The Woodland Foothills development, proposed by Dury Enterprises, seeks to create five new residential lots from existing outlots D and E, spanning 12.87 acres. This initiative is intended to address affordable housing concerns in the area. The Commission reviewed a preliminary and final plat application, contingent on zoning considerations, as the area is designated for single-family residential use and conditional use developments. The original Planned Unit Development was approved in 1995 and amended in 2001, allowing for a maximum of 40 units on 40 acres with specific conditions, including two parking spaces per dwelling and maintaining 50% open space.

Richard Fong, representing the developer, addressed concerns about drainage and wetland areas, noting that the natural topography would aid in drainage. He confirmed that the existing septic systems were compliant and could accommodate the new units. Public support was voiced by residents, including Tim Kennedy, who emphasized the development’s role in enhancing affordable housing opportunities. Despite some concerns about technical aspects, such as the impact on existing drip zones, the preliminary plat received approval, with the final plat tabled pending minor corrections.

The Commission then addressed a request from Deborah Mark and David Truart to rezone approximately 2.4 acres from Resort Commercial Residential to Lakeshore Residential and Forest Agriculture Residential at 12208 Gunflint Trail. This rezoning would allow for conforming residential development and align with the existing use of the property. The board approved the rezone request, recognizing its consistency with the county’s comprehensive plan and public need for residential development.

A more debate unfolded around the proposed rezoning of five parcels along Kramer Road and Schroeder from F3 to single-family residential R1. The applicant aimed to create smaller parcels for family use. However, the staff raised concerns about increased density conflicting with existing land uses, particularly given nearby gravel pit operations. While some public comments supported the rezoning to facilitate affordable housing, staff recommended exploring alternative solutions, such as variances or conditional use permits, instead of a significant zoning change.

The discussion on affordable housing continued with a proposal for a telecommunications tower by Vertical Bridge. The 195-foot lattice tower with a 4-foot lightning rod aims to improve coverage along the Highway 61 corridor. However, concerns were expressed about its visual impact, particularly from the Superior Hiking Trail. A camouflage design was suggested to reduce visual intrusion, but the feasibility was debated. The tower site is in an F1 Zone District, primarily supporting forest management and agriculture, and the proposal included considerations for stormwater management and visual effects.

Public comments highlighted mixed opinions on the tower’s necessity. While some supported it for improving connectivity and public safety, others, including adjacent property owners, raised concerns about the visual impact and potential easement issues. The applicant argued that the tower was essential to bridge current coverage gaps along Highway 61, which sees significant traffic. The Commission ultimately recommended approval of the tower, acknowledging the coverage needs but recognizing potential implications for further installations.