Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents, contractors press Winnebago County to accept DNR-issued boathouse repair permits; committee debates jurisdiction
Summary
Property owners and contractor Ty Johnston told the county planning committee that DNR and Army Corps permits have been issued for repairs to existing wet boathouses but county zoning staff have withheld local permits citing a 50% floodplain-value limit; the committee debated whether such rebuilds qualify as repair under Wis. Stat. 30.1213(c) and reached a general consensus to avoid starting new county-level permitting without legal clarification.
Ty Johnston, owner of Johnston Pile Driving, told the Winnebago County Planning & Zoning Committee during public comment that four landowners have DNR and Army Corps permits and are waiting months for county action. "According to the Wisconsin state statute, 30.1213 c, if the lehi floor houses was built prior to 12/16/1979 ... we meet the exception," Johnston said, adding that one submitted application was paid for five months earlier with no answer from the county.
Tom Contos, a property owner on Lake Biedelmore, described a historic boathouse with a failing foundation and told the committee his DNR permit expires in August and "it's not renewable," urging staff and the committee to resolve the delay so repairs can proceed.
Planning staff summarized the legal tension the committee must resolve. A staff presenter explained that DNR chapter 30 permits have been issued in some cases where application materials state "remove existing boathouse and rebuild, in exact footprint," but county floodplain/zoning rules include a 50% of assessed-value threshold that may bar rebuilding. The staff summary raised the central question repeatedly discussed: "When is it a complete tear down versus a repair/maintenance?" and whether a complete removal and rebuild constitutes a new boathouse prohibited after Dec. 16, 1979.
Committee members and staff debated the roles of DNR and the county. One staff member said the DNR can be a "gatekeeper" for chapter 30 permits but then asked why those same applications were being forwarded to the county for floodplain review. Planning staff said they had been advised by Michelle Hayes (water management) that the county's floodplain ordinance could apply and that, under that ordinance, repair or maintenance may not exceed 50% of fair market value.
Doug Nelson, a county supervisor, said he was troubled by apparent inconsistency: the county previously approved a boathouse for the sheriff's department and spent close to $1 million on that project, yet private owners appear blocked despite meeting state criteria. "How can that possibly be?" Nelson asked, calling for clarity.
Multiple staff members said they are "scratching our heads" about inconsistent practice between DNR approvals and county floodplain reviews and that some of the submitted permit materials appear to document a full removal and rebuild. Staff told the committee they have begun communicating with the DNR and that one county permit application has been formally submitted and will be processed, but that staff have not intended to keep paid fees while the legal question remains.
After extended discussion the committee signaled a practical approach: avoid creating a new routine of county-level permitting for over-water boathouses that historically were not processed by county zoning staff, while staff obtain a written interpretation from the DNR and, if needed, legal counsel. One staff member said that if the DNR issued the chapter 30 permit and county review was not required, the county could return the fee and be done; several committee members agreed, but asked staff to secure legal backing in case the DNR later responds differently.
The committee did not adopt a change to county code at this meeting. Members asked staff to provide further clarification from the DNR and corporate counsel and to notify applicants of the next steps.
The committee moved on after the discussion; no vote altering county policy on wet boathouse permitting was taken at this meeting.
