February 23, 2023 at 12:54 p.m.
Oneida County land and water conservation committee hears latest on shoreland protection
Oneida County land and water conservation committee hears latest on shoreland protection
Oneida County zoning administrator Karl Jennrich spoke to the committee about that ordinance.
Jennrich said the county planning and development committee had been undergoing revisions to chapter nine of the shoreland protection ordinance, specifically articles one, three and nine.
"The planning and zoning committee, after hearing some concerns from some individuals ... basically, I was directed to revise the ordinance," he said. The biggest changes, according to Jennrich, would pertain to exempt structures, which are, he explained, those allowed to be placed closer than 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark.
"What the committee was looking at doing was allowing erosion control structures such as retaining walls to be allowed between 75 and 35 feet and also between 35 feet and zero if they were in the access and viewing corridor," Jennrich said.
However, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has said those types of structures could not be exempt. Jennrich said the committee met again, looked at proposed ordinance changes and decided not to move forward with those changes.
Other issues concerned boat houses. The committee wanted to allow stairs at the back of a boathouse to access the deck on top of the boat house and wanted to allow aprons on the front of boat houses.
DNR officials, Jennrich said, have taken the position they do not agree with those changes.
However, the zoning and planning committee decided to move ahead with those changes.
"My question would be what changes will affect Michele (Sadauskas) and her work?" committee chair Jim Winkler asked.
Sadauskas, on the land and water department staff as the county's conservationist, said this was the reason she wanted to bring the topic before the committee, to make them aware this ordinance revision discussion was going on in the planning and zoning committee.
At least one committee member, Linnaea Newman, said it was the first they were hearing of the proposed changes. Sadauskas said she knew a public hearing was in the works in the near future.
If there was something that would affect the land and water committee and as well as her department, that everyone would be aware of those changes and could respond, if need be.
Jennrich said, with many shoreline projects, there is a good deal of grading and excavating in the access and viewing corridor, the 35 foot deep strip situated between zero and five feet from the ordinary high water mark.
The overall goal in those projects, he said, would be to get the area back to a more natural state.
"We require permits for various erosion control projects," he said. "They are independent of a building permit. What the committee wants to do is streamline and consolidate the process and not have a separate erosion control permit."
Landscapers, he said, wanted to have some of the "red tape" cut with these types of projects and have, over time, expressed concern about their inability to hold back erosion in some cases without a retaining wall.
There are other non-structure erosion control devices that could be used, Jennrich said, but he was not sure where this topic was going to end up.
"Are you fixing the language in the proposed amendment to make sure it is in compliance with the statute and ordinances in NR 115?" committee member Bob Thome asked Jennrich.
"As far as some of the DNR comments, the committee did remove, again, allowing these retaining walls within the 75 foot setback, so they did do that," Jennrich said. "They did not remove the stairs onto the back of the boat house. They did not remove allowing the apron on the boat houses, which the Department of Natural Resources objected to." Jennrich said the planning and zoning committee members were aware of the objections from the DNR but they didn't take all of them into consideration.
"So, in answer to my question, the current ordinance does not comply with NR115 at the moment," Thome said and Jennrich replied there are portions of the ordinance that don't comply.
"So why are we wasting our time doing something that is not in compliance with some of the state rules?" Thome asked.
"Because some of the state rules have pretty big loopholes," committee member Tommy Ryden. "You know, you can build a boat house and put a deck on top of it but no way to access the deck. You can't put stairs up to your patio. That's one of those revisions that - why would, you know, you're allowing us to have something that we can't use."
"Nevertheless, it's still in state statute that you can't do that," Thome said. "So, until that gets changed, the stairs and the apron are still in non compliance in the proposed one, so why are we doing that? Why are we doing that? How can we amend our ordinance when we knowingly have items in there that are in non-compliance. I just don't understand that."
"Again, I can't comment about that," Jennrich said.
"That's your job, Karl," Thome said. "That's your job. Your job is to tell them what they can and cannot do. You're allowing them to go down this path, knowing that it is not correct."
"The planning and development committee, like yourself, mister, is an elected body that can make the decisions on their own," Jennrich said. "Again, I provided them with that background information and they made the choices to move forward, sir."
Once the issue goes to public hearing and possibly to the county board, he told Thome, he and the other county board members could make those decisions.
"Not if it's not legal," Thome said. "Not if it's not legal. You can't do anything knowingly doing something that's not in the ordinance. That's not right. You can't knowingly do that."
Winkler referred to a dock ordinance from several years ago. Within a few months, he said, that was all retracted and Jennrich said that dock language was removed due to losing a court case in Oneida County circuit court and it was decided not to appeal it.
"If you put forth information that's against what DNR says can happen, won't we have to retract that at some point?" Winkler asked.
"Possibly, yes," Jennrich said. "Again, the DNR would have to send us a formal letter, if this was adopted by the Oneida County board of supervisors, they would send a letter saying, you know, we believe that these provisions of your ordinance are not in compliance with NR 115 or 59.692, and if you don't do something about removing that language, again, we have the ability, and again, it's a state mandate that we have to have a shoreland zoning ordinance, and the state is saying is saying it should be consistent with state law. They would then have the ability to possibly impose a superseding ordinance."
He said it was "up to the will" of the county board what it wanted to do with the ordinance.
"Karl, that's not true," Thome said. "If it's illegal, it is not up to the will of the county board. They can't do it. They can't do it unless a legislator changes the rule. You're talking in circles, and it's not right."
Jennrich said there were counties, such as Vilas, who allow things such as aprons on boat houses. At this time, the DNR has not imposed a superseding ordinance on that county. Vilas County, he said, also allows stairs up to a boat house to access the deck and the DNR has not imposed a superseding ordinance on that, either.
"I don't know if this has application to our committee," Winkler said. "But what Karl's talking about is the planning and zoning committee, so we'll have to leave it."
"For the record, the planning and development committee is aware of a lot of this stuff, and as an elected body, they made the decision to move forward," Jennrich said.
If the committee decided to move forward, he said, there would be a public hearing where all involved would get to make comments on the proposed ordinance.
Sadauskas reiterated she brought the matter to the land and water committee to ensure everyone was updated on what was happening and that, if the matter would go to public hearing, that committee members were not caught unaware.
Even though planning and zoning was not at a final stage, she wanted to at least start the conversation with the land and water conservation committee.
Comments:
You must login to comment.