Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Chapter 9 Amendments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee discusses Chapter 9 ordinance changes and refers building‑height rule to public hearing

Oneida County Planning and Development Committee · March 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Planning staff reviewed proposed edits to Chapter 9 (including Ordinance Amendment #13‑2025 and #12‑2024); the committee instructed staff to revise texts for later review and voted to send proposed building‑height restrictions (Article 7 §9.72) to a public hearing. No substantive votes were recorded on the other amendments.

At its March 4 meeting the Oneida County Planning and Development Committee discussed multiple proposed changes to Chapter 9 of the county Zoning and Shoreland Protection Ordinance and referred a proposed building‑height restriction amendment to public hearing.

Planning Director Karl Jennrich and Assistant Director Todd Troskey outlined updates to Ordinance Amendment #13‑2025 (Article 3 §9.37 and Article 8 §9.82) and Ordinance Amendment #12‑2024 (zoning permit requirements and exceptions). The committee conferred with Corporation Counsel Chad Lynch and directed staff to implement the discussed edits and return a redraft for future review. No formal action was taken on the two ordinance amendments at this meeting.

On building height restrictions (Chapter 9, Article 7 §9.72), staff presented additional information requested at a prior meeting. The committee voted to send the building‑height revision to a public hearing (motion by Bob Almekinder; second Mitchell Ives; unanimous).

Other items discussed included retroactive tourist rooming house (TRH) administrative review permits (the committee declined further action at this time) and a proposed boat‑parking area on state property (staff has sent a formal letter to the DNR; further discussion with DNR anticipated).

What comes next: staff will return revised ordinance language for review after incorporating the committee’s guidance; the building‑height changes will go to public hearing per the committee vote.