Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Buffer Cup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appeal over 150-foot buffer at Hunter campground sent back to zoning committee
Summary
Sawyer County Board of Appeals voted unanimously to return an appeal over a conditional‑use permit condition that reduced a 150‑foot buffer to a row of pines. The board directed the zoning committee to clarify what it intended for “condition 11.”
The Sawyer County Zoning Board of Appeals on an evening meeting returned an appeal about a campground permit condition to the county zoning committee for clarification after residents and the permit holder disputed a change that reduced a 150‑foot buffer to a requirement for a row of trees.
Attorney Max Lindsey, representing appellant Darlene Smolin, told the board the zoning administrator had “taken actions to change that unilaterally without any notice, any procedure, any hearings, any opportunity for input,” and argued the administrator lacked authority to alter condition 11 of conditional use permit 21‑013.
The appeal centers on whether the original conditional‑use decision required a 150‑foot buffer between campground sites and neighboring property, or instead left a 100‑foot residential strip plus a 50‑foot setback where the operator agreed to plant a single row of pines. Zoning administrator Jay Kozlowski said he had listened to audio of the 2021 hearings and concluded the record supported inserting a row of pines to reflect the committee’s intent; he characterized the change as correcting a “Scribner’s error.”
Several neighbors described planting failures and concerns about whether one row of 6–8 foot pines would constitute the protective “buffer” they understood the committee to require. Owner Steven (Steve) Boden Schatz told the board he had planted screening and said the planted trees were located along the 50‑foot setback, not the 100‑foot RR‑1 strip.
After more than an hour of testimony, a member moved to send the appeal back to the zoning committee to “clarify what they meant by number 11.” The motion passed 4–0. The board also confirmed the administrative stay tied to the appealed condition remains in place for the campground side of the 150‑foot measurement: the stay prevents construction activity inside the campground area up to the 150‑foot line pending the zoning committee’s clarification.
The board instructed the zoning committee to review the record (audio, minutes and decision letter) and issue a specific clarification of condition 11. The remand preserves procedural options for all parties: if the zoning committee alters the condition again, future appeals or enforcement actions may follow.
Board members and the zoning office said the remit is narrow: the appeals body must decide whether the zoning administrator properly changed the written condition or whether the committee itself should clarify its original intent. The zoning committee will have to reissue a decision with clearer findings if it seeks to change the condition again.
