Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 12/15/2022 Page 1 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 MINUTES BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2022 1. Call to Order of Public Hearing: Chairman Rondeau called the public hearing to order at 4:00 pm. 2. Roll Call: Pocernich, Ray, Rondeau, Silbert, and Strand – ALL present. Other’s present: Director-Ruth Hulstrom, Mark Abeles-Allison-County Administrator, Tracy Pooler-AZA, Mckenzie Slack-AZA (via Teams), Erica Meulemans-AZA (via Teams), and Heather Doubek-Secretary. 3. Affidavit of Publication: Ruth Hulstrom stated the affidavit of publication was fulfilled. Published November 29, 2022, and December 6, 2022. 4. Public Comment: Bill Bailey stated that he submitted a written statement to Ruth Hulstrom on solar permitting and requested that it be kept simple. He suggested that it should be for all stand- alone solar installations not just residential. Rooftop installations should not affect property lines and are preapproved. A lot of things are already in place with state and utility inspections. Online applications would be helpful. Communicating with SolSmart and the Department of Energy as they have some guidelines. Bill Stewart stated he spoke a month ago at the November meeting against the conditional use permit that was on the agenda to come before the Committee regarding the Richard Cochrane property in Barnes. He is asking what was told to the Committee by Ruth Hulstrom, Director, John Carlson, Corp Counsel and Mike Furtak at the November meeting and since. Stewart states what he has heard and read since the meeting is both perplexing and disturbing. He added that when Hulstrom and Carlson were threatened with a lawsuit, they assumed authority to grant a land use permit that does not comply with the zoning ordinance. He is asking where in the ordinance do Hulstrom and Carlson find the authority to do this. And what did the department receive in return. A settlement agreement from Mr. Cochrane, Conditions that hold him to his claim that there is no food prep in the bunkhouse, no commercial activity will be conducted on the property, that it can never be regarded as a dwelling or principal structure or Mr. Carlson’s memo explaining the threat that you face and his reasoning for not defending the ordinance. None of these agreements or any agreement are in evidence. Stewart states he is here objecting to the administration of the zoning ordinance demonstrated by the zoning offices handling of Mr. Cochrane’s request. He further stated that the law is simple. If your proposed land use meets the zoning ordinance the zoning office issues you a permit. If it does not meet the ordinance the zoning office does not have the authority to issue a permit. If you think there are extenuating circumstances unique to your land and its use, you can apply for a conditional use permit. This application is not decided on by the administrative office, it gets public review by town, county, commission or committee approval or rejection. However, the mere threat of a lawsuit does not empower the zoning office with the authority that belongs to this Committee. Where in the ordinance is your office procedure that allows Ms. Hulstrom authorization to do this. He added that the public, the record, and the zoning office staff is owed answers to these questions. Stewart requests that the Page 2 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 Committee read what he has provided and to be put on the agenda for the January meeting. Mark Abeles-Allison asked if he could submit his statement digitally and he stated he will email it to Ruth Hulstrom. 5. 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. 6. Public Hearing: A. Start Line Inn, LLC (Cable) – [ATF] multiple unit development, [ATF] 2-unit short- term rental accommodation, and bicycle and ski sales and repair in R-RB zoning district. Ruth Hulstrom informed the committee that the applicants were not able to attend tonight’s meeting due to the weather but are available by telephone if the Committee has any questions for them. Rondeau asked three times if anyone would like to speak in support. No one spoke. Rondeau asked three times if anyone would like to speak in opposition. No one spoke. Discussion ended. 7. Adjournment of Public Hearing: Silbert made a motion to adjourn the public hearing, Ray seconded. Motion carried, 5-0. Adjourned at 4:11 pm. 8. Call to Order of Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Rondeau called the meeting to order at 4:11pm. 9. Roll Call: Pocernich, Ray, Rondeau, Silbert, and Strand - ALL present. Other’s present: Director-Ruth Hulstrom, Mark Abeles-Allison-County Administrator, Tracy Pooler-AZA, Mckenzie Slack-AZA (via Teams), Erica Meulemans-AZA (via Teams), and Heather Doubek – Secretary. 10. New Business A. Start Line Inn, LLC (Cable) – [ATF] multiple unit development, [ATF] 2-unit short- term rental accommodation, and bike and ski sales and repair in R-RB zoning district. File Report: Ruth Hulstrom informed the Committee that there are three requests being made. Hulstrom stated that Corp Counsel indicated the request could be provided under one application for all three requests. But the Committee can choose to approve any number of the requests or all three. Silbert made a motion to waive the EIA on the Start Line Inn, LLC, seconded by Ray. Motion carried, 5-0. Page 3 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 Strand made a motion to approve the conditional use permit for the multiple unit development, which includes three residences, two short-term rentals and a retail business with the conditions that the property owner must acquire a land use permit for conversion of the loft space above the garage into living quarters, they must obtain a UDC inspection for certificate of human occupancy for that space and the property owners must acquire a sanitary permit for the living quarters above the garage. No after the fact fees will be charged, based upon consistency with the town’s comprehensive plan, town board recommendation, maintenance of safe and healthful conditions in the community, the general welfare and economic impacts of the proposal seconded by Silbert. Motion carried, 5-0. Agenda Review and Alteration 11. Other Business B. Minutes of Previous Meeting(s): (November 17, 2022) Strand moves to approval of the minutes with one correction on page six, item 10A striking the three words “town board recommendation” from the record. Strand made a motion to approve the minutes from November 17, 2022, as corrected, seconded by Silbert. Motion carried, 5-0. C. Discussion and Possible Action regarding Bunkhouses Ruth Hulstrom informed the Committee on the struggles the department faces on the definition of bunkhouses and recited the ordinance and if it should be clarified or alter the existing application as they do not match. She added that the department is looking for some direction from the Committee. Tracy Pooler added what his understanding is of the bunkhouse definition. Silbert asked which areas are most concerning. He stated that he would be more concerned about the sanitary versus the food preparation. Hulstrom confirmed that sanitary is part of the review process at the time of the application. She added that the main thing the department wants to address is that the application meets the ordinance definition. Reviewing the applications has been difficult, especially for new staff, since the definition does align with the way the Department has approved bunkhouses. Ray added that he understands the staff’s frustration and is in favor of clarifying things. He addressed the list of concerns with removing from property just to add in after the fact, additional noise, more clearing on lakeshore properties. He pointed out that we are not currently enforcing lakeshore vegetation clearing. He is sympathetic to these concerns. Ray asked for clarification on the personal property/cooking concern. Pooler answered that appliances are classified as personal property and are not fixtures. They can be easily removed and moved back in after the fact. Hulstrom stated that having a clear definition of what constitutes a bunkhouse would be beneficial to staff when trying to apply whatever the standards should be. Ideally, thinking about a way to revise the definition in a way that is considerate to adjacent neighbors and the local community. Because a bunkhouse is classified as an accessory structure the setbacks are less than a residence. So, the concern is if these bunkhouses are being used as full-time housing it could have a greater impact on the neighbor. Ray asked where the history of bunkhouses came from, and the Committee was not sure. Silbert asked if there is a limit to how many bunkhouses there can be on a property. Strand confirmed that this is addressed in the ordinance. Strand questioned how bedrooms are counted on a bunkhouse when looking at the sanitary. Pooler responded that they do look at the bunkhouse as a bedroom. Page 4 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 Silbert asked if a bunkhouse can be rented out. Hulstrom answered that if they met the requirements in the application process it could possibly be rented out as a short-term rental. But was unclear on the Public Health Department requirements for licensing. Discussion continued by the Committee. Pocernich asked the Committee if they know the definition of a bunkhouse per the Webster dictionary and informed them that the definition of a bunkhouse is sleeping quarters. He added that the concern on bunkhouses is similar to short-term rentals. Hulstrom stated that clarifying the definition of a bunkhouse would help the staff. Strand asked how UDC standards are met with bunkhouses and what obligation does zoning have. Hulstrom answered that sanitary is approved first Pooler added that the department adds a condition on the permit that it needs to meet UDC inspection. He added that there is no follow up by the department after the permit is issued. Pocernich reiterated to keep the definition simple, sleeping quarters only. No water and no plumbing. Ray added that he would like to see bunkhouses meet the residential setbacks versus the accessory building setbacks. Strand asked for clarification on what the department’s process would be for other structures if we change the bunkhouse ordinance to the simple definition. Pocernich stated it would then fall under a short-term rental and have to meet all of those requirements. Silbert and Ray agree that short-term rental should be kept separate from bunkhouses, and it be classified as a second residence instead. Hulstrom agreed that a bunkhouse and a short-term rental are two different uses. Discussion continued by the Committee. Silbert added that he would like there to be a size limit. Ray added that there may need to be a size limit, but it may need to be larger than 500 square feet. Hulstrom stated that the department can check with other Wisconsin counties and see what they are doing with bunkhouses for further direction as well. She would like to see this addressed prior to the upcoming construction season. Strand summarized that a simple definition of bunkhouses could be made, and other structures would potentially be classified as second residences with or without a kitchen or with or without a bathroom. He added that he is not ready to make a decision tonight and would like to hear how other counties are handling bunkhouses. And suggests that an immediate solution could be to change the application to be consistent with the ordinance and maybe later on make the ordinance change. Abeles-Allison questioned when the zoning department has a discrepancy in the application and the ordinance or sees a discrepancy or inconsistency to be corrected that this is an administrative change and does not need to come to the Committee to make the correction. Hulstrom responded that this was brought to the Committee’s attention because there were other issues related to bunkhouses and she wanted it noted. Abeles-Allison clarified that in other situations where there is an inconsistency in the ordinance it should be at her discretion. Hulstrom confirmed that she could have altered but it has historically been in place a long time and there are issues that the staff has struggled with and how it has been applied. It does not seem to align with the definition and is why it became a more in depth discussion. D. Discussion and Possible Action regarding Residential Solar Installations Ruth Hulstrom informed the Committee that she did reach out to the Wisconsin County Code Administrators (WCCA) to understand what other counties are doing in the State of Wisconsin. Generally, many of them are requiring permits for the installations, deeming them an accessory structure, and they need to meet accessory setbacks. Hulstrom stated that documentation was received from SolSmart and noted what they do as part of their work. She added that Bill Bailey did provide her with some additional information after the meeting deadline and that she can provide this information to the Committee if they would like to see his comments. The staff’s main concern is that they meet the required shoreland setbacks and height requirements. Making sure that the property owner is correctly siting their structure would be best handled through the permitting process. She added that she Page 5 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 wants to be sure that it is not adding any negative impacts on adjacent neighbors and the community. Silbert added that he would like to go with Bill Bailey’s recommendation and keep it simple and recommends a reduced or nominal fee to encourage solar. Ray asked Hulstrom if the concern in the shoreland area is the thirty-five-foot height requirement or asserting the setback from the lake or both. Hulstrom confirmed that the concern is both the height requirement and the setback from the water. As well as impervious surface. Ray questioned that impervious surface would be required, and Hulstrom confirmed it would since it has water run-off. Pocernich stated he would like to see the rooftop mounted solar systems for residential properties be exempt from zoning and approved in all zoning districts and not require a fee. And on residential ground systems be considered for setbacks only and be exempt from permitting. Hulstrom clarified that this discussion is on residential solar only not commercial. Abeles-Allison asked for clarification on the setback for solar and if it would follow the setback for an accessory structure. Hulstrom stated that her understanding on what Pocernich is suggesting is that residential solar would have its own standard setback across all zoning districts. Strand disagrees with this and if using the existing accessory structure setback, it needs to be consistent with what each zoning district requires right now. Discussion continued by the Committee. Hulstrom added that she can put it on as a future discussion item once the Committee has had an opportunity to think more on it. Ray stated that he is hearing, to encourage residential solar, that rooftop solar should be exempt with no permit necessary. Pole mounted residential solar panels would need to meet some setback. He added that he did not hear anyone contest there being no fee. Ray would like to see a proposed ordinance at the next meeting for review. Hulstrom stated that the Wisconsin County Code Administrators (WCCA) did note that solar installations would have impervious surface to meet state requirements. E. Discussion and Possible Action regarding Fee Schedule Ruth Hulstrom informed the Committee that there is a lot of staff discussion internally looking at reformatting some of the applications. As part of this process the Department has also been reviewing fees. Property owners tend to struggle when indicating the valuation for their total cost to base the fee on for land use permits. She noted that she has talked with other counties and there are some that have a base fee plus so much per square feet to capture the fee more easily, and possibly more accurately for the proposed structure. Hulstrom added that it would be nice to update the fee schedule at the time of updating the land use application. And possibly removing the fee schedule from the ordinance for an easier process to change or update for the Committee. Strand agreed on removing the fee schedule from the ordinance and would like fee changes to be presented to the Committee. Pocernich agreed with fee calculation being based on square footage instead of fair market value. The Committee agrees on removing the fee schedule from the ordinance and looking into calculating fees for the land use permit by square footage instead of value of project. Abeles-Allison added that there will be definite budget implications if there is a major change one way or the other. It would be wise for the Committee to plan well in advance and potentially adopt it on January 1st basis consistent with the County’s annual budget costs. Ray suggested that the department look at a month worth of permits and run it through the potential new process calculating by square footage to see the difference. Hulstrom agreed with this. F. Committee Members discussion(s) regarding matters of the P & Z Dept. Silbert stated he wanted to repeat his request to have the etcetera removed from the irrigation section within the ordinance wording. Hulstrom answered that this change is in Page 6 of 6 ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – December 15, 2022 process and will be part of the January meeting agenda as a public hearing item. Pocernich added that the metallic mining section of the ordinance has an etcetera in this section as well. Hulstrom confirmed that this could be looked at when going over the ordinance in the future. 12. Monthly Report / Budget and Revenue Ruth Hulstrom stated that the monthly report is not available at this time. The November report will be on the January agenda. 13. Adjournment Rondeau called adjournment at 5:38 pm. Prepared by HRD on 12/20/22; given to REH on 12/20/22 Reviewed by REH on 1/4/2023 Sent to PZC on 1/19/2023 Final Approval on 1/19/2023 cc: (after final approval)- (8) Supervisors, Cty Admin, Clerk, DNR, Web k/zc/minutes/2022/#12 Dec