HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning & Zoning Committee - Minutes - 10/19/2023
Page 1 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
MINUTES
BAYFIELD COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE
PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC MEETING
OCTOBER 19, 2023
1. Call to Order of Public Hearing: Acting Chairman Silbert called the public
hearing to order at 4:05 pm.
2. Roll Call: Dennis Pocernich-present; Charly Ray-absent; Brett Rondeau-absent;
Jeff Silbert-present; Fred Strand-present
Others present were: Director-Ruth Hulstrom, Alessandro Hall-AZA, Mark
Abeles-Allison-County Administrator and Madelaine Rekemeyer-County Board
Supervisor
3. Affidavit of Publication: Hulstrom showed the audience the affidavit of
publication and the certified mailing receipts.
4. Public Comment:
Mike Furtak spoke as agent on behalf of Michael Bidon, a property owner in the
Town of Delta. Mr. Furtak walked away from the microphone several times so
dialog wasn’t heard. Mr. Furtak asked Tracy Pooler, AZA for the Delta Township,
the status of Mr. Bidon’s application and Mr. Pooler responded that there were
several violations that needed to be addressed. Mr. Furtak stated he has a dispute
with the idea that Mr. Pooler, while visiting the site to inspect the proposed project,
found the violations without the authority to look at more of the property than the
proposed project site. Mr. Furtak talked about back when he was an Assistant
Zoning Administrator he never had these issues or was allowed to “wander” around
the property, nor did he want to. Acting Chairman Silbert called time and told Mr.
Furtak the Committee will look deeper into the issues that Mr. Furtak has
described.
5. Review of Meeting Format – Acting Chairman Silbert 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.
Strand motioned to move into the Public Hearing. Seconded by Pocernich.
6. Public Hearing:
A. White River Ag Products, Inc, owner and Richard W Donner, agent, are
petitioning for a zoning district map amendment of two (2) parcels
from Ag-1 to F-1. Parcel #1 is a 5-acre parcel (Tax ID# 21533) described
as the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter (S ½ SE ¼ NE ¼ NE ¼), in Doc #2022R-596946, and
Parcel #2 is a 35-acre parcel (Tax ID# 21534), described as the Northeast
Page 2 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼ NE ¼) less the South ½ of the
Southeast ¼ thereof in Doc #2017R-567773; both in Section 32, Township
46 North, Range 5 West, Town of Kelly, Bayfield County, WI.
Mike Furtak spoke in favor of the Rezone proposal, informing the
Committee that he attended the Town of Kelly meeting of the Town Board
& the Planning Commission and both recommended approvals.
Silbert asked three times if anyone would like to speak in support. No one spoke.
Silbert asked three times if any would like to speak in opposition. No one spoke.
Discussion ended.
7. Adjournment of Public Hearing:
Adjourned at 4:17 pm.
8. Call to Order of Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting: Silbert called the
meeting to order at 4:18 pm.
9. Roll Call: Dennis Pocernich-present; Charly Ray-absent; Brett Rondeau-absent;
Jeff Silbert-present; Fred Strand-present
Others present were: Director-Ruth Hulstrom, Alessandro Hall-AZA, Mark
Abeles-Allison-County Administrator and Madelaine Rekemeyer-County Board
Supervisor.
10. New Business
A. White River Ag Products, Inc, owner and Richard W Donner, agent are
petitioning for a zoning district map amendment of two (2) parcels
from Ag-1 to F-1. Parcel #1 is a 5-acre parcel (Tax ID# 21533) described
as the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter (S ½ SE ¼ NE ¼ NE ¼), in Doc #2022R-596946, and
Parcel #2 is a 35-acre parcel (Tax ID# 21534), described as the Northeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (NE ¼ NE ¼) less the South ½ of the
Southeast ¼ thereof in Doc #2017R-567773; both in Section 32, Township
46 North, Range 5 West, Town of Kelly, Bayfield County, WI.
Hulstrom spoke and gave an overview of the request and the property
overview of the Zoning Districts in the area and what the Town’s future land
use map showed, and if the town is supportive then the Dept has no issues.
Pocernich asked if the Dept received input from the Town and Hulstrom
replied yes, the Town is supportive. Silbert mentioned that the Town’s
Planning Commission is also supportive and approved the request.
Motion: Strand moved based on the Towns Plan Commission and
the Town Board recommendation, to forward to the full County Board with
Page 3 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
a recommendation to approve the rezoning of these two parcels from Ag-1
to F-1 Seconded by Pocernich. Motion carried, 3-0, 2 absent.
Madelaine Rekemeyer, District 11 Supervisor, thanked the Committee for
taking the time to drive all the way out to her district and carefully looked at
the Ag-1/ F-1 situation and for coming up with a solution.
11. Other Business
B. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Fees Ordinance Language
Section 13-1-21(e):
Hulstrom stated that this is just a minor modification to the ordinance
amendment to remove the fee schedule from the ordinance language, so it
could be updated more readily. She noted that the only items changed from
last meeting’s review were the highlighted portions. This highlighted addition
should make it more clear where an individual could locate the fee schedule,
said Hulstrom. Someone spoke without the mic on, so no audio was heard.
Strand stated he supports the proposed wording as presented and looks
forward to seeing it as an official ordinance amendment in the future.
C. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding updating the Fee
Schedule:
Hulstrom explained that the Department is looking to review the proposed
fee changes again, primarily the Town and Committee reviews, the Special
Use Class A, Class B, Conditional Use, and the zoning petition text
amendment as well as the Board of Adjustment review. Hulstrom stated
she tried to note any of those possible items that the Department would like
to be discussed in terms of fee changes in red. The Department is aware
that the Committee, at the last meeting, had been hesitant to want to make
significant increases to the Class B or the Conditional Use permit review
fees. Hulstrom stated that the Department's not saying the amount in red
is set in stone, but asked the Committee to review them again given that the
Department needs to cover the cost of the new fulltime office personnel
through fee increases. Hulstrom also asked the Committee to review the
Board of Adjustment fees again. Hulstrom commented that the Department
has seen several Board of Adjustment cases and a lot of legal fees
associated with those cases and the Department is trying to figure out how
to balance the cost of those legal fees. Hulstrom indicated uncertainty as
to who should hold the burden of those fees, taxpayers or the applicant.
Silbert asked regarding the BOA fees why the Department is requesting an
increase from $250 to $1000 for a limited rehearing or reopening. Hulstrom
commented that she is unaware of the history of why that fee was set so
low because the costs associated with these hearings are the same as a
typical Variance or Appeal Hearing and the Departments feels that it’s
merited to be at the same fee rate. Pocernich stated he supports the BOA
fee increase but wants to see the Special Use Class B & the Conditional
Page 4 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
Use only be raised $50 or so and feels that $350 & $450 are pretty good
numbers. Pocernich also asked why the Zoning Department would want a
$150 annual renewal fee for short-term rentals. Hulstrom stated there has
been a lot of struggles for both Public Health and Zoning in terms of
managing the short-term rentals and making sure that the minimum
standards that need to be met related to both are able to be verified. The
Department is looking at trying to both better serve the individuals who are
looking to facilitate short term rentals as well as balancing the cost burden
so that individuals who are looking to facilitate short term rentals are
covering more of the cost of doing that versus the individual property owners
or taxpayers in the county. Abeles-Allison commented that annual
inspections would ensure that the property owner is maintaining the
requirements of the permit. Pocernich asked why is the Zoning Department
involved with an annual inspection when the Health Department does the
annual inspection? If Zoning states that you must meet these conditions,
and they do, and you issue them the permit, why is Zoning involved with
going back when there is no annual fee for any other category of issued
permit that has an annual renewal fee. Pocernich stated he would rather
see the fee be applied to the initial STR application instead of on an annual
basis. Michelle Simone spoke on behalf of the Health Department’s roll in
short-term rentals and stated that the Health Department does have an
annual permit at $155 currently but because of being so overwhelmed with
400+ STRs, the State gave an alternate inspection plan in which inspections
are done every 2 to 2 ½ years. Simone also commented that Health &
Zoning have different standards and Codes to be looked at. Pocernich
asked again why Zoning would be involved annually when Health is. Again,
Hulstrom replied that there are different things the Departments look at and
to make sure that the Zoning Department is doing our due diligence to
address it up front and have a more balanced approach, and in order to do
that we have to be able to set the fee structure accordingly whether we put
the burden on the general taxpayer, or upon the individual who's facilitating
the use upon their land is the question. Strand suggested that the fee for a
STR should be only one permit fee since in the budget for 2024 it is a shared
position between both Departments and that position would do the annual
inspection. Internally the Committee would have to decide what the
allotment for each Department would be, commented Strand. Silbert asked
if the new position would take care of both Departments’ objectives. Simone
& Hulstrom confirmed it would. Strand stated that it better because that is
the premise in which he is supporting the creation of that new position.
Silbert commented that the one position to do everything regarding STR’s
would justify a larger permit fee than either one alone, but questions how it
would be separated by Departments. Abeles-Allison stated that it will be
figured out and that it’s just logistics, and believes the premise was that the
fees for short-term rentals would pay for this position for both the Zoning
and the Health Department. Both Departments want the annual inspections,
as required, and this should create efficiency in one person going out and
doing both tests of each Department and not having two different
Departments making the trip, along with much better customer service
Page 5 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
because the applicant has one point of contact with the County. Pocernich,
Hulstrom, & Abeles-Allison all were talking over one another and couldn’t
be understood by the Secretary. Pocernich stated that permits from the
Zoning Department don’t warrant an annual inspection and Hulstrom
replied that STR permits will now be treated as a license, just like the current
Health Department license. Silbert asked Simone what the fees are for an
STR from the Health Department. Simone stated they are $455 the first
year and $155 annually. Abeles-Allison stated there will be some need for
some finesse from this individual, but the goal is to get compliance with both
Departments and communicate with the applicant early on so that there isn't
any conflict down the road between the two Departments. Strand stated he
thinks the Departments should establish one fee for the annual permit
renewal and that it is the Administration's responsibility to figure out how
that money is allocated to the position or between the departments. Silbert
asked what the individual would be required to do should they be on site for
an inspection and discover violations. Abeles-Allison stated that all issues
from Health & Zoning would be addressed at once, get in compliance, and
a license/permit would be issued. Pocernich stated going back, that he
doesn’t agree with raising Class B & Conditional Use permits to $500 &
$600. Strand asked Pocernich if he agreed to only raise the fees $50 and
Pocernich confirmed that is correct. Strand spoke but his mic wasn’t on so
it wasn’t picked up by the audio recording.
D. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding RV Placement Ordinance
Amendment:
Hulstrom reviewed for the Committee the current Ordinance and standards
regarding RV’s, Sec. 13-1-28. She shared the struggles that the Department
has had with enforcing the current language. The words stored and
developed have been difficult to define. Currently the Department took
developed to mean that any structure, a shed, garage, shipping container,
or any permitted structure deemed the lot developed, stated Hulstrom. If a
lot was deemed developed no RV permit would be needed. The Department
would like to know if the Committee wants to continue in that direction.
Hulstrom stated that the Department has heard concerns from community
members, towns, and other Counties, about RV’s being placed all over the
County and potentially the placements meandering into campground
territory. Hulstrom commented that some Counties require RV placement
permits for all lots. If applied to Bayfield County, that would require an RV
placed for more than 21 days, no matter if it's a developed or non-developed
lot, to obtain an RV placement permit and provide proper sanitation.
Hulstrom stated that the Department needs input from the Committee on
what it means to store an RV, and if the Committee is satisfied with the
standards that are in place. Rekemeyer asked how the Department would
enforce the RV/Campground Ordinance and how does the Department find
out about violations. Hulstrom replied that neighbors, the public, and Town
officials call and express concerns about RV’s exceeding the standards that
have just been discussed and the Department follows up. Discussion
Page 6 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
occurred about what needs to be defined and clarified regarding the
standards set for RVs. Strand commented that the Department has lots of
work to do to come up with appropriate language on this topic for our future
consideration. Silbert asked if you had an undeveloped lot and wanted to
allow your relatives to stay in their RV on that lot for 21 days, would that be
allowed. No answer was provided to Silbert. Hulstrom asked for
clarification on the direction the committee wanted to go with the Ordinance
language. The Committee recommended approval of RV placement for 21
days in a calendar year without a permit, proper sanitation if placed for more
than 21 days, etc. The Committee discussed different scenarios about RV
storage and usage. Hulstrom stated the Department will put this topic on
the agenda for next month, do more research, and come up with a
recommendation based on some of the discussion and feedback the
Department has gotten from the Committee.
E. Discussion and Possible Action regarding Short-Term Rental
Ordinance Amendment:
Hulstrom gave an overview of what the Zoning Department reviews for a
short-term rental permit to be issued and what the Health Department
reviews for a license to be issued. Pocernich asked what the Ordinance
Amendment the Committee is looking at regarding short term rentals.
Hulstrom stated that this is just a discussion so that the Committee is aware
of what Public Health does for their licensing compared to what Zoning does
for their permitting regarding short term rentals. Discussion occurred about
the differences between how Health deals with campgrounds and what
Zoning needs for permitting a campground. Simone commented that the
topic is very confusing because the two Departments use different
terminology and there could be 3 or 4 different terms for saying the same
thing. Silbert spoke and the microphone didn’t pick up the audio. The
discussion continued regarding campgrounds and not short-term rentals.
Hulstrom asked what basic standards, ideally, short term rentals or RV's
need to meet to lessen the potential negative impacts on surrounding
neighbors and the community. Pocernich spoke about Bayfield County
promoting recreation and not creating an environment that drives potential
visitors away because of the requirements & restrictions on placing RVs on
a property. Discussion continued regarding campgrounds and campsites.
Pocernich asked, as a citizen of the County who is filing a complaint, that
the Zoning Department investigate whether the Bayfield County
Fairgrounds has the appropriate permits to have campsites, that the
sanitary is not in violation, and that the buildings are allowed to be used for
storage. Pocernich stated that if the Department is going to hold the citizens
feet to the fire, the County’s house needs to be in order.
F. Minutes of Previous Meeting: Strand motioned to approve the minutes
from September 21, 2023, as presented, seconded by Pocernich. Motion
carried, 3-0, 2 absent.
Page 7 of 7
ZC Planning and Zoning Public Hearing and Meeting – 10/19/2023.
G. Committee members discussion regarding matters of the Planning
and Zoning Department:
Pocernich asked what Zonings purpose when they go to a site for an
inspection. Hulstrom stated that the Department verifies setbacks and that
the site plan provided is accurate, and that there are no egregious violations
on the property because the Department can’t issue a permit when there is
any kind of violation. Pocernich was asking about a particular permit that
had been held up for, in his opinion, no reason at all. Hulstrom stated that
in no circumstance does the Department not issue a permit when one can
be issued. It's not the Department’s goal to hold up anyone from being able
to move forward with their project, but at the same time, stated Hulstrom,
knowing the investment that goes into placing a residence and not doing our
due diligence to make sure that whatever the setback needs to be is
adequate is something that the Department is cognizant of. Pocernich
asked why if a citizen’s sanitary system is failing or has failed why can’t they
get a permit for a new system when there is a violation on the property.
Hulstrom explained that when a plumber submits for an emergency
installation nothing holds up that installation. Gross informed Pocernich of
the process from the submission to the installation for any sanitary
emergency. Pocernich stated he would check with the individual to make
sure what was relayed was the correct information. Pocernich stated that
he continues to get phone calls almost every day about the Zoning
Department and he doesn’t know how much more he can take when he is
getting phone calls at 8 AM on a Sunday morning. Pocernich stated that
he is aware that there is a particular individual that gives his phone number
out to everyone. Hulstrom stated that that is particularly frustrating because
giving that information to individuals and allowing them to think that if they
yell to upper administration or to certain supervisors loud enough that it’s
going to get their applications expedited is unfair to other folks who are
waiting patiently for their permits. It sets a really poor precedent.
12. Monthly Report / Budget and Revenue: Pocernich motion to receive the
monthly report. Seconded by Strand. Motion carried, 3-0, 2 absent.
13. Adjournment
Silbert called adjournment at 6:10 pm.
Prepared by FIG on 10/29/23; given to REH 11/9/23
Approved by REH on 11/10/2023
Sent to ZC on 11/10/2023
Final Approval on 11/16/2023
cc: (after final approval)- (8) Supervisors, Cty Admin./Clerk, DNR, Web
k/zc/minutes/2023/#10 October