HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 12/15/2016
Page 1 of 5 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2016
MINUTES
BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE
PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2016
1. Call to Order of Public Hearing: Chairman Rondeau called the public hearing to order
at 4:00 pm.
2. Roll Call: Rondeau, Silbert and Strand – all present. Pocernich & Bussey – Absent.
Others present were: Director-Rob Schierman, Jennifer Croonborg-Murphy-AZA, Josh
Rowley-AZA, and Krystal Hudachek - Secretary.
3. Affidavit of Publication: Schierman showed the audience the affidavit of publication
and the certified mailing receipts.
4. Public Comment
5. Minutes of Previous Meeting(s): Rondeau stated the minutes are from the November
17, 2016 meeting.
Silbert made a motion to approve, Strand seconded. Motion carried.
6. 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.
7. Public Hearing:
A. Peter Hexum (Oulu) - multiple principal structures [property is 2 parcels in Vol.
1141 P.895. Parcel 1 (Tax ID# 37156) is 6.91-acre described as a parcel in the
NE ¼ of the NE 1/4 and Parcel 2 (Tax ID# 37158) is 12.82-acre described as the
N ½ of the SE ¼ of the NE ¼ both in Section 36, Township 48N, Range 9 W,
Town of Oulu, Bayfield Co, WI]
Peter Hexum spoke in support asking the committee to grant his application for a
second principle structure. This was originally a bunk house but would like to add
a kitchenette for when his mother-in-law comes to live with them for four month
out of the year.
Discussion ended.
8. Adjournment of Public Hearing:
Strand made a motion to adjourn, Silbert seconded. Motion carried.
Adjourned at 4:09 pm.
9. Call to Order of Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Rondeau called the
meeting to order at 4:09 pm.
10. Roll Call: Rondeau, Silbert, and Strand –all present. Pocernich & Bussey – Absent.
Page 2 of 5 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2016
Others present were: Director-Rob Schierman, Jennifer Croonborg-Murphy-AZA, Josh
Rowley-AZA, and Krystal Hudachek - Secretary.
11. New Business:
A. Peter Hexum (Oulu) - multiple principal structures [property is 2 parcels in Vol.
1141 P.895. Parcel 1 (Tax ID# 37156) is 6.91-acre described as a parcel in the
NE ¼ of the NE 1/4 and Parcel 2 (Tax ID# 37158) is 12.82-acre described as the
N ½ of the SE ¼ of the NE ¼ both in Section 36, Township 48N, Range 9 W,
Town of Oulu, Bayfield Co, WI]
Croonborg-Murphy explained there is a principal structure on the property that
Mr. Hexum lives in. He built a garage and convert part of the upstairs to a
bunkhouse. Now he would like to add a kitchenette and use 800 sq. ft. of the
garage so this would be multiple principal structures. Silbert asked about the 3
conditions that the Town placed. Strand stated that there were two conditions
placed and one recommendation that the owner combine the two lots. Hexum
stated that would be ok with him to combine the two parcels. Croonborg-Murphy
added, that maybe give him a year to combine the parcels.
Strand motioned to approve with the conditions that the Town placed
(Towns Conditions: 1] approve only the second floor of the garage for a second
principal residence and limit to 800 sq. ft. 2] Strongly recommend that both
parcels be combined into one parcel. 3] The Town may periodically review the
Special Use Permit to assure compliance with the permit conditions and the
Town’s Comprehensive Plan.) giving the applicant one year to combine the two
parcels of land, based on Town Board Approval, that it meets the Comprehensive
Plan, and that it meets safe and healthful conditions and community or general
welfare. Silbert seconded. No further discussion. Motion carried.
B. Salvadore Borsellino Jr. (Cable) – home-based business (antique sales) [a
22.14-acre parcel (Tax ID #35639), described as a parcel in SW ¼ Described in
V.1044 P.114, Section 15, Township 43 North, Range 7 West, Town of Cable,
Bayfield County, WI]
Matt Borsellino spoke in support stating he would like to open a thrift shop in the
other half of his duplex. Rowley asked if he was the owner of the property, reply
was no. Rowley read the definition of home-based business. Borsellino stated
that he does not think that his Aunt would pay him nor would he go over the 25%
limit, that this is a small area he would like to use to sell items. Schierman stated
that he is concerned this application does not meet the criteria for a home based
business. 1. Who is the property owner, and 2. Will this be limited to 25% space
used? Silbert asked who the owner is on the deed; Schierman stated Salvadore
Borsellino is the only one listed on the deed. Silbert asked if he lived on the
property and the reply from Borsellino was no that he (the nephew) lives on the
property and will be running the business. Silbert stated this does not meet the
definition of home-based business. Linda Coleman, corporation counsel for
Bayfield County, spoke asking the question is this a gainful occupation as the
definition states? There are other routes the applicant can go, one being they can
rezone the parcel, the owner can move to the property, or they could apply for a
variance.
Page 3 of 5 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2016
Bussey arrived at 4:25
Schierman stated there are two letters of opposition in the file, one form Sam
Senske concerned about hours of operation, and trespassing. A letter form Leroy
Walters concerned about hours of operation, increase use of road, trespassing,
and liability. There is Town Board approval. Rondeau stated that he knows the
applicants, that there is fighting amongst the family about who owns what
property and possible switching of properties, this will be a hard one to decide on.
Silbert noted that the personal issues of the family is not part of the decision, this
does not meet the definition of a home-based business.
Silbert motioned to not accept this application based on the fact that it
does not meet the Zoning ordinance and all other applicable laws. Strand
seconded. Bussey stated he will abstain from voting since he was not here for
the entire discussion. No further discussion. Motion carried.
C. James Pagac (Barksdale) – home-based business (auto repair) [a 4.22-acre
parcel (Tax ID #590), described as a parcel in NE ¼ of the SE ¼ of, Section 35,
Township 48 North, Range 5 West, Town of Barksdale, Bayfield County, WI]
Withdrawn
D. Discussion and possible action regarding reconsideration of dirt track
(Kelly)
Strand motioned to suspend the rules and allow testimony only in regards
to the reconsideration. Bussey seconded. No further discussion. Motion
carried.
Scott Clark, attorney for the Larson’s, stated that the reason the Larson’s were
not at the initial hearing is because they had the understanding that the tabling
from the Town board would necessarily delay actions by this Committee. They
thought the Town would deal with it again at the December 12th meeting then
back to this Committee. We are requesting a motion for reconsideration and a
motion for a withdrawal of the denial of the permit. The Larson’s neglect of
attending the meeting was because of the Town Board Chair. The opponents
were represented by counsel at the Town Board meeting. Larson’s are apologetic
and did not mean disrespect but relied on Mr. Gillis’s representation.
Ryan Larson, owner of the property, spoke asking for reconsideration for the use
of the track that he and his son built. He tried working with the neighbors and
cannot come to an agreement. This is a life style for us, have tried many ways to
work with the neighbor. Strand stated point of order that he needs to stick to the
reconsideration.
Linda Coleman, Bayfield County Corporation Counsel, everyone is cognitive to
the Larson’s desire to be reheard and they should have that opportunity but this
is a question of procedure. The Zoning Committee operates under the ordinance
and there are not provisions for reconsideration at this Committee but there are at
the Board of Adjustment. Does this mean the decision stands forever, no, we also
do not have any rules on reapplying. Concern with reconsideration is what would
Page 4 of 5 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2016
that look like, do they pay a fee, how will this be noticed and what about the
testimony from the last hearing. If this is what the Committee wants to do then set
some ground rules. If not reconsider then they could reapply. Bussey stated that
they could appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Coleman agreed but the applicant
wasn’t at the first meeting, there is nothing for the Board to go off of. Bussey said
there could be legal arguments to reapplying. Strand stated he is very supportive
of the Larson’s having an opportunity to make a presentation before this
Committee but they would need to pay the fee again, it should be noticed
properly, and the previous record should be included. Bussey stated they should
have checked with Zoning and not go off of what they heard from the Town. Is it
fair to drag everyone back, the opponents came to the first meeting and they
heard the same thing from the Town, they were at that same meeting. They have
another avenue. The Committee should stand on the decision that was made.
Silbert stated he agrees with Bill and the Committee should not vacate the
decision. Clark stated the Larson’s were served with Cease and Desist papers
that only pertained to the 6 acres. The denial of the application included both he 6
acre parcel and the 20 acre parcels which would have been the alternate location
for the track. Now they are stuck. The fee for a BOA appeal is an $800 fee. There
is concern that there are no races conducted on the property it is not a race track,
but Mr. Schierman stated you can race against yourself; this is only for Mr.
Larson and his son. Rondeau stated this has nothing to do with the
reconsideration. Silbert asked if this is turned down by the BOA can they
reapply. Coleman answered yes. Schierman stated they have 30 days from the
November 23rd letter to appeal to the BOA.
Jacqueline Roguski spoke in support, they are neighbors of the Larson’s and
they were planning on attending the meeting but couldn’t due to a family event.
The track does not bother her; it is no louder than the plow, or tractors or things
like that. Strand stated this testimony has nothing to do with the reconsideration.
Mike Furtak stated that he used to work for the County and has seen everything
there is to see. There should be some research done within the department as to
past practices.
Patti Larson spoke asking to grant the reconsideration that they listened to the
Town of Kelly that the board wouldn’t necessarily act on this; they assumed that’s
what would be. The Town wanted more information. They were able to go to the
first meeting and share their points; it was approved 3:1. Then they went to the
Town of Kelly meeting, Vern Gilles said that Bayfield County doesn’t usually
make a decision unless they get the Townships recommendation or denial. They
assumed and didn’t come to the meeting. She heard through the rumor mill it was
denied. It was an error and a learning lesson. It is just as hard for them to come
to a meeting as it would be for other people. They have never gone through
something like this and listened to the Town.
Rob Roguski asked the board to reconsider that there was a lot of lies that were
told now the committee should hear the truth.
Lois Mackey asked the Committee to reconsider.
Page 5 of 5 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2016
Ben Taddy asked the Committee to hear the reconsideration. He was at the
Town meeting and hear what was said to the Larson’s that this board would not
hear it until there are more facts on the table.
Linda Larson asked the Committee to reconsider, after all that they have been
through the most certainly would have been at the meeting if they weren’t told
that that the Committee wouldn’t act on this.
Michael Larson asked for reconsideration since they were given false
information from the Town.
Dennis Seechen is in opposition. That he was at the Town meeting and heard
the same thing the Larson’s heard from the Town and he still appeared at the
County meeting.
Kim Anderson is in opposition of the reconsideration because have been
through a lot in three years of this.
Bussey motioned to deny the request for reconsideration. Silbert
seconded. Strand stated the Larson’s are at fault for not attending the meeting
and even though they are at fault he would have liked their input prior to making a
decision. No further discussion. Roll call vote: Bussey – Yes. Silbert – Yes.
Rondeau – Yes. Strand – No. Motion carried.3/1
E. Committee members discussion regarding matters of the Planning and
Zoning department
Schierman updated the Committee on the shoreline ordinance, UDC, and the
Town of Russell (Boulder Point).
12. Monthly Report
Schierman stated the department took in $12262.59 more than last year. Land
use is 20 less and sanitary are 2 more than last year. Permitted $26,938,756 in
value of projects.
Bussey motioned to receive and place on file, Silbert seconded. No further
discussion. Motion carried.
13. Adjournment
Rondeau called adjournment at 5:35 pm.
Prepared by KMH on 12/16/2016; given to RDS 12/16/2016
Approved by RDS on 12/22/2016
Sent to ZC on 12/22/2016
Final Approval on 1/19/2017
cc: (after final approval)- (8) Supervisors, Cty Admin./Clerk, DNR, Web
k/zc/minutes/2016/#12 December