Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Conditional Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning committee denies Oak Shores’ request for public bar, citing neighborhood impact
Summary
The Sawyer County Zoning Committee voted to deny conditional-use permit 26-010 for Oak Shores Resort’s conversion of a pole shed into a bar/cocktail lounge after contested testimony from applicants and several neighbors about noise, traffic and whether the use is accessory or a principal use of the property.
The Sawyer County Zoning Committee on May 15 denied Conditional Use Permit 26-010, which would have allowed Oak Shores Resort to convert an existing pole shed into a 24-by-60-foot cocktail lounge and occasional public bar.
Applicants Chad and Wendy Lauderback, owners of Oak Shores, told the committee they intended the space primarily for resort guests and occasional small events and provided decibel readings and historical licensing information to support that claim. “We are here today to be transparent, respectful, and to answer any questions honestly,” Wendy Lauderback said, adding that the space is designed to support the resort’s lodging operations and not to compete with local restaurants.
Several nearby property owners and residents urged denial. Sherry Lively, who lives next door, said the neighborhood is “a quiet residential area” and argued a bar eight feet from her lot line would harm livability. Susan Gerking raised safety concerns about increased traffic on the winding local road. Attorney Max Lindsey, speaking for neighbors, urged the committee to treat the change of use as equivalent to constructing a new principal structure, arguing that opening to the public and plans to host snowmobile- and ATV-related visitors show the use would not be merely incidental to resort operations.
County counsel and legal advisors told the committee that the key legal question was whether the proposed use would remain an accessory use incidental to the resort or whether it would be a principal use requiring setback compliance and possibly a variance. Counsel advised the board to ground any approval or denial in substantial evidence, citing statutory standards the committee must apply.
After hearing applicant testimony, public opposition, and legal guidance, Supervisor Kaye Wilson moved to deny the conditional use permit on the basis that the proposed building would constitute a principal use rather than an accessory use and would not meet applicable setbacks; the motion was seconded and carried on roll call. The committee’s recorded votes on the motion to deny were Kay Wilson (yes), John Minto (yes), Jim Evans (yes), Steve Cariannon (yes) and Ron Buckholtz (yes). The committee incorporated testimony from the April 17 meeting and the May 15 hearing into the record.
The decision leaves in place the status quo for Oak Shores: the owners may revise the application, seek a variance for setbacks if the use is found to be principal, or pursue other lawful options. Committee counsel reminded members that any conditions imposed in a grant would need to be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
