CUP approved over neighbors, town’s objections

A Lake Tomahawk couple secured a conditional use permit for a large home in Lake Tomahawk last week, overcoming objections from neighbors and the town board. 

The proposed house on property owned by Michael and Nicole Gerdin will be built over a period of three-to-five years, with home construction set for three years and landscaping and touch-ups stretching to perhaps five years. The use fits within the recreational zoning district in which it sits.

However, neighbors had raised numerous objections to the project, including a proposed plan to exceed maximum height standards on the lake side of the house, impervious surface concerns, and worries about the estimated time of construction and construction noise.

The town board recommended denial because it did not conform to the town’s comprehensive land use plan.

All the concerns were laid to rest one-by-one without objection by the zoning committee, which attached 10 conditions to the permit to address town and residential concerns.

As for the town’s objections, the plan might or might not meet the current comprehensive plan, which calls for restricted mixed use residential and commercial development — that was not quite clear — but in any event the proposed single family use does match the current recreational zoning, and, as zoning committee chairman Scott Holewinski observed, that was controlling.

“A comprehensive plan is a plan, it’s a guide, but an ordinance is an ordinance and the ordinance isn’t written to match your plan,” Holewinski said. 

Zoning committee member Dan Hess, who is also the Newbold town chairman, agreed: “It is basically a map to follow,” Hess said. “It’s not enforceable or anything like that.”

In addition, the town is planning to rezone the property to single-family residential, but Jimmy Rein of Wilderness Surveying, representing the property owners, said that would not affect the project and the owners had no objection to the rezone. 

“The only thing I think that everybody’s got to realize is, if they rezone it, there’s condominium form of ownership in this area,” Rein said. “That would be rezoned as well. So that’s multifamily. And if you rezone multifamily to single family, then those become legal preexisting, non-conforming structures. It is just because at the time there [were] resorts and they converted to condos over the years. So it’s something that the town’s going to have to think about, but my customers, they don’t care. It is a single family use, they’re fine with it.”

Indeed, one objection that has been raised by neighbors is that the size of the house — some called it a lodge — would allow it to be used as a corporate retreat or for other commercial purposes, but Rein said that was not the case.

“It’s designed as a single family residential home,” he said. “It’s a large home but it’s designed and permitted as a single family home. There’s no intention to have — there’s not like separate kitchens. It’s a house. It’s just a big house. So it’s just a single family. The owners, when they talk about bringing family and friends up, I mean they come up with quite a few people from Iowa five or six times a year.”

And that’s all the intention is, Rein said.

“Sometimes they fly up with just them and their five kids, but it isn’t a corporate retreat,” he said. “It’s nothing along those lines. I mean it’s a single family home for them and their family.”

Another major issue was the proposed height of the structure on the walk-out side to the lake. Zoning department staff said the height issue was the only reason the matter was before the committee — otherwise a building permit would have been issued. In fact, the structure would meet the county’s 35-foot height standard on three sides, but overall the mean height would be 49.5 feet  —  a height that is allowed with a conditional use permit.

Rein pointed out that no one’s view of the lake would be obstructed by the dwelling.

“If you stand on the property line, you’re going to see the house just like you can see any house,” he said. “But if you’re inside a residence looking at it, the way the other houses face, they don’t face toward this house. I guess the way I looked at it is, it’s not going to impede somebody’s view from their home to the lake.”

Not liking the ­look next door

There were also earlier concerns about impervious surface impacts, but the owners have proposed adjusting lot lines between two adjacent parcels they own, which would bring the total impervious surface cover on the house lot to 8 percent, well within limits and meaning no mitigation would be required.

The committee did address concerns about potential damage to the town road during construction, but Rein proposed a $50,000 bond, which was agreed to as a condition, to assuage those concerns. The committee also agreed to limit exterior construction hours to between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday though Friday.

Finally, the committee recognized that parking construction equipment and trucks on town roads could be an issue but said they were powerless and without jurisdiction over that matter, though the town of Lake Tomahawk could control the parking on its roads.

Disgruntled neighbors, who have argued that the project would lower their property values and disrupt the enjoyment of their own properties, observed that applicants must provide substantial evidence that the project will meet the permit requirements demanded by the county. The committee felt the applicant did so, and land-use specialist Carla Blankenship read that portion of the permit application that laid out the applicant’s substantial evidence that permit conditions would be met.

“Approving this conditional use permit allows the residential structure to exceed the mean height of 35 feet,” Blankenship read. “This height allowance does not impact on any surrounding properties due to the home’s location. This location will not block the view from any other residence.”

There would also be a residential fire protection system installed in the residence to reduce any risk of potential fire hazard, Blankenship stated.

“The height of this structure does not impair or diminish the use value or enjoyment of any neighboring property,” she read. “The construction of this home will increase the value of surrounding properties and the height of this structure will not be seen from the neighboring properties.”

The application observed that the single-family use of the property was compatible with the single-family zoning surrounding the property.

“Therefore the property and structures use will be in harmony with adjacent land and allow adopted local plans,” she stated. “The surrounding properties are constructed already so the construction of the residence will not impede any normal or orderly development of the surrounding properties.”

The site has adequate utilities for gas and electricity, Blankenship continued. 

“The existing access to the property from the town road will be improved,” she stated. “The properties drainage complies wit NR115 and the Oneida County zoning requirements. During construction, the property requirements will comply with all DNR construction requirements.”

What’s more, the application asserted, the conditional use would conform to all applicable regulations of the zoning district in which it’s located. Residential structures are allowed in this district and does not violate any shoreland or floodplain regulations. 

“Runoff from the development of this site will be directed to rain gardens and grassy swales,” she stated. “All construction runoff will comply with Wisconsin DNR runoff standards during construction, and post-construction site development will comply with county and state erosion control and runoff measures.”

The committee concluded that the applicant met or will meet all the standards and the conditions proposed, and unanimously approved the CUP.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.