##VIDEO ID:PLD9r2WETE4## has been taken um is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda is there anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda one more time is there anybody the audience that wishes to speak on something that is not on the agenda thank you look for a motion to approve the agenda made motion motions and made and seconded um any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you next item is approval of minutes from October 15 motion to approve them motions made and seconded to approve the minutes from October 15th any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried Matt is there somebody anybody online that wishes to yeah Mr chair um I think we might have a couple folks online Che here if you're online would you be please unmute and identify yourself I know we do have a representative from Central Specialties online GN I don't know who that is that wishes to speak on something that isn't on the agenda so okay moving forward I'd like to open the look for a motion to open the public hearing for cenal Specialties make motion motions and made and seconded all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried Matt thank you Mr chair so this is a uh variance request to allow for mining activities within the 100 foot set 100 foot property line setback oh they can't excuse me Mr chair it looks like I got to unmute here are those of you online able to hear us now yes I hear you thank you and then could you identify yourselves please if you are online just for the meeting minutes this is Luke liard on behalf of Central Specialties guy Nelson thank you all right so this is a after Thea variance request to allow for binding activities within the 100 foot property line setback the applicant is Central Specialties and the land owner is Diane blomster the relevant goals and um objectives of this request pertaining to the comprehensive plan and so we have a a goal to recognize the importance of aggregate resources to Clay County and the region and Implement policies and standards to ensure sound stewardship of Agate resources and natural biotic resources and just a general kind of response to that and how this might fit is the variance process is outlined in our Clay County code recognizes that Agate deposits do not follow parcel lines and provides me me to access deposits within the property line setback we also have a goal to foster a balanced approach to aggregate resource extraction that is compatible with the natural resources and the rural character of Clay County one of those objectives under this goal is to consider the cumulative impacts of existing year by mining operations for new or expanding op operations on the environment egg egg lands residential areas and transportation infrastructure so the variance process also requires written consent from an adjacent landowner uh for this type of of variance request which protects the rights of adjacent Property Owners from encroachment so the subject property is zoned agricultural General and resource protection Aggregate and does have some resource protection um biological uh on the south east extent of the property um all immediately adjacent Parcels are have similar zoning it's a property that's primarily used for aggregate Mining and agriculture uh the applicant did was granted conditional use permits to mine as well as operate a batch plant in 2002 and 2007 there was a variance granted to mine within the 100 foot setback of the north property line shared with the Hagar Roots so up to the north here so there is a variance for that in our code um basically all mining activities um structur storage of excavated materials and excavation Edge have to be set back 100 ft from the boundary of adjoining property lines unless written consent from the adjoining property owner is secured and a variance is granted from the board of adjustment so for this request they are looking for this after the fact variance for um to mine on the west property line um the Practical difficulty that they provided is that they would lose access to valuable aggregate materials that are present within the setback and because this has already occurred they would still need need to get within in into the setback to reclaim those areas as well should note that um there's an adjacent property to the Northwest that's owned by the DNR um and also to the South um South Southwest that's owned by Miles Nelson and so because this variance request would only be for the property line set back to the the 100 foot property line set back um to the parcel immediately to um the West which is also owned by Diane blomster so they would still have to honor the 100 foot setbacks from these property lines right on the the northwest corner and the southwest corner for after the fact variances um there is a 2009 Minnesota Supreme Court um decision that was made that the board of adjustment can use the following standards uh in your review of an after theact variance um whether the construction was complete in this case yes whether there are similar structures and you can interpret structures and uses similarly in the area yes there are other gravel puts in the area um is the benefit to the municip municipality of enforcement compared to the burden on the applicant if compliance was required in this this case the um adjacent property owner they they also owns this property too so really not any conflicts there um and then whether or not the violation was intentional or unintentional not entirely clear at this point so any questions for me at all are you saying that they don't have to get neighbors written permission basically because they own both Lots anyways yeah essentially and they but they did do they did that they did get written yep yep so I should note too that this is something that um the in our as part of our development ordinance update looking at maybe changing this process a little bit because this is something that comes before the board of adjustment quite a bit and um so looking at just streamlining it a little bit so you don't have to get a variance but you still need to get that written consent from the adjacent land owner and have that provided to to the planning department so that's kind of a proposal that's in the works for um for the development ordinance update process right now is because you are varying from that 100 foot setback of the code you would need that's in the code you would need a a variance to that any other questions for me yeah I have one this is Guy think we're we're I think we're not taking questions from I from the um the chair hasn't asked for questions from the audience at this point so we might just have to hold off until you're ready to yeah um I'm sorry Mr Luke yeah they still have to maintain that that 100 foot setback yep from yeah from these properties any other questions for me from the board I believe Mr chair we do have an the applicant is online if you would want to ask him to speak at all would the applicant care to speak on this yeah this is Luke Lippert with Central Specialties um I do just want to add that Central Specialties owns mineral rights for the parcel to the West 2814 4800 so at some point in the future we would most likely apply for a a permit for that parcel as well and being able to mine up to the property line now in the parcel to the east 28013 23000 um would kind of allow for a smoother transition between the parcels in the future once once the the parcel to the West is mined as well um I don't have anything else to add unless there are specific questions for me members of the board questions hearing none is there anyone in the audience whether online or in person that wishes to speak on this Mr Nelson yeah so just to be clear on the south border there's no is there is there 100 foot property line bu buffer on that too Mr chair yes there would be a 100 foot property line buffer on that self border that would stay in place okay is there anyone else online or in the audience that wishes to speak on this please state your name for the record uh my name is Miles Nelson um and I own that corner right there were we supposed to get consent like permission to give them like you guys were talking about the adjacent land owners was I supposed to get a form so Mr chair and Mr Nelson it would only be if they were encroaching in the 100 foot setback of the property line that's shared by your property and um so right now just based on where the mining activity is um it would it looks appears to only be encroaching in the 100 foot setback of this uh parcel directly to the east correct but they want to start mining on the South Side they would have to essentially if they wanted to mine further south um and then if they obtained a permit here they would have to seek a variance okay so it's and get written consent for from you as well we're not talking 100 ft from that Gravel Road then from this Gravel Road no really just talking about this property line here that's but understanding that you have that these two corners are are these 100 foot setbacks would remain in place um because they're separate properties yes okay okay yep thank you anyone else online or in the audience wish to speak on this one more time anybody in the audience or online wish to speak on this hearing none would look for a motion to close the public hearing make a motion second motions and made and seconded any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried okay um now we'll go through the findings of fact for this permit is granting the variance in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Clay County Land Development code yes is the requested variance consistent with the Clay County comprehensive land use plan yes does the applicant establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the strict letter of the Clay County Land Development code yes do exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist that apply to to the property in question and that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity resulting from lot size shape topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property have no control or influence yes with the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Clay County Land Development code deprive the applicant of Rights commonly enjoyed enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance yes is this variance being granted the minimum variance that would alleviate the Practical difficulty yes does a variance request meet all the below criteria no variance shall be granted where any of the following conditions are not met adequate sewage treatment systems or water supply capabilities that would be not applicable I would say U plate of the landowner or hardship is not due to circumstances created by the land owner yes land owner does not have control over the placement of aggregate Reserves aggregate extraction is allow is an allowed use within the zoning District yes there is gravel extraction directly to the north of existing gravel mine yeah okay we did that sorry um there would not be a significant adverse effect on public health or safety yes the variance does not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to owners of other lands structures or buildings in the same district yes conditions may be imposed in the granting of a variance a condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance mining activities can only occur within the 100 setback of the property line shared with parcel 28. 0144 the southeast quarter Northeast quarter and Northeast quarter Southeast quarter of section 14 Township 137 and range 44 W and so Mr chair that that condition um I think outline or addresses some of the concerns that were were brought up by the adjacent land owners to the South saying that the setback would only apply to that parcel if you were looking if that um the applicant or the operator was looking at mining potentially within any other 100 foot setbacks they would need that variance and written consent from those land owners as well prior to Prior prior to commencing any operations not after okay any further discussion no look for a motion to approve or deny this variance make a motion to approve it motions and made and seconded to approve the variance any discussion um Mr chair with that uh and Mr span Kowski would your um motion include that condition as well the the final condition one the condition one is that really is that really a condition that's basically what's being yeah I think it it's just to make it incredibly clear so it's on the variance yep yeah it's not really a condition it's more of clarification yeah yeah essentially okay so a motion has been made and seconded to uh prove the variance with condition number one um all the those in favor say I I opposed variance is granted um okay the next order of business is uh look for a motion to approve the the public hearing for Jacob morac make a motion motions am made and second to approve to open the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed public hearing is open take it away Matt thank you Mr chair so this is a variance um setback request for a residence from the center line of a public road um brought forward by uh Jacob murac and the owner is Sheila Mur from our uh Clay County comprehensive and transportation or Transportation plan a relevant goal um relates to the transportation system in the county and maintaining and operating an accessible safe efficient transportation system for the movement of people and goods throughout the county um essentially um I should maybe back up and just describe where or I'll get to where where this is located um but it is on uh 60th Avenue kind of in between or just north and west of of um Downer south of of Glendon and east of of Sabin um it is on a relatively low travel Road um the subject property and all immediately adjacent properties are zoned to agricultural General the use of the entire uh 168 AC 60 acre parcel is agriculture it's it is entirely um tiled there is one kind of rundown egg building you can kind of see it here um and then a shelter belt in the southwest corner of the parcel what township is that this is in Glendon Township yeah I can pull it up here on the if I can find Mouse kind of get a sense of the location here just south of south of Glendon and East in the interstate so the applicant is Seeking a variance to the road Center Line setback for a residence that would encroach approximately 75 ft into the 125t road Center Line setback um of 60th Avenue North the um setc represents a 60% reduction um the residence would be approximately 50 ft from the center line of the road and like 17 ft from the right Road right of way uh the applicant did provide a pretty detailed narrative um in outlining the difficulty practical difficulty in complying with this setback um essentially they're looking to build a home on the south side of the trees um the field the entire field has drain tiled installed um there're two pretty deep drainage ditches that are on the north side of the trees uh and then also um north and south on the east side of the trees as well uh and then there's also a pump for the drain drain field um they're looking to avoid those ditches um uh in terms of the placement of their their well uh they want to put that as far away from the field drain pump and ditches as possible to avoid any contamination um they want to avoid the ditches as well because they do hold a good amount of water and run off in the spring would like to avoid those obstacles for their private sewer as well um they have talked with the um company that did the drain tile about building on top of that and said there wouldn't be any issues with building on or near a drain tile there also is a Grove of trees and they would make very very good Shelter From the elements and that's why they would like to build on the South Side um and also to preserve as much of them as possible and so I can kind of give you a sense here of where roughly the drain tile would be located here's one of those ditches the pump is kind of right down here and then there's another ditch that runs along here as well um where they're looking to the the um the shelter belt and this building roughly match up almost perfectly with that 125 ft Center Line setback from the road um what they're requesting is roughly right here so um about 75 ft there'd be about 75 ft between this setback and where they're where what they're requesting so just some comments about this request if it was Grant it would place that dwelling about 17 ft from the road right way um the Practical diff difficulty would be that location of the shelter Bel drain itches and drain tile impact that placement of the dwelling and the inability to meet the 125t setback um the placement if you were to look at the this map here would provide probably the best protection from um uh the north North winds there is also trees on the other side of the road here you can't really see as well that would protect it from the south um but it's likely that placing the dwelling 50 ft from that road Center Line would not be the minim minimum variance request necessary to relieve the or alleviate the Practical difficulty as there is approximately 75 fet between that proposed 50 foot setback and the 125ot and the the shelter belt um and I'll show you some pictures as well but um there could potentially be some ability to move into that sh shelter belt as well as it's very mature shelter belt um has a lot of Ash Cottonwood and popler in there um there is a small clearing in there as well and that 50ft setback is also right on top of that drain tile line um and then also so not really don't really it would likely be the best location on the property for locating a residence um just due to the fact that that's where the best shelter is um it wouldn't impact any uh really have a big impact on Farmland I think the question on the question is with this request is is it the minimum variance necessary to relieve the Practical difficulty so you can kind of see here this would be looking West here's that drainage on the so looking North so recommendation for this would be to work the findings effect order but really what um oh excuse me requesting if the the setback would be the minimum necessary to alleviate this practical difficulty do you have any questions for me on this one at all or any thoughts a watershed ditch that's run along the south side of that road there I believe I believe so it's the Township Road it is a Township Road yep has the township weighed in we've not heard from the township on this oh okay you're on the Township Board okay no no I not yet I'm just asking questions I know it's a very it's not a very well-traveled Road um that's really close it's really close yes and any future 17 said 17 feet off the RightWay please be sure to use your microphones is that better sorry okay anybody have any questions for Matt would the applicant like to state your name and speak to us please hey guys I'm Jake mirak we did uh preemptively talk to the Glendon Township last last Tuesday and they did not have any objections to any setback they said uh they didn't really care if we had a small front yard or not um and we were also concerned about safety I guess um being closer to that RightWay um but the trees kind of block all the snow um we were thinking well if we were out in the middle of nowhere the house would be kind of a snow fence but that's already naturally there with the trees on both sides of the road of 60th Avenue so so we did I did get a a a signed letter from uh the Glendon Township with no objections on their side anyway can we can we see that sure okay y e anyone have any questions for the applicant so I I'm assuming Glendon Township is they or that must be the county must be doing their snow removal the township would take care of that yeah they I think they hire the county have you have you talked to the county about this no this thing it's 17 ft from the road when when they start coming down there with a snow plow with their wing on and they're winging it out there you're talking 17 ft Mr Shar be from the it would be 50 ft so if you're assuming a 33 foot from the center line would be the the right of way and then yep additional 17 ft from that would be that 50 foot set back from the center line that 125t road Center Line set back that green line that you have there right now that's what the rule is that's how far you're supposed to be back correct and then the dark green line is where they want to move it to and so they'd be able to build all the way up to that dark green line on the south is that what you're saying I can move back to that essentially be this orange line but roughly matches the drain that drain tile that dashed line pretty close it looks like that's the top of the ditch is that right looks very close so they could build all the way up to the edge of the of the ditch yeah essentially that's what the request would be for are there power lines along there no the power power on the south side of the road where's the power at uh there's power at that the pump on the Southeast corner of those trees I'm not sure where' come from for the house I'm not sure where it come from there there's no power lines along there no not on that side of the road no no more questions thank you anybody else in the audience or online wish to speak regarding this anyone else in the audience or online wish to speak regarding this permit request anyone in the audience or online wish to speak hearing none look for a motion to close the public hearing I'll second motions are made and seconded to close the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried hey now for the findings of fact is granting the variance in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Clay County Land Development code I got to say no and would you be able to give a state a reason for why you would say no I just don't think it's safe to be that close to the road you're talking about promoting Public's health safety we we'd be given permission to build a house right next to that ditch correct yep very close I got to say no I mean this Beyond us being a really bad idea okay is this requested variance consistent with the Clay County consistent land use planing to the Transportation maintain and operate an accessible safe and efficient transportation system for the movement of people and goods throughout Clay County so Mr chair just I just want to make sure I have this just in writing so this would you would say it does conflict with the going back to number one the general Pur of the and intent to the code as it is presents a a safety issue in your in your opinion is that I'm just picturing a snow pla coming through their winging snow in the winter here and that that ditch that's the RightWay ditch for the township to move water correct to drain the land and we have a watershed ditch on the other side of the road so we know they're moving a lot of water through there if they have a watershed ditch there on the other side of the road I mean I I could see a happy medium there but not all the way up to the ditch that just seems Preposterous I that's really close yeah Mr chair with the if you if you as a board would like I mean you could certainly have have the applicant come back and ask if there's uh setback that would would work that would be more accommodating I I think there I mean I think there's Comm I think there's a happy medium here but not that close to that ditch yeah so if you I don't know if you want to if you have a you want to open it up again open the public hearing up and again and yeah so ask the applicant if he wants to modify his request yeah mean he certainly can do that I don't think you as a board wouldn't be able to say this is what you you're requested it would have to come from the applicant oh he wants to modify I thought that would have happened in the last part where you can put conditions okay what really want to make sense what it yep y because if you answer no to any of these the variance is denied okay all right do you want that so if you want to open the public hearing back up uh we will pause the findings of fact and look for motion to reopen the public hearing I'll make a motion oh second motions are made in second and to open the public hearing all those in favor say I I I oppos motion is carried will the applicant car to come up State his name again and sh us a compromising distance sure Jacob mirak um just to clarify to this this ditch on the south side of the trees there's not necessarily a ditch it works right did you see that when you're out there Matt it kind of worked yeah it's it's kind of a different it's it's pretty level at once it hits that all the way across the board there but um is there a a setback that you guys would be okay with I mean and kind of like Matt alluded to we could go into the trees we're trying to save those as much as possible but we could put the house into the trees a little bit is there something that just think so Glendon Township you're going to have you're going to have more coming by mowing those ditches the RightWay ditches right and sometimes they throw stuff right now what you're requesting is basically you have the right to build all the way up to the edge of that ditch so they come along mowing there they throw rocks they could hit your house if they come along there you go back to that picture again with that they come along there winging snow out you know and they got two feet on say we could bad snow get two feet I mean how far can they Wing that snow out they're going to hit your house if they're going fast yeah they go and they do because they're winging it I mean they come through there that they're throwing it and you I mean you want that no we mow those ditches but but I see what you're saying with the snow I mean they come Trucking along there it's gon to be yeah I mean that's I mean if we say yes that means you can build all the way up to the edge of that ditch that just seems way too close I wasn't thinking the right of way I was thinking how much room do we need between the trees South is what I was thinking so how between those two green lines what's the what's the difference there approximately the dash line in the the 125t set back line yeah it's about 75 ft 75t where are you actually thinking about building a house there's kind of a little clearing that's kind of where the garage would go into the trees we were planning on but we could you know chop some more of that to set it back more so where would the front of the house be the south end of the house be um I would probably need 40 feet from the trees where would that where would that put us roughly right here Mr chair what does that get us on the road so it' be make mely different than what so the that would roughly be 85 feet from the center line of the road versus versus 50 so it' be 35 35 more feet that's that's definitely better we do have you know some local roads setbacks in Clay County um local Road setback would be like if you were in a subdivision for example would 90 ft from the center of the road that's another kind of common setback that we do have in so would 90 ft work for you well I think we could make it work we would just like it have where would 90 ft be then where is that where that South Red Dot is then are you thinking just a little bit fur it be a little bit further it would be can you go in the center of the road and measure out 90 ft that's what you're trying to do right somewhere in there it would be like roughly right where that kind of be patch yeah does that seem workable I think I think we probably could yeah okay I mean the summmer time that's I those gravel RADS get super Dusty too I mean we would throw some uh anti yeah that's sodium choride down yeah there's not much traffic on that road there's really nothing that farm set on the south there's uh there's a shop there they don't use it so there's really no traffic on that road it's just this agriculture traffic I suppose yeah yeah um that seem more reasonable yes 85 90 oh what's some of the closest you have in the county Matt is 90 year closest do you think or is there closer very few and outside of a Shoreland area where you know speeds are generally lower no I would say if it's closer than that it's probably pre- ordinance it's an older older yep that 125 is that a Township or County that's County that's County does the township have any overlay or overlaying rules uh they the Glendon Township follows our ordinance so it would be the same yep okay um yep and that 125 foot setback has been in place since at least the 70s okay I don't we're still getting something 35t that seemed like that it'll work for you okay so now Mr chair that with the amended request we're not looking at a um 50 foot from the setback now it's now it would be a a 9 90 foot setback so you have to kind of look at it through the Len look at the findings of fact through that request the 90 foot request what a 90 foot request considering everything else uh about the property as well with the drainage and things like that yep we just start over I would start I would start over Okay I should note too that the specific setback of 50 ft the request was not in the public notice it was just to a request to vary from the 125 foot setback so if we had put the 50 Foot setback in there we would not be able to have this amended request at this hearing but the public notice does not state that at all do we need to go ahead and um close the public hearing before we go to the tax findings look for a motion to close the public hearing make motion close public I second motion is been made and seconded to close a public hearing all those in favor say I I I oppos motion is carried now we'll go through the findings of fact is granting the variance in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Clay County Land Development code yes yes is the requested variance consistent with the Clay County comprehensive use plan land use plan yes yes does the applicant establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the strict letter of the Clay County Land Development code yes yes do exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist that apply to the property in question and that do not apply generally to the other properties in the same zone or vicinity resulting from lot size or shape topography or other circumstances es over which the owners of the property have no control or influence yes and so Mr chair for this one I don't know if you want to amend the um kind of our draft response to that the second um was that the placement of the shelter belt and drainage on the property creates a unique situation but there should be adequate space to allow for the placement more in line with the setback standard than what is requested I know we kind of you kind of had a discussion about that is there would you to am amend that finding at all and just maybe remove the um just remove this this last part here um what are you asking to possibly remove well because we're considering the the 90 Foot Center Line request as opposed to a 50 foot um the the response that was drafted was based on that 50 foot and so I'm wondering if you want to amend that based on the discussion that you've had um amends this finding essentially well I am personally I'm not seeing any reason to okay amend that okay changed it 40 feet um okay okay moving on to number five would the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Clay County Land Development code deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the turns of this ordinance yes is the variance being granted the minimum variance that would alleviate the Practical difficulty yes does the variance request meet all the blow criteria no variant shall be granted where any of the following conditions are not met adequate sewage treatment systems or Water Supplies can be provided yes was that addressed was that addressed so Mr chair I should say we did we did speak with um our County Environmental Health director on this um there really isn't any setback distances for from drain tile or anything like that but you do want to make sure that that's located essentially as far as possible oh okay um reasonably possible from that drain the drain field is and if they're looking at being closer to the trees that would that would yes the B the plate of landowner or hardship is not due to circumstances created by the land owner yes the current landowner had no control over the placement of existing trees however shelter belts have always had to be located 125 ft from the center line I don't know if that's something you'd want to you could potentially modify that to add in yeah when the shelter belt still is yeah so You' want to strike that strike it yeah the variance would not allow a use that is not already allowed in that zoning District yes single family residences are allowed and allowed use within the zoning district there would not be significant adverse effect on public health or safety I think moving at that 40t we accomplished that yes Mr chair I think we need to read uh item D about essential character what did I skip D is a d essential character the essential character of the locality would not be altered or there would not be a significant adverse effect on the surrounding properties yes and would you want me to modify that draft response or strike it essentially okay strike it yes f um back to e there would not be a significant adverse effect on public health or safety yes and same with that striking that one as well response okay the variance does not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by the ordinance to owners of any other lands structures or buildings in the same district yes yes single family residences are allowed and allowed use within the zoning District yes they [Music] areed okay um so looking for any further discussion um look for a motion to deny or confirm uh the variance with it the 90 feet instead of 50 feet make a motion to accept it a second motions been made and accepted to Grant the variance with the 90 foot condition any further discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed Varian is granted next public hearing look for a motion to approve the public hearing for Bradley Berg make a motion second motions are made at second and to open the public hearing for Bradley Berg all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried where you go Matt thank you Mr chair so this is a after the fact variance request for a temporary second dwelling to have a separate well and so this will also be heard by the Planning Commission they'll have to get an interim use permit for this request as well um at the at the next meeting our relevant um Clay County comprehensive plan goals and objectives we have a housing goal and objective to support additional options to get people in all life stages of all economic means viable choices for safe stable and affordable homes um we have res residential goals and objectives to recognize the diversity of living and working Arrangements in the unincorporated areas of the county and a objective under that to recognize multigenerational and temporary agricultural work living arrangements by permitting accessory dwelling units on properties that can adequately provide for water and sewer so this is zoned uh resource protection or agricultural generals the base zoning there's resource protection Aggregate and resource protection biological biologically significant areas overlay zoning on this parel a lot of zoning going on um and all the immediately adjacent Parcels are zoned very similarly it's primarily used as grazing land for residential purposes um there's a home uh uh single family home on the property to the North and then a manufactured home kind of on the south end of the property as well uh for a second dwelling on a parcel uh in our code we have um a number of Standards uh the standard in question um that's coming before you um as a variance request this evening is that the dwelling must share a common well with a principal dwelling I think the intent of that is like this was intended that the second residence would be temporary in nature and drilling a well is kind of more of a permanent thing um there requesting to allow for that second dwelling on a parcel to have separate well from the principal dwelling um the Practical difficulties identified by the applicant is that the secondary well is all is used to water livestock uh the topography near the existing home would not allow for the placement of the manufactured home kind of in the vicinity there um they also had an in intent to subdivide this property at some point and so looking kind of at splitting it um kind of in half um their zoning District right now resource protection Aggregate and resource protection biological the the residential density is one um dwelling per quarter quarter or 40 acre tract um this parcel is actually in two quarter quarter so by placing the um secondary the secondary home on the southern end of this parcel um they they do intend to subdivide it in the future and they would be able to meet those residential density standards again we have our after the fact um consist is something that you can just consider when you're when you're um contemplating this this variance um whether construction's complete yes if there's similar structures in the area yes and the benefit of to the municipality of enforcement compared to the burden on the applicant if compliance was required should say too that um with our development ordinance update looking at at potentially uh allowing for accessory dwelling units by right uh on a on a parcel so this is something that could be uh is very likely to be allowed in our code without a variance or interim use permit um in the future any questions for me at all the well is already in place yep septic all that stuff yep yep yeah I think that when they originally purchased the property they were going to subdivide it right away didn't happen for whatever reason um and so the intent is at I think at some point to potentially subdivided um so it'd be two separate Parcels but in the in the meantime it's it's um brothers that live on on the parcel so they are they do meet they meet all of the standards except for the well anybody questions for M anybody in the audience wish to speak or against or online got I saw two nods I still have to ask it three times you have the applicants here I don't know if you have anything to correct me at all on okay what township is this tansom yeah anybody in the audience or online wish to speak for or against this one more time anybody in the audience wish to speak for or against this hearing none look for a motion to close the public hearing make a motion second motions made and seconded to close the public hearing all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried thank you now for the findings of fact is granting the variance in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Clay County Land Development code yes yes is the requested variance consistent with the Clay County comprehensive land use plan yes recognize the recognize the diversity of living and working Arrangements in the unincorporated areas of Clay County so it's on the next page it's on the next page Mr chair sorry that number three okay yep does the applicant establish that there are practical difficulties in complying with the strict letter of the Clay County Land Development code yes yes do exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exists that apply to the property in question and that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity resulting from lot size shape topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property have no control or influence yes yes with the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Clay County Land Development code deprived the applicant of Rights commonly enjoined by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance yes is this variance being granted the minimum variance that would alleviate the Practical difficulty yes yes does a variance request meet all the criteria no variance shall be granted where any of the following conditions are not met adequate sewage or Water Systems can be provided yes flight of a landowner or hardship is not due to circumstances created by the landowner yes the variance would not allow a use that is not already allowed in the zoning District yes the essential character of the local would not be altered or there would not be significant adverse effect on the surrounding properties yes the character of the neighborhood is not going to be altered with the placement of the second dwelling as there are oh sorry there would not be significant adverse effect on public health or safety yes the variance does not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is is denied by this ordinance to the owners of other lands structures or buildings in the same district yes and Mr chair just have one proposed condition on here that the well must meet all that all the required setbacks in accordance with with the Minnesota rules chapters 4725 governing Wells for isolation distances essentially okay anybody have anything to questions for mat any discussion I think those are good conditions hearing none I would look for a motion to approve granting this variance or denying it with the two conditions that staff has recommended make a recommendation that we approve it second motion made and seconded that we approve the variance following the two conditions that staff has entered any discussion hearing none all those in favor say I I opposed motion is carried any un finished business from before uh no Mr chair any new business to um just uh basically want to say that our first four chapters of the draft development ordinance are um available uh they are on our website if you go to is that what you you sent that out to us I think I did yes I did send this out 176 Pages yeah I read the whole thing already so you can see it here uh Land Development code update um first four are and the table of contents of course that's available um with the remaining chapters would expect those in early December so the Planning Commission will be kind of looking at some of these starting to review some of these tonight likely at their December meeting as well um want to thank Leo and Dennis for help with the this and serving on the study review committee and um yeah looking forward to getting this to the Finish Line a question for you yeah not sure if this is on that or not so I've always been told Clay County does not adhere to the state of minutes so a building code does that what does that mean we just we don't enforce it so we don't have like a building inspector we only we're only development and Zoning yep so okay yep yep that basically means there's no inspection there's no yeah just the only inspections that would happen would be the just the state ones for like Plumbing and Electric Co okay yep and then septic we have to follow sep you know yep yep that's all I have director what is going to Happ the 2025 schedule Oh yes um the 2025 schedule as well for meetings um that should be included in your in your packets so I just want to make sure you have that and review that as well what is happening with Ezra bear then when he becomes a commissioner he's no longer be on this board on the plan yes yep okay so it would be the [Music] new chair of the the Planning Commission would serve on the board of this the chair of the board of adjustment yep okay so Joel so we'll likely have um um Joel here in Jan January and then the elections for a chair typically happen in at the February meeting so January and February yep okay yep any further discussion hearing none look for a motion to adjourn make a motion all those in favor say I I meeting is adjourned thank you everyone for