May 18, 2023 at 1:56 p.m.
Plan commission denies annexation request after neighbors speak out
Comments were made indicating that the property owner may have conferred with the former city administrator Zach Vruwink at some point about the annexation idea, but Mayor Kris Hanus, city attorney Steve Sorenson and interim zoning administrator Tom Waydick all said they could not speak to the owner's plans for the property.
The current city administrator, Patrick Reagan, did not speak at all.
The adjacent property owners who addressed the commission during the public hearing indicated they purchased their properties because they enjoy the "country living" the area offers and want to remain part of Pelican. Two of the speakers stated they expected some kind of presentation where the owner would explain why the annexation application was made.
"I don't know what they want to build and that concerns me," noted neighbor Donald Pfeiffer. "If they're just going to build one house or two houses or divide into three lots, I really don't have a problem with that. If they want to build an apartment complex, that I have a major problem with."
Pfeiffer also mentioned that it was his understanding that a parcel has to be "physically connected to the city" to be annexed. It was his contention that the parcel in question is not contiguous to the city.
Another speaker, Judy Michaels, told the commission she has lived on Colburn Lane for 50 years and is concerned about new development changing the neighborhood.
"It's very personal to us," she said. "Our children have grown up there."
Fifty years ago, "there was nothing, there was no hospital, no Milestone (Senior Living), just country living," she added. "We're rural people. To have the city come in and take over and be crowded, it hurts."
"We don't want to be annexed to the city. We have good water. We have a fine septic system. We do not want to be (in the) city. We want to stay in the Town of Pelican."
"I know you need the housing. I know Rhinelander is in need of housing but having multiple houses across the street, it just doesn't sound very sensible to me," she added.
Larry Wiesneske, a local attorney who lives in the neighborhood, expressed similar sentiments.
"I think I, along with my neighbors, are concerned about the urban sprawl that's taking place in our neighborhood," he told the commission, noting that he purchased his home in 1986 and at that time a basset hound owned by one of his neighbors could safely take a nap in the middle of N. Shore Drive without worry about being disturbed.
"If that dog did that nowadays he'd be run over," Wiesneske said, adding that he has seen motorists traveling down the roadway at 60 miles per hour.
Wiesneske stated that he researched the municipal boundaries and it's his belief that there is a "gap" between the city boundary and the parcel in question.
"My primary objection to this petition is that the territory that is subject to petition is not contiguous to the city," he said.
In an email to the commission, Pelican town chairman Dave Hollands also went on record in opposition to the annexation on the grounds that the parcel does not meet the criteria due to its lack of connection to the city.
"When I look at the Oneida County GIS system, it appears there is no connection between the city and the annexation parcel," he wrote, noting that an annexation with this configuration could lead to community boundaries becoming irrational.
When the public hearing was closed and the discussion shifted to the commission, both Hanus and Sorenson stressed that the city was merely responding to a petition for annexation and this was not a case where the city is looking to add land to its boundaries.
"This isn't the city requesting, demanding, pushing them to come in," Hanus said. "This is the owner of that private property wanting to be in the city."
In response to a question about what the city would get out of the proposed annexation, Sorenson said the development of a multi-family complex would give people who work at the hospital and other nearby businesses "a place to live until they can afford a home of their own."
Commissioner Carrie Mikalauski moved to deny the annexation and former Rhinelander Fire Chief Terry Williams seconded the motion.
It carried on a 4-2 vote. Hanus and commissioner Leann Felten were the only members to vote against the denial.
After the vote was recorded, Sorenson explained that the property owner will have to wait a full year before renewing the petition for annexation, per city policy.
"We'll see you in a year," one of the neighbors in the gallery responded.
"Hopefully not," another added.
Heather Schaefer may be reached at [email protected].
Comments:
You must login to comment.