in the County have just as much private property rights, which are known as the public interest. A land mark court case in Wisconsin in 1972 stated “an owner of land has no absolute and unlimited right to Page 5 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 change the natural character of his land so as to use it as a purpose as to which it is unsuited and it is not in its natural state and injures the rights of others”. It falls upon the committee to protect the resources and rights and welfare of communities. Respectfully asks the committee to deny. Al Horvath, vice chair of the Wisconsin Conservation Congress Delegation in Douglas County and Chairman of the County Deer Advisory Council, spoke in opposition. Also stated there is no animosity towards the applicant but CWD is the greatest threat to the deer herd possibly. The purity of the sport needs to be maintained. The reason why there are no dead deer with CWD found is because scavengers will clean up the remains, spread them, and that is how CWD is spread through the environment. 25% of all bucks are CWD positive. There were two positive instances where CWD was found on a farm in Eau Claire County and Oneida County, none of which it is found in the wild anywhere near these two counties. To remove these deer from the farm it cost the tax payers $280,000. There were escape deer spreading the disease in the soil and to other deer. Clay soils spread the most, also vegetation like alfalfa. It stays in the soil and cannot be eradicated by any known means currently. The ability to eat CWD infected meat and not have it transferred to humans is low but not Zero. This is not a risk worth taking in the county. Al House, chair of the Wisconsin Congregation Congress Delegation, from Bayfield, spoke in opposition. House would like to remind the committee of the current fragile status of the Bayfield County deer herd. The last two hunting seasons have resulted in the two lowest buck harvests in recent times. Asks the board to do exhaustive due diligence on the possible ramifications of a deer farm in the county. Take the time to make the right decision. If approved the farm should have to enroll CWD farms. Kevin Schanning, Iron River and Wisconsin Conservation Congress elective, spoke in opposition, wanted to go on record as a member speaking in opposition. David Lindelof, Town of Oulu, spoke in opposition. His land boarders the Hoover Line about ¾ of a mile from the proposed location. Happy that the county does not have the same view of property rights as Texas does. He only saw one doe on his property this year hunting and to know that the few bucks that are out there are going to be drawn off the property to a concentration of 30 does that are in heat. That is not what he wants next to his property. Hopes the committee does not approve. Nick Vander Puy, Mellen WI, spoke in opposition. Grew up deer hunting in Wisconsin. Private property rights do not trump here in Wisconsin. During the time he was in public radio there was a game farm that was developed called A Forest of Antlers, which they swapped the DNR for some land they populated the land with deer that they paid $25/head for these deer. The following winter some wolves went underneath the fence on the Tomahawk River and killed about 26 of those deer which now they became about $3000/head. Endangered resources fund was used to pay that game farm for the death of those deer and the wolves got killed. About a year later CWD showed up in Wisconsin. Keith McCaffery, Natural Resource Biologist, told Vander Puy that game farms are a petri dish for exotic diseases. Val Guist stated that when you concentrate wild animals, animals get sick. Vander Puy agrees with Lahti. Pat Quaintance, board of director for Wisconsin Wildlife Federation also worked as a conservation warden, spoke in opposition. There is not a fence big enough, tall enough or strong enough to keep the deer in. He has dealt with the game farms in this area. Page 6 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 Gates can be left open. Fences that are inspected all had breaches one time or another. He worked with Mr. Bratley’s farm the one out in the barrens, had problems with bears and wolves getting in. He did what Stolz was talking about angling a fence away from the fence to keep the predators out, this did not work. The proposed site has a waterway going in which can be a breach for animals getting in and out. One of the problems with the Bratley game farm, was sick deer. He drug them out of the fence where people with stands were sitting inside the fence shooting deer outside the fence and dragging them inside the fence and putting deer farm tags on them. He had a separate fence inside another fence where he would leave in open in the winter time when deer are real subjectable to feed and baiting and deer would encroach from the wild and he would eventually put them into his own herd. The Stan Stevenson farm in Bayfield, Stevenson stated the fence was clear, upon inspection it was not. One day Quaintance saw a deer jump through the fence, at that time he worked diligently with Stevenson to fix the fence, it was never fixed. It was later sold to Mary Rice. According to the book there were 53 deer on the farm, Mary hired someone to look after the fence and while out inspecting the fence was found to be open. Finally the deer were eradicated but only 23 were found. The farm was then shut down. Same problems with the Jim Gadamus farm after it was sold to the Martinsons, there was about ¾ of a mile of fence down. Some deer got out, one was shot and it was tested positive. They were then eradicated and some were tested and came back negative. It is amazing how these deer escape and he oppose this totally. It is a nightmare. Bill Maki, spoke in opposition explaining he wrote a letter about this that was printed in the April 9 addition of the daily press (also a part of the application packet on file). He is opposed to the deer farm with concerns of spreading CWD. He sees no benefits of this. They own 902 acres about a half a mile away from this; the goal is to eventually turn this into public land. If this gets contaminated with CWD the value goes down the hill. The applicants forgot about the hunting culture in this area. David Saetre, Bayfield County, spoke in opposition. He wanted to correct some of the facts that were presented earlier by saying that he managed game farm number 5 owned by Mary Rice and he never left the gate open. There were numerous occasions where the gate was in fact left open by vandals for unknown reasons. This became a public nuisance. It attracted the public for viewing and shooting, wolf packs despite the attempts to stop it, also bears, deer escaping out the fence. Concentrated areas create other diseases. Saetre is opposed to this game farm. Bill Chingo, land owner in Bayfield County, spoke in opposition. Yesterday’s paper has an article that Wisconsin’s Conservationists push for double fences on game farms. Fences come down, and deer escape. There are figures on CWD, it was first found in Almond WI and the people were paid about $300,000 to eliminate the deer herd. Now the 80 acres was purchased and there is a fence to keep the deer out thinking the prions are in the soil. No one mentioned here how many farms were shut down because CWD was found. About half of the state contains CWD there is almost none up north. Where does it come from, game farms. A lot of hunters come from the southern part of the state to hunt up here in the north. They come here because they are scared of hunting in the south and getting sick. If CWD gets up here those people will stop coming up here and spending money. He suggested to the applicants to raise beef cattle. Pete Crowley, Ashland WI, spoke in opposition asking the board to not allow this because he feels that a game farm can be a conduit to spreading CWD. This farm would need to be populated from another game farm which was explained earlier. There is no Page 7 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 way to guarantee this won’t happen. CWD does not exist naturally in the wild, it needs to be introduced. Believes that it happened by transferring feed and vegetation. One thing that was not mentioned is the danger to humans. Who would want to eat an infected CWD infected animal. Mad Cow Disease was created this way. It can cross the species barrier. This is a huge concern. Ken Jonas, retired wildlife biologist, spoke in opposition concerned about white tailed deer as a natural resource (handed the committee members a map of where CWD is found in the United Stated. Attachment B) and explained spread of CWD. CWD is spread from one animal to another and it is always fatal. There have been several deer that were found that were so emaciated to the point that it was a walking dead. There is a pattern, CWD is found in captive facilities then spread to the wild. Concerned about the resource, the social and economic impacts and feels that by approving game farms there is a greater risk that CWD will be spread to new counties one being spread by the feed. Do people know where their feed comes from? Recommend denial. Steve Anich, Emergency Department Physician, spoke in opposition and wanted to go on record as against the farm for reasons that others have already stated. He owns property in Bayfield County. Derek Ogle, adjoining property owner, spoke in opposition; explain there are other environmental issues that need to be taken into consideration. There is a ¼ mile boarder that the fence line will go through and old beaver meadow which is denoted on the maps as a wetland. Also the clear cut for the fence comes within 10 paces of the Muskeg Creek which is a class 2 trout stream in Bayfield County. Please consider water issues with this application. The fence is within 30 inches of the property and he does not like his trees cut down. The fence line is an eyesore and he would like the fence more hidden like explained it would be by the road. Tom Podlesny, Gurney WI and owns property in Orienta, spoke in opposition. This is up to the local control to make the decision, this is historic and the herd could become contaminated forever and would ask that the committee exercise local control. Pocernich motioned to receive and place on file all the letters that are in the file. Bussey seconded. Strand asked that in the business section that Rob states who the letters are from and what the concerns are about. No further discussion. Motion carried. Discussion ended. D. David Buryanek (Namakagon) – rezone from R-2 to R-1 or RRB [9.47-acre Tax ID #36852) described as Lot 2 of SCM #1844 in V.1147 P.820, Section 36, Township 43 North, Range 5 West, Town of Namakagon, Bayfield County, WI] Kathy Midwood - Agent for Buryanek, spoke in favor explaining that the property owner has 9.5 acres on Buffalo Lake in Bayfield County. He would like his property setbacks to be 10 feet instead of 75 feet like they are now with the current zoning. Strand asked if the owner is requesting R-1 or RRB. Midwood stated he would like either and does not care, just would like the 10 foot setback. No one spoke in support or opposition. Discussion ended. Page 8 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 E. Town of Namakagon (Namakagon) – temporary asphalt plant [40-acre parcel (Tax ID #24048) described as NW ¼ of the NW ¼ in V.402P.101, Section 19, Township 43 North, Range 6 West, Town of Namakagon, Bayfield County, WI] Rowley stated this is a preemptive if Mathey’s are to get the bid for the project. They are trying to get the permits lined up ahead of time. Pocernich noted that the representatives for Northwoods Paving were here. Silbert asked how long is temporary and are they asking for both concrete and asphalt. Rowley stated less than a year and both concrete and asphalt. No one spoke in opposition. Discussion ended. F. Brad Buscher (Bayview) – multiple principal structures (3); 2 (1 unit) short-term rentals; and a banqet hall / event center [Parcel #1 is a 1.55–acre parcel (Tax ID# 33937), described as Lot 6, Thompson’s Subdivision in V. 1154 P. 829-830, Parcel #2 is a 1.64–acre parcel (Tax ID# 6740), described as Lots 1 and 2 of CSM # 553 in V. 1154 P. 829-830, both in Section 34, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayview, Bayfield County, WI] Therese House, coordinator, property manager and partner for Bayfield’s Best House Rentals, explained that the current owner’s parents purchased the property in 1982. This is a beautiful location for weddings. Would like to put in a wedding, family reunion, and short-term rentals for the property. In 1982 there were not zoning ordinances in effect when the property was purchased. Have been working very closely with the Zoning office to clear all the violations that are on the property before we start business on this property. Anne and Pat Crow are the personal property managers of this property working it every day. The garage we would like to turn into a meeting space. This property will can house over 25 people comfortably, and can bring in a lot of room tax in the town. The town has approved it. What is being proposed is to turn the garage into a meeting space, then there will be the house, then the other garage has two living spaces one upstairs and one down. Bussey asked if both garages have living units in them, House stated yes. Bussey asked how long ago was that, House stated not sure, a lot of these were there when the property was purchased. Bussey asked if these were owned by separate trusts, House stated both are now owned by Buscher the son. Pat Crow spoke in favor that this is a beautiful place and the town needs this, he lives the right across the street. No one spoke in support or opposition. Discussion ended. G. Bayfield County Forestry / Jason Bodine (Bayfield) – EIA and (3 site) rustic campground [Parcel #1 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5065), described as NE ¼ of the SE ¼; Parcel #2 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5066), described as NW ¼ of the SE ¼ in; Parcel #3 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5067), described as SW ¼ of the SE ¼ in; and Parcel #4 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5068), described as SE ¼ of the SE ¼ all are in V. 999 P. 19 of Section 30, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayfield, Bayfield County, WI] Page 9 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 Jason Bodine stated the EIA is clean and has no objections to it. This is the alternative location and it is not as good as the first but will work for the yurt site. It is about a mile and a half away from other location and a mile from closest neighbor. Soil test came back and good for pit toilet. No one spoke in support or opposition. Discussion ended. 11. Adjournment of Public Hearing: Pocernich made a motion to adjourn, Bussey seconded. Motion carried. Adjourned at 6:45 pm. 12. Call to Order of Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Rondeau called the meeting to order at 6:45 pm. 13. Roll Call: Bussey, Pocernich, Rondeau, Silbert & Strand – all present. Others present were: Director Rob Schierman, Jennifer Croonborg-Murphy-AZA, Josh Rowley-AZA and Krystal Hudachek-Secretary. 14. Previous Business: (Feb) A. Bayfield County Forestry / Jason Bodine (Bayview) – rezone from F-2 to F- 1 (postponed 2/18/16) [10-acre parcel (Tax ID #6671); described as the NE ¼ of the SW ¼ of the NE ¼ in V.8 P.381 Section 32, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayview, Bayfield County, WI] Bussey motioned to have an agenda amendment and move this item to after item G. Pocernich seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. 15. New Business: C. Dirk Stolz, Jane Stolz & Copper Hills Hunting Preserve, LLC (Oulu) – game farm on 385 acres [Parcel #1 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26708), described as SE ¼ of the NW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #2 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26709), described as NE ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #3 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26710), described as NW ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #4 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 37342), described as SW ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #5 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26715), described as NW ¼ of the SE ¼ in V. 1116 P. 416-417. Parcel #6 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26700), described as SW ¼ of the NE ¼ in V. 1121 P. 943-944. Parcel #7 is a 35-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26701), described as SE ¼ of the NE ¼ less V. 333 P.94-95 in V. 1121 P. 943-944. Parcel #8 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26713), described as SE ¼ of the SW ¼ in V. 1121 P. 945-946. Parcel #9 is a 40-acre parcel (Tax ID# 26716), described as SW ¼ of the SE ¼ in V. 1121-945- 946. Parcel #10 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34280), described as S ½ of the S ½ of the SW ¼ of the NW 1/4 in V. 1140 P. 61-62. Parcel #11 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34850), described as S 30 acres of SW ¼ of the NW ¼ less S ½ of the S ½ and less N ½ of the S ½ in V. 1140 P. 61-62. Parcel #12 is a 10-acre parcel (Tax ID# 34851), described as N ½ of the S ½ of the SW ¼ of the NW ¼ in V. 1140 P. 61-62. All in Page 10 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 Section 10, Township 48 North, Range 9 West, Town of Oulu, Bayfield County, WI] Schierman shared some zoning 101 (see attachment C). Went on to say that there are some letters on file, David Clausen is in opposition with concerns of CWD, and conditions need to be placed on application if approved, Steven Fortney and Mary Lou Fendrick in opposition that it is not consistent with Town Comp Plan, Dereck Ogle in opposition with concerns that he expressed here at the meeting, Fran Mackey has concerns about CWD, and Dave Kovacic is in support that it is good use of the property. There is the town board approval form from the town, indicated that it is checked that it is reviewed with the comp plan, they recommend disapproval for three reasons; 1. Not consistant with town land use plan, 2. The current plan use is forestry, 3. Farm raised deer is an agriculture use. Bussey stated this is a difficult case, the Stolz have done their homework and try to minimize the harmful impacts on Bayfield County. Think they would operate the site as well as they could, but need to look at the risks and listen to the testimony. No matter how careful one can be things do happen that are unavoidable, and that proposes a big risk to the Bayfield county deer population. Bussey motioned to deny based on #5 relevant public input of potential impact of CWD on Bayfield Counties deer herd, #7 the maintenance of safe and healthful conditions meaning there is a substantial risk, #8 the community and general welfare of economic impact, to avoid taking that substantial risk, #17 the potential impact of the proposed use on other lands and land uses referring specifically to hunting. The town board recommendation is taken into account but not convinced that there in a great deal of inconsistency with the towns comp plan. The town pointed out that some of the land is agricultural most of the land is forestry and the state considers this an agricultural use. This is looked at as a county perspective not a state perceptive and the proposed use would leave the forested land forested. The land use map of Oulu is largely zoned ag-1 with a few islands of forestry. Bussey considered the town board recommendation but does not place as much weight on the town recommendation as he does on the risks of CWD. Silbert seconded. Coleman stated that this application is listed as a conditional use for a game farm, if this is considered a livestock operation then it does not need a conditional but a special use class B permit, the process is the same, just want to insure that if a motion is passed the committee feels the result will be the same that it is stated as part of the motion. Want to bring the attention to zoning issues as opposed to operational issues. There can be a difference. There are procedures in place that regulate the operation through the state. The committee should be looking at issues pertaining to the County Ordinance. Bussey views this as a game farm in the ordinance. Motion is still to deny. Is the application in the alternative? The motion is the same weather this is for a conditional or a special use. Ok with second. Strand asked about the waterways. Croonborg-Murphy stated she inspected the property and found a waterway and contacted the owner which in turn contacted the DNR for a navigability determination, that email is in the packet, the stream was found non-navigable. There are some uses that have agricultural exemptions like the ponds, the atv trails are not and will be regulated. There is another waterway but the owner is avoiding that area. Pocernich wanted to go on record saying that comp plan maps are a living document and can be amended, should seriously take into consideration the handout of the comp plan, they meet a majority of the counties comp plan, they meet the standards of most compared to what they don’t meet, it outweighs that. CWD is a big thing. He would support the game farm as presented. Strand stated he received a lot of information on this issue and made his own investigation. Recap, it is contagious, it is fatal, and no cure, no prevention, or vaccination, since its discovery the distribution and prevalence has increased. There was a study in Wyoming with a 19% annual decline in mule deer with Page 11 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 CWD. It is spread by animal to animal contact could also be spread by environmental contamination and shed feces. Deer farms are documented to have spread CWD in the past. CWD so far has not been found in Bayfield County and it has been looked for. Consumption of deer should be avoided. There is potential for human health risk. Pocernich asked if CWD is in free ranging deer. Strand said yes, Pocernich stated then it can get here no matter what. What is being proposed are coming from farms that are tested. This is a benefit for the county. Silbert commented that this is serious and believes that the applicants are cautious, with that being said he opposes this based on common good, local value and control, the town board voted against it and 18 local people spoke out against it and one in favor of it. The deer herd is resource much like the water, if contaminated it is done. Have to let the local define us as a hunting community but does agree with Pocernich on points. Silbert has put in many fence posts and they can heave, does not think can keep the deer in or out it is a breach waiting to happen. Escapes from game farms are more common than not for a variety of reasons. There is not a reliable test currently on live animals. For common good, local control, have to stand up for our people, and neighbors so have to vote against. Rondeau, agrees with Denis on a lot of the items that were brought up, but years ago when they developed the plan commissions for the town, went through a lot of pain, time and effort so the towns could have their part in these decisions. When it was developed back then, that the zoning should come from the bottom up and that we just reaffirm what they have said and that we trust them. Rondeau agrees with Dennis and if were up to him he would allow this to go in but since the town plan commission and the town board have voted against it he supports the town recommendation. Coleman advised the committee to modify the motion to add the additional rational that was stated examples being fence deterioration, deer getting out on to neighboring properties, objectionable to neighbors, and that the committee is going to rely heavily on the local decision at the town level. Bussey noted he will not include in his motion the objections of the neighbors or local control, those are matters of concern, but ultimately look at the 17 factors and base decision on those. Bussey will stand on his motion. Roll call vote: Pocernich – No. Strand – Yes. Bussey – Yes. Silbert – Yes. Rondeau – Yes. Motion carried. 4/1 D. David Buryanek (Namakagon) – rezone from R-2 to R-1 or RRB [9.47-acre Tax ID #36852) described as Lot 2 of SCM #1844 in V.1147 P.820, Section 36, Township 43 North, Range 5 West, Town of Namakagon, Bayfield County, WI] Schierman stated there are no letters of support or opposition and there is town board approval and they have checked it with their town comp plan. Bussey motioned to approve the rezone to R-1 zoning. Strand seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. E. Town of Namakagon (Namakagon) – temporary asphalt plant [40-acre parcel (Tax ID #24048) described as NW ¼ of the NW ¼ in V.402P.101, Section 19, Township 43 North, Range 6 West, Town of Namakagon, Bayfield County, WI] Schierman stated there are no letters of support or opposition and there is town board approval and they have checked it with their town comp plan. Silbert motioned to approve with condition of one (1) year and hours of operation as stated in letter (Monday-Friday, 6 am – 8 pm, Saturday, 6:30 am – 3 pm). Strand seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. Page 12 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 F. Brad Buscher (Bayview) – multiple principal structures (3); 2 (1 unit) short-term rentals; and a banquet hall / event center [Parcel #1 is a 1.55–acre parcel (Tax ID# 33937), described as Lot 6, Thompson’s Subdivision in V. 1154 P. 829-830, Parcel #2 is a 1.64–acre parcel (Tax ID# 6740), described as Lots 1 and 2 of CSM # 553 in V. 1154 P. 829-830, both in Section 34, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayview, Bayfield County, WI] Croonborg-Murphy stated that she was not aware that the Northern garage had two units in it; there will now be three rental units on the property not two. She then read memo into the minutes (Attachment D). Bussey asked if the house on lot 5 was going to be a short-term rental. Croonborg-Murphy stated yes but applied for separately since it is in different ownership. Bussey stated he is concerned about the after the fact permits and there is no excuse, if approved it would open the door for others. Croonborg- Murphy stated that she and Deb contacted Linda Colman and it was confirmed that the conditional use can be heard by the committee just not issued until violations are eradicated. The agents have been very cooperative to move past all violations. It is the committees’ decision to do what they would like. Strand asked if the parcels can be combined and if so that would eliminate some of the violations like the 10 foot setback. Croonborg-Murphy answered yes with a certified survey. There was no objection at the town lever. Schierman added there is town board approval and they have indicated that they checked compatibility with comp plan. Bussey motioned to deny based on existing violations. Pocernich seconded. Strand noted that it is troubling that there are numerous violations. Schierman noted most of the violations were on lot 5. In recent times there was no reason to access the property of lot 6. We are not allowed to go inside these buildings. There is still a lot of gray area. No further discussion. Motion carried. G. Bayfield County Forestry / Jason Bodine (Bayfield) – EIA and (3 site) rustic campground [Parcel #1 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5065), described as NE ¼ of the SE ¼; Parcel #2 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5066), described as NW ¼ of the SE ¼ in; Parcel #3 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5067), described as SW ¼ of the SE ¼ in; and Parcel #4 is described as a 40–acre parcel (Tax ID# 5068), described as SE ¼ of the SE ¼ all are in V. 999 P. 19 of Section 30, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayfield, Bayfield County, WI] Schierman stated one letter of support from Mt Ashwaybay. There is town board approval and they have checked it with their town comp plan. Strand motioned to approve both the EIA and campground. Bussey seconded. Pocernich asked if the trailhead will still come off Whiting Rd, the reply was yes. No further discussion. Motion carried. Agenda Review and Alteration (Feb) A. Bayfield County Forestry / Jason Bodine (Bayview) – rezone from F-2 to F- 1 (postponed 2/18/16) [10-acre parcel (Tax ID #6671); described as the NE ¼ of the SW ¼ of the NE ¼ in V.8 P.381 Section 32, Township 50 North, Range 4 West, Town of Bayview, Bayfield County, WI] Bussey motioned to deny. Rondeau seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. Page 13 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 H. Superior Avenue Partners LLC / Terri & Kyle Anderson (Bell) - residence in a commercial zone to be used as a 1 unit short-term rental [0.350-acre parcel (Tax ID #8129) described as Lot 2 of CSM #1194 in V.7 P.262, Section 34, Township 51 North, Range 6 West, Town of Bell, Bayfield County WI] Croonborg-Murphy stated there are no issues or concerns with this application. This property will change hands based on approval. Schierman stated he received by email scan from approved town board approval form. Pocernich motioned to approve that it is consistent with town board and comp plan, positive general welfare and economic welfare. Bussey seconded. Motion carried. I. John & Marion Warren (Washburn) – storage (campers, boats, mini-storage, etc.) requesting (1) 100 x 60 building [30-acre parcel (Tax ID #30972) described as SE ¼ of the NE ¼ in V.554 P.408 Less W ½ W ½ in V.862 P.309, Section 25, Township 49 North, Range 5 West, Town of Washburn, Bayfield County WI] Croonborg-Murphy stated there is a letter in the packet from the applicant that he cannot be here he is open to you postponing the application until next month. Note that there is one building being proposed he would like it opened to being a facility if business is well. Schierman stated there is town board approval. If the applicant had put on the application multiple buildings that would be one thing but since he has indicated one mini storage on his application he would have to come back and ask for others. Pocernich motioned to approve limited to one (1) 100 x 60 building based on town board, and economic welfare. Strand seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. J. Bayfield County / Jason Bodine (Bell) – trailhead (seeking to improve parking lot) [part of a 160-acre parcel (Tax ID #7306) described as NW 1/4, Section 10, Township 50 N, Range 6 West, Town of Bell, Bayfield County WI] Bodine stated this is off of Co Hwy C about one mile in on an old log landing. There is another access off of Klemik Rd but the town would like to do away with that location. Croonborg-Murphy added that at the town meeting they stated that the town uses that as a turnaround for the plow and would be beneficial. Bussey motioned to approve based on town board approval, consistent with comp plan, general and economic welfare, help with erosion and location of site and access roads. Pocernich seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried. K. Discussion and Possible Action regarding update on shoreland zoning. Schierman stated he is waiting on one more bill to be signed, assembly bill 582, surveyors identifying high water marks, once signed will be working on an amendment. L. Discussion and Possible Action regarding on-line permitting. No update. Page 14 of 14 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – April 21, 2016 M. Committee members discussion(s) regarding matter of the Planning and Zoning Department. No update. 16. Monthly Report / Budget and Revenue Schierman stated he added a new feature, declared value, wants to total the declared value of construction. In 2015 the department permitted $21,725,691 in value, if all were built this would generate $66,000 in county tax revenue. Pocernich motioned to receive and place on file, Silbert seconded. Motion carried. 17. Adjournment Rondeau called adjournment at 8:00 pm. Prepared by KMH on 4/22/2016. Given to RDS on 4/25/2016. Reviewed and approved by RDS on 4/26/2016 Sent to Zoning Committee on 4/26/2016 Approved by Zoning Committee on 5/19/2016 K/zc/minutes/2016/#4 April